Slashdot Mirror
Consumer Reports Ranks Tesla Model X Near Bottom For Reliability (cnn.com)
Last year, Consumer Reports withdrew its recommendation for the Tesla Model S after investigating its reliability. Today, the nonprofit organization released its 2016 Car Reliability Survey and found that, while the Tesla Model S has become more reliable, the Tesla Model X has proved to be unreliable overall. CNNMoney reports: CEO Elon Musk admitted that he wished he hadn't put so much new, complex technology on [the Model X] all at once when he unveiled the model last year. Apparently, he was right to worry. The Model X's complicated "falcon wing" doors have been a big trouble spot, said Jake Fisher, head of Consumer Reports' car testing unit. Even the front doors, which have electric motors that let them open on their own, have been a headache for customers, he added. As a result, Tesla ranks among the "Less Reliable" brands on Consumer Reports' list. The SUV's dependability is rated as "Much worse than average." Still, overall owner satisfaction with the vehicle is rated as "Excellent." For a long time, "dependability problems" have tended to be relatively trivial, said Fisher, as the industry has perfected the major mechanical aspects of the cars. In recent years, the problems have stemmed from the more high-tech additions to the newest cars, like the computer screens that work with phone, navigation and entertainment features, said Fisher. But now, with tougher fuel economy rules pushing more complex transmission technologies, dependability issues are once again starting to involve fundamental mechanical components. New eight- and nine-speed transmissions as well as dual-clutch and continuously variable transmissions have been suffering problems at a higher-than-average rate, Fisher said. It's been years since new car buyers would have to worry about things that could actually render their vehicle undrivable. But those concerns are coming back, Fisher said. As for the Model S, Consumer Reports says "Tesla's Model S has improved to average reliability, which now makes the electric car one of our recommended models."
Maybe they can use the spaceX rockets to launch their junk cars into space
Most people expected those to take time to get right.
But the issues with poor build quality was simply horrendous and would have been unacceptable for cars costing well below the Model X base price.
They delayed the car by 2 years and still couldn't get it right, FFS
Pain is merely failure leaving the body
Consumer Reports is rigged against Tesla. When I'm president, I will sue everyone who has complained about their unreliable Teslas.
You are welcome on my lawn.
TFS points to an earlier story on slashdot.
The review on the model X is here. Despite the lower-than-average rating for first-year reliability, I can't find where CR rates it "near the bottom"
Did anyone else find the rating I can't?
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
Even when it works its awful. The 2nd row is short on room. The 3rd row is tiny. And you cannot fold the 2nd row seats so even if you fold the 3rd row down you can't fit a bike in it.
Here is a video showing how much more hauling space there is in a small LEAF than in a Model X.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
And you can't even put stuff on the roof of the Model X due to the stupid doors.
Get an AWD Model S. Skip the stupid Model X.
http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
My father gifted me a Tesla Model X upon attainment, and in celebration, of my high school graduation. I returned it three weeks later and purchased a Range Rover in its place. Though Consumer Reports has enumerated numerous quality flaws, the most glaring was the new car smell, dubbed Elon Musk. It was a mixture of farts and old spice with perhaps a hint of leather and coriander. The dealer insisted it was supposed to smell that way and even offered to "re-musk" it for me.
Copyright (c) 1990 - 2014 Dice. All rights reserved. Use of this comment is subject to certain Terms and Conditions.
But you were saying they were rigid against Tesla before they were rigged against Tesla and we have proof that everyone used to say that!
Even if looks like they're going to crash and burn, Tesla will make America fabulous again.
But if I paid that kind of money for one, I could afford to have it off for repairs all the time, and I'd tell you my satisfaction with it was excellent too. It's not like my carpool was depending on it...
Besides, I personally think the model X is one of the least attractive cars you can buy. It seems like something designed only for hipsters. The kind of people who do not care how pointless and terrible something is. The ones who will defend it to the grave despite all evidence being to the contrary.
Most people expected those to take time to get right.
