Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Suspension Breakage: It's Not The Crime, It's The Coverup (dailykanban.com)
schwit1 quotes a report from Daily Kanban: For several months now, reports have circulated in comment sections and forum threads about a possible defect in Tesla's vehicles that may cause suspension control arms to break. Many of those reports appeared to come from a single, highly-motivated and potentially unreliable source, a fact which led many to dismiss them as crankery. But as more reports of suspension failure in Teslas have come in, Daily Kanban has investigated the matter and can now report on this deeply troubling issue. Our investigation began in earnest upon reading a thread titled "Suspension Problem on Model S" in the Tesla Motors Club forum. The original poster (OP) in that thread described the suspension in his 2013 Model S (with 70,000 miles) failing at relatively low speed, saying the "left front hub assembly separated from the upper control arm." Images of the broken suspension components showed high levels of rust in the steel ball joint and the OP reported being told by Tesla service center employees that the "ball joint bolt was loose and caused the wear," which was "not normal." Because his Tesla was out of warranty, the repair was reportedly sent to Tesla management for consideration. According to a subsequent post by the OP, Tesla management refused to repair the broken suspension under warranty despite the "not normal" levels of wear reported by the service techs. Then, just days later, the OP reported that Tesla had offered to pay 50% of the $3,100 repair bill in exchange for his signature on a "Goodwill Agreement" which he subsequently posted here (a scan of the stock agreement can be found here). That agreement included the following passage:
"The Goodwill is being provided to you without any admission of liability or wrongdoing or acceptance of any facts by Tesla, and shall not be treated as or considered evidence of Tesla's liability with respect to any claim or incidents. You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. In accepting the Goodwill, you hereby release and discharge Tesla and related persons or entities from any and all claims or damages arising out of or in any way connected with any claims or incidents leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla or related persons or entities based upon facts related to the claims or incidents leading to or related to this Goodwill." [Emphasis added]
This offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry. More troublingly, it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database, the auto safety regulators sole means of discovering defects independent of the automakers they regulate. Reuters also reports today that U.S. auto safety investigators are reviewing reports of suspension problems in Tesla Motors Inc's Model S cars.
"The Goodwill is being provided to you without any admission of liability or wrongdoing or acceptance of any facts by Tesla, and shall not be treated as or considered evidence of Tesla's liability with respect to any claim or incidents. You agree to keep confidential our provision of the Goodwill, the terms of this agreement and the incidents or claims leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. In accepting the Goodwill, you hereby release and discharge Tesla and related persons or entities from any and all claims or damages arising out of or in any way connected with any claims or incidents leading or related to our provision of the Goodwill. You further agree that you will not commence, participate or voluntarily aid in any action at law or in equity or any legal proceeding against Tesla or related persons or entities based upon facts related to the claims or incidents leading to or related to this Goodwill." [Emphasis added]
This offer, to repair a defective part in exchange for a non-disclosure agreement, is unheard of in the auto industry. More troublingly, it represents a potential assault by Tesla Motors on the right of vehicle owners to report defects to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's complaint database, the auto safety regulators sole means of discovering defects independent of the automakers they regulate. Reuters also reports today that U.S. auto safety investigators are reviewing reports of suspension problems in Tesla Motors Inc's Model S cars.
This "deeply troubling" issue is what? A control arm issue?
1) I've had the control arms go out on cars, including an Audi A4. Is this some other kind of failure that is more hazardous?
2) At least on normal sedans this doesn't doesn't generally result in death or major injury the way a car fire may, gas tank explosion etc.
3) Where are the other reports from other users about this deeply troubling issue? They've got 100K+ cars on the road, and actually even though this random website is deeply troubled about this issue, these guys have one of the best safety records going.
4) Any chance this is an astro-turfing campaign or something - the write-up is insanely long.
No legal agreement can override the law. You might be able to sign away your rights, but you can't sign away the governments or ones guaranteed by government. I do not believe any contract provision that bared you from participating with a government inquiry would be legal and depending on whether the terms are severable could invalidate the entire agreement.
This is why you can't sign a legal agreement to be someones slave. You can sign it, but it's not legal, it can't be enforced and any attempt to enforce it is likely to get someone in serious trouble. Just as in that case Tesla can't bar you from talking to NHTSA, the laws about vehicle safety would specifically preclude such a clause. Any attempt by Tesla to enforce such a clause would be dangerous beyond measure to the company. And as I mentioned previously the fact that such a clause exists could invalidate the rest of the agreement.
The person that posted that agreement should have a long and frank talk with a lawyer experienced in vehicle and NHSTA law.
It matters because it appears to be a manufacturing defect. It wasn't noticed till after warranty expired but due to rust etc it was obviously not something that just happened. Refusing to fix out of warranty for such an issue is not unheard of and while an arsehole act could at least be justifiable under the warranty conditions, trying to cover it up though is most definitely NOT justifiable.
no, I see a MAJOR story. This is NOT how Tesla has operated. This is how companies like GM, Audi, VW, Mercedes, Toyota, Ford, Honda, etc operate. Tesla has stood behind their work and it has made them who they are today. They need to rethink this CAREFULLY.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
So the guy had a ball-joint failure at 70,000 miles. Ball-joints are replaceable maintenance items on suspensions of most cars. Vehicles with loose ball-joints have noisy front ends, unusual tire wear and steering anomalies.
