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."
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
When "attained" my high school graduation my father gifted me with fuck-all. Because graduating high school isn't something you "attain". It's something you do because you have the bare minimum level of competence to be a self-sufficient human.
If you RTFS, you would have seen this link where CR revoked their recommendation of the model S because of poor reliability.
Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
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.
Masterful troll, great bait.
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...
Funny how, even though the Model X scores low in reliability, it's at the top of the list in customer satisfaction with 92% saying "definitely yes" when asked "would you get this car if you had to do it all over again".
So it looks like the poor reliability is not that big of a deal.
Nah, they'll just rename it the Yugo and keep selling 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.
Because like Apple, their customers are part of a cult. Shitty overpriced products tend to attract this kind of people.
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.
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.
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.
Cognitive dissonance. If people are emotionally invested in a poor decision, then they will retroactively justify it in a lot of ways.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
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.
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.
The Model X has issues. I know I own an early one. After waiting more than 2 years, I've had a Model X for around 6 months. I think it's spent about a month of that time in the Shop.
Right now my front turn signals don't work all the time and the driver's door no longer opens automatically. Tesla is coming to pick it up tomorrow and fix it.
The real problem with Tesla's is that they are addictive. After driving one for about a week, you never want to drive anything else. They are simply that much better than any other car on the road. I'm already suffering from withdraw and they haven't even picked it up yet.
The only think I would consider trading my Model X for would be a Model S and all my money back. Then I would just order a new Model X. There is no comparison.
I always warn people that are interested in Teslas, that there is no going back. Once you've driven one for a bit, you will hate all your other cars. So don't even test drive one if you can't realistically buy one.
And yes, I've already got a Model 3 on order to go with my Model X, and I've been trying to figure out how to afford a used Model S just in case the Model 3 is delayed by too long.
Consumer Reports car recommendations went off-path in the 80s. Just like the article says, most car "reliability" problems became nickle-and-dime stuff, yet their recommendations don't weight a power window switch malfunction differently than the engine exploding. Buyers of American cars in the 80s and 90s were very familiar with the car falling to pieces around them, but were generally willing to make the compromise because they saved thousands at purchase and when something inevitably went wrong, parts were cheap and repairs could be done by any idiot with a garage and a wrench. Do I want to know if the drive-train of a car is more or less likely to malfunction? YES! But it would be foolish to trade a car with an easy-to-fix transmission that is known to be unreliable for a car with a transmission that is 2x as reliable but 3x more expensive to fix. Do I want to know if the trim and electronics are going to go all wonky? Sure, but I certainly won't weight it as highly as the drive-train. Consumer Reports is disconnected from this, and so I have trouble taking their recommendations as anything more than a small datapoint.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
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.
Tesla no longer has a reputation for speedy repairs.
Why Tesla has such a strong recommendation score is because there is literally zero competition.
So people will put up with flaky technology and poor repair experiences because there is simply no alternative if you want a similar vehicle.
I really believe that Tesla will be in a bunch of trouble if/when they ever have actual competition to deal with.
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
Funny how, even though the Model X scores low in reliability, it's at the top of the list in customer satisfaction with 92% saying "definitely yes" when asked "would you get this car if you had to do it all over again".
So it looks like the poor reliability is not that big of a deal.
Ah, Consumer Reports. There are some vehicles that they simply hate, like most Jeeps. I find that despite their not taking ads, they are incredibly biased, especially about vehicles.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
Like you say the short term growth potential doesn't support their stock price. However a lot of the money in the stock market isn't looking for only short term growth. The high price of Tesla stock reflects that a lot of fund managers think they have a decent chance of huge long term growth. So yes, 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.
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.
As does Apple. (I just bring this up since some cowards have been making a comparison between the two) In the very few cases I've needed hardware support, they've had me back operating overnight. Auto dealers? Not so much.
The only reason I don't own a Tesla is that they don't make an offroad capable vehicle.