There is more to quality than taking your time. I've worked as a quality engineer in the auto industry. The hard part is installing a company culture that values quality while still being able to manage costs effectively.
But the issues with poor build quality was simply horrendous and would have been unacceptable for cars costing well below the Model X base price.
I guess you've never dealt with cars in that price range much before. Nobody buys a car with a six figure price tag because of its reliability. Super cars are notoriously unreliable. Nobody buys a Lambo or a Ferrari or even a Land Rover for its reliability. People buy them for their features, looks, and brand but almost never because they don't expect to see the inside of a repair shop. Part of this is because high priced cars tend to have the latest gizmos as well as a lot of them so there simply are more places for things to break. Given how much they are pushing the envelope on car design and features I'm not really surprised there are some quality problems with some Tesla cars. But when compared to the cars they are currently competing against their quality seems to be roughly par for the course compared to their nearest competition like BMWs or Mercedes. Toyota/Lexus is probably the exception that proves the rule as they tend to lead the pack on quality though their cars also tend to be rather conservative and boring me-too designs.
Now that's not really an excuse for poor quality but if you are going to compare apples to apples Tesla isn't really out of the ordinary in the market they are selling to. And to their credit Tesla seems to take dealing with problems that arise in their vehicles seriously and proactively. It indicates that the Model S is now roughly average build quality which these days is actually pretty darn good. If you want to argue that Tesla should be better I won't disagree. Personally if something costs that much money I don't think it's unreasonable to expect it to be well designed and well built.
Too me Tesla should be focused on the environmental factor. But instead it seem to build cars for young wealthier tree huggers. Not the typical family guy. All these people who buy a tesla today could easily afford gasoline for a traditional luxury vehicle. It's why Tesla fails at what I thought was it's core business. To prove it can make a volume selling vehicle for the masses. Some say it's Tesla 3 is going to be that car, but as the price inches up and support cost like installing charge station and a limited number of stations in some areas won't help in the long run. Tesla has just fallen flat on this business model so far.
Besides, I personally think the model X is one of the least attractive cars you can buy.
That's a matter of opinion. My sister agrees with you but I think the Model X looks fine - at least compared with any other crossover SUV. I don't think it's as pretty as the Model S but it doesn't offend me visually. Different strokes for different folks. Personally I think the Nissan Leaf is FAR uglier than the Model X as well as far less practical if we ignore the vastly different price points. I don't really get why Telsa is the only company that has wrapped their head around the idea that an ugly hatchback with a 100 mile range isn't anything to get excited about.
It seems like something designed only for hipsters.
Ahh, I get it. You don't like it so it must be something designed for your designated generic ill-defined douche bags - aka "hipsters". You don't have to like the vehicle and I get it if it doesn't suit your needs. But I know several people personally who own a Model X and "hipster" doesn't remotely begin to describe any of them. Most of them are people who simply are techies who like the geek factor and performance that comes with a Tesla. A few are greenies who also happen to be car enthusiasts. Reliable or not the cars Tesla makes are among the most interesting vehicles you can buy today regardless of price point.
It's been years since new car buyers would have to worry about things that could actually render their vehicle undrivable. But those concerns are coming back, Fisher said.
Yep so great we live in a nation were we have choice and freedom.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
It's a sedan.
There's another useful metric - cost of repair.
It is useful but not publicly available. Tesla isn't going to break this number out on their financial statements and Consumer Reports doesn't have access to the real number. One might be able to make an educated guess at it but there would be some very substantial error bars on that calculation.
They're about $7 billion in the hole and still a year, at least, before their mass market car ships.
Which is why their stock valuation is astonishing. I think Tesla is a pretty good company doing very interesting things. But their market capitalization is bat shit crazy. It is completely unjustifiable given the size and any reasonable analysis of the near term prospects of the company. It doesn't make sense that an unprofitable company selling 50,000 vehicles a year has a market cap half the size of General Motors market cap. Tesla simply isn't going to be big enough or profitable enough any time soon to justify that valuation.
If people are emotionally invested in a poor decision, then they will retroactively justify it in a lot of ways.