The real question one has to ask is when was the last time you had your vehicle inspected and had normal maintenance performed on it?
If recently, you need to be looking at your technician and thanking the manufacturer for the good will repair.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Which rich asshole's agenda should I fall in line with?
The ball joints were probably sourced from china. I have collector cars and this has been going on in this area as well. If Tesla would use Moog ball joints instead of lowest bidder they might have better results. That is what we found to cure early failure. Ball joints should last 100,000 miles easily if they are quality and your not hitting every pot hole in town every day. Recent conversion to the chinese market for this item has magnified issues of ball joints not lasting as long. I have been told by the local big box appliance store not to expect anymore than 8 years out of any major appliance you buy. That way we can squeeze more buying into your life span. After all we are the carcass everybody else feeds on. On any major purchase source the forum for that particular item.It might cut down on the jackals feeding on your money for a few years. It will alert you to the issues with that particular item.
A chassis lube should have been performed (to include suspension parts) at leas 5-7 times in that 70,000 miles,
No. No modern vehicle ships with greaseable joints. They all have sealed "lifetime" joints which last roughly 50-150k.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I dig Musk and his companies but I do believe liability due to "defects in materials and workmanship" doesn't cease when the warranty does.
My 2007 honda civic has has TWO fail. I have had to replace them 3 times in the life of my 1999 Jeep grand cherokee.
So there is data about failure rates all over the road.
Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
The point is it appears Tesla was trying to hush this guy so that there was no inquiry that may cause a recall. That's the real story.
My current car has 108,000 miles on and hasn't had a ball joint fail.
I had an '01 Suzuki Areo that had 5 ball joints fail while it was still under warranty. When it failed the last time, Suzuki offered to buy the car back for the amount of my outstanding loan (far more than the blue book value of the car). Naturally I accepted and was happy to be rid of the problem. Even though it hadn't cost me any money, it was a pain to have to deal with it again every couple of months. The dealer said it was likely an alignment tolerances problem when the car was originally manufactured, and the only way to fix it permanently would be to replace the entire front differential which would cost even more than what Suzuki gave me for it.
I wish I had a good sig, but all the good ones are copyrighted
They just responded to this issue on their blog:
https://www.teslamotors.com/blog/grain-of-salt
Interesting how they call out the author for his previous "death watch" on the company.
As usual, there are three sides to every story: yours, mine and the truth.
Will
remove nospam. to email!
Yeah, I'm mildly surprised. Tesla doesn't MAKE ball joints. It BUYS them from someone and they probably are not custom engineered for the unique needs of Tesla's vehicle. Tesla does design the suspension, but this sounds like a defective part rather than an overstressed part. Overall, Ball joint failure in modern cars is uncommon. Which is a very good thing as it often causes complete steering failure and can kill you if the ball joint fails at speed or at the wrong time and place.
BTW, I'm not a big fan of Tesla or Elon Musk. I think electric cars (as opposed to hybrids) are a poor choice for cold climates or long distance driving, and I think Musk is a con artist who will tell us anything he thinks we're dumb enough to believe if it is to his advantage. But his companies do seem to do decent engineering.
As for the agreement. The no admission of fault part seems reasonable. The confidentiality clause seems to me to be unconscionable and if this crap is enforcable, laws need to be changed to make it unenforcable.
You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
Tesla has a slightly different take on this story which is worth reading. I\m not saying they are necessarily right and the customer is necessarily wrong, just that it could be useful to hear both sides of the story:
- They haven't seen this problem on any other cars (and they would know as they own all service centers).
- The car in question experienced a very unusual use case, it was regularly used on a long dirt road and was caked in dirt (it took two tow trucks to retrieve it, one to get it to the highway and another to get it to the service center)
- The NHTSA has not actually opened even a preliminary evaluation
- Their document would not prevent the customer from talking to the NHTSA.
- Tesla regularly meets with the NHTSA and has often issued recalls for defects before they ever became anything close to an actual safety issue
- The blogger who fabricated this issue (sic) is the same person who previously wrote a blog titled "Tesla Death Watch", starting on May 19 2008.
(Those are just a few highlights, read the to make up your own mind)
I noticed this article this morning:
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/10...
Seems Tesla disagrees with the Daily Kanban's report:
"With respect to the car that is discussed in the blog post that led to yesterday's newsthe suspension ball joint experienced very abnormal rust. We haven't seen this on any other car, suggesting a very unusual use case. The car had over 70,000 miles on it and its owner lives down such a long dirt road that it required two tow trucks to retrieve the car. (One to get the car to the highway and one to get it from the highway to the service center.) When we got the car, it was caked in dirt."
Secondly, Tesla said that the NHTSA had not opened any investigation and hadn't even started a so-called "preliminary evaluation", which is the "lowest form of formal investigatory work it does". The car maker said on April 20 the regulator asked about its suspension as part of a "routine screening" and on April 30, Tesla complied.
"NHTSA has since told us that we have cooperated fully and that no further information is needed. Neither before nor after this information was provided has NHTSA identified any safety issue with Tesla's suspensions. This can be confirmed with NHTSA," Tesla said.