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."

Comments

Re:It's not the FWD that are the real problem

[AK Marc]

That's one of the issues with CR's reporting. 100 people with problems with a cupholder would rate as "poor" while 2 with a blown engine would rate as "good", when the sum of cost of 100 cupholders is less than two engines, so the upkeep cost of the "reliable" car is higher than the "unreliable" car.

Or just get a leaf or an outback

[pablo_max]

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.

Re:Calling all rockets

[Anonymous Coward]

Because like Apple, their customers are part of a cult. Shitty overpriced products tend to attract this kind of people.

Re:it's a terrible SUV

[DrXym]

Those gull wing doors were always a gimmick, a "hook" to ensure coverage for the vehicle. I'm sure it's neat to watch them ponderously open and close via sensors, hydraulics and motors but there is a simpler, cheaper and practical solution - a regular car door, and if necessary a little catch on the mid row seats that slides them forward or tilts them. The regular door keeps out the rain, opens and closes more quickly, doesn't need a bunch of electronics to function and does the same job.

It's notable that the gull wing doors are always demoed in tight spaces because that's about the only place they tenuously offer any advantage, but since the front row has regular doors I'm not sure how that's supposed to make sense either.

Re:Calling all rockets

[thegarbz]

So it looks like the poor reliability is not that big of a deal.

Poor reliability depends on the impact. Tesla has an incredible record of standing by its products. Every other car company out there treat customers like garbage.

Given the choice between a car where I'm 75% certain to have a problem that would be resolved by the manufacturer quickly without question, and a car where I'm 5% likely to have a problem where the manufacturer royally screws me and then charges me a ludicrous fee I'll take the 75% anyday.

This is why reliability and consumer satisfaction are two different metrics. Nothing funny about it, nor is it in any way inconsistent except when you compare the metrics to other manufacturers.

Silicon Valley culture of cowboy design

[sinij]

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.