One person's poor decision is another person's awesome decision. Let's use a different car company - Ferrari. Nobody buys a Ferrari because of the reliability ratings in Consumer Reports. They buy it because of the looks, the performance, the badge, or other reasons. The decision tree and evaluation of satisfaction about the purchase simply won't be based on whether it is as reliable as a Toyota Camry. Tesla is somewhat in the same boat. Reliability is pretty far down the list of reasons why someone buys a Tesla in most cases.
Remember that Consumer Reports has a particular view point on their evaluation of cars. They apply the same ratings to all vehicles regardless of whether those ratings actually are relevant to the buyers of those cars. This isn't a case of post-hoc justification of satisfaction. It's that the measuring stick for satisfaction is a lot more complicated than how reliable Consumer Reports thinks the car is. Consumer Reports provides useful data but you have to understand that it is data from a very specific view point which may or may not be relevant.
Yet CR reports customer satisfaction at 92%. The Model S (I'm a Model S owner) scores the highest customer satisfaction of any car. My Model S is so unreliable that I completely forgot to take it in for the recommended annual inspection. I've got an inspection booked for next week because I discovered I was out of windshield wiper fluid, the only user serviceable item, since I hadn't taken the car into the service center in eighteen months. Yep...a lemon--no doubt about it.
This is direct result of systematic problem with Silicon Valley culture of release and patch it later. While consumers got used to buggy, poorly optimized, and unreliable software they are not willing to tolerate this with cars.
First of all, I've seen first-hand and heard about examples of brand new cars that were pretty much undriveable due to some kind of quality control issue.
Second, when you buy cutting edge technology of any kind, you're probably going to pay a price in reliability. If you know a good, honest auto mechanic, he'll probably tell you to avoid first model years. It's hardly ever because of basic design problems, because new models are tested pretty extensively. There's a learning curve associated with building them, though.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
Your wrong here though. I remember this coming up with BMW in the 90s. If you asked BMW owners they would rate their cars as some of the most reliable on the roads. Objectively they were crap in reliability though. It's all people justifying things.
Nobody bought a BMW because of their reliability no matter what they claimed unless they were a fanboi who couldn't be bothered to actually look at the data. This is true of most luxury car brands with a few notable exceptions. Furthermore your argument is nonsense because CR rates reliability based on surveys to actual owners of those cars. Sure you might find a braggart who is delusional or honestly hasn't had any problems with their BMW but those are the exception rather than the rule. Similarly nobody buys a Tesla because of its reliability no matter what they are claiming.
Cars that are bought for reliability market that fact front and center. BMW markets their cars as the ultimate driver's cars. Tesla doesn't ma
The Ferrari is a red herring, anybody even remotely familiar with any of the super cars knows they're god awful for reliability, but that's not what you're buying it for and nobody will argue for their reliability
Incorrect. It's an extreme example of my point but you are confirming what I'm saying. People don't buy Tesla vehicles with reliability as a primary concern. I'm sure it's on the list somewhere but it's not the main consideration. Consumer Reports however they regard reliability as a top concern even when the buyers of the vehicle in question do not.
Yet objectively they're somewhere between average reliability and crap reliability.
Objectively the average reliability of cars today is actually extremely good. So someone who says their car is reliable when the data says it is average probably isn't lying. The difference between top and mid-tier reliability these days is really not a big difference. This is quite a change from 20 years ago when there were rather substantial differences in reliability between brands.
The Model X needs to have a second version made available. Where everything is the same except that it is "Sans" the gull doors. It would be significantly cheaper and much more trouble free. I expect that it would take off sales wise.
Then eventually when demand drops. Drop the Gull Wing doors from the Model X. Don't discard them, rather migrate them to the new Roadster 2.0.
This is what Tesla needs to do.
Attempts to piggyback Tesla 's zero-cost marketing.
Requiem for the American Dream
Again?
Requiem for the American Dream
Like you say the short term growth potential doesn't support their stock price.
Neither does the long term potential unless you have a time horizon of decades.
The high price of Tesla stock reflects that a lot of fund managers think they have a decent chance of huge long term growth.
Not true. Tesla is being held by fund managers because it is a stock people want to own. A realistic appraisal of Tesla's growth prospects doesn't even come close to justifying a $30Billion valuation. A super profitable car company makes something like a 10% margin. Even if Tesla magically sold 1/10th the cars that GM does tomorrow (GM sold 9.8 million vehicles in 2015) and we double their margin to 20% which is far beyond any car company that has ever existed they would take decades to generate enough free cash flow to justify that valuation. No, the ONLY reason Tesla's stock remains high is because people are playing a game of "who's the greater fool" buying high in the hopes it will go higher.
Tesla stock is an expensive gamble but it still has a clearer path to long term growth and profitability than companies like Twitter and Facebook.
Twitter maybe but Facebook is already hugely profitable. You might try actually looking at their financials before posting next time.
Actually, a Tesla should be in the same boat as a Toyota: it is a daily driver.
Now, it you tell me you bought a Tesla for the badge and to boast to your friends that you have a Tesla in your garage or to bring it to a track on the weekend*, that maybe a viable reason for you, but I don't think that's how Tesla positions themselves. Don't they want to bring EV to the masses?
* not the best idea, I'd rather drive the Ferrari
Actually, a Tesla should be in the same boat as a Toyota: it is a daily driver.
Doesn't matter. It isn't. That's not how people perceive it currently and it isn't how Tesla market's their cars. People don't worry about Tesla reliability either positively or negatively currently.
Now, it you tell me you bought a Tesla for the badge and to boast to your friends that you have a Tesla in your garage or to bring it to a track on the weekend*, that maybe a viable reason for you, but I don't think that's how Tesla positions themselves. Don't they want to bring EV to the masses?
I didn't say people bought the Tesla for the badge though I'm sure some do. I just said they didn't buy it for the reliability. In no particular order people buy Tesla's for battery power (no gas), appearance, performance (fast as hell in a straight line and not bad in the curves), luxury (very nice interior), geekiness, and fanboi-ism. Which of those matter most depends on the buyer. Reliability isn't really much of a consideration for the vast majority of buyers.
* not the best idea, I'd rather drive the Ferrari
I've driven both a Ferrari and a Tesla in years gone by. Both have their charms. Tesla is FAR more pleasant to drive under normal conditions and faster than most Ferrari's in a straight line. But Ferarri's have their good points too depending on which model you are talking about. I really can't imagine myself buying a Ferrari but I could imagine myself owning a Tesla.
Here's the deal, back in the late 80's/early 90's and throughout the 90's Consumer Reports went after Suzuki for their SUV's. In court case after court case, Suzuki would win, but that did not stop Consumer Reports from chasing them saying that their SUV's were less stable than others and more dangerous.
In the end, even though Suzuki won in court multiple times against Consumer Reports, they stopped selling cars and suv's in the American market.
What lesson do we learn from this, Kiddies? That Consumer Reports is far from unbiased and lies about shit to push an agenda
I don't care for Tesla and am tired of hearing about how a sub $60K car is 'affordable' when I can barely afford a $28k car, from some multi-billionaire but in this case, I do not trust consumer reports and will not ever trust them.
serious question - what is so much better about driving a tesla than other higher end brands? I have a (just turned) 3 yr old lexus - it has less torque but FAR from underpowered/it's not as quiet as an electric but pretty damn quiet for the power it has/it doesn't have autopilot (ok, I'll admit I'm jealous about that part!) but you know what's gone wrong in that car over three years? NOTHING! zip, zero, nada, not a damn thing!
not trying to talk anyone out of a tesla (quite the contrary), just wondering what besides above (& eco bling) makes a model s so much better than an ls for 20-50k more?
The fancy doors added to the wow factor of the Model X. But they didn't deliver any utility, which is the point of an SUV. And they added expense and a new point of failure, especially since they needed even more complexity to allow opening the doors in a parking garage. Tesla would have been better off ditching them.