And I get the impression that the Slashdot Cowards Army all drive Toyota Corollas.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
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.
No probably more like there's an understood level of accepted risk to buying a car by an automaker that didn't exist not all that long ago with technology that had never been implemented in cars quite like this to produce a true electrical replacement for vehicles that has never really been attempted before at any kind of reasonable scale. You kind of expect there's going to be bugs along the way since you're an early adopter. Now if in 10 years their cars are still highly unreliable, that's a different conversation but as the summary itself states -- Model S reliability has increased as you would expect from ample improvement cycles.
If you RTFS, you would have seen this link [slashdot.org] where CR revoked their recommendation of the model S because of poor reliability.
Perhaps you should have RTFS more carefully. Your linked article is from 2015 when CR revoked their recommendation, however they recently reinstated it as is pointed out in the summary where it states:
"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."
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.
Tesla no longer has a reputation for speedy repairs.
Sure it does. A reputation is what people think of it. Generally they remain head and shoulders above the car crowd.
Now maybe you may have experience or know of one or two bad cases. They will always be out there, but the general reputation for Tesla is still excellent in this regard.
Tesla Model S re-earns Consumer Reports recommendation on improved reliability:
https://electrek.co/2016/10/24/tesla-model-s-re-earns-consumer-reports-recommendation-on-improved-reliability/
Ad homenim. There's nothing cult-like about it.
A user has completely different metrics than Consumer Reports. For instance, if the auto-opening door fails but the user can still open it manually, an owner isn't going to be terribly bothered while the "official" grade will take a hit
Likewise, with the right setup, this car can be virtually free to drive. An SUV with no gas cost is a godsend to someone who's been pumping $100 a week into their old Suburban. But the consumer report don't care. They're not actually using the car, just grading it, so electric isn't really a plus for them. Hell, it might be a negative because of the longer "fill up" times and overall lacking infrastructure.
The criteria by which consumers and Consumers Report grade are just wildly different, and so you get a discrepancy.
This signature is false.
What kind of stupidity does it take to not be able to tell the difference between humor and trolling? Who are the idiots on this site nowadays that downvote posts as "troll" just because they are too dumb to understand or appreciate them, or just don't agree with them?
Yeah I'm an old timer. I don't come to this site that often any more. But even more troubling than the slide to mediocrity of the story editing and selection (which happened in the mid-2000's by the way, and unfortunately never improved), is the increasing stupidity of the Slashdot readership. Or perhaps it's really just a part of the overall trend of this new generation not being able to handle any viewpoint they don't agree with without furious downvoting.
pay attention to the forums.
The reputation among owners of the vehicles is for slow repairs, long waits for parts, and an inability to even get a hold of the service centres to book appointments.
Cognitive dissonance. If people are emotionally invested in a poor decision, then they will retroactively justify it in a lot of ways.
Or possibly Commitment Bias and, over time, Escalation of Commitment.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Actually, with a normal dealer, the reliability would be an issue. However, with Tesla, if you have an issue, they take care of things quickly while giving you a temp vehicle to drive.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
"neckbeard"
Amish?
Amazon.
I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.
except every Jeep I've ever been in is a dangerous death trap, with crap build quality, and safety, so that would actually make their hatred of Jeeps accurate, and a valid warning to consumers...
I've owned 3 now, and they've actually been literal lifesavers. My first year Grand Cherokee was finally retired with almost 300 K miles, still ran well, but was starting to nickel and dime us at almost 15 years old, the Wife has a compass, and I have a Patriot. She wanted a Jeep that was more crossover like, and I wanted a small Jeep that gets good gas milage along with the Jeep's ability to just go no matter what. That some AC doesn't like them means... well actually nothing.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I get this feeling too about Consumer Reports. While I think some of their studies are helpful, and they try to fill an important role, I always end up wanting more detail than what they offer. They collect a lot of data but withhold all the details. I don't feel that their data analysis is very good. But maybe I just get that impression because I want to see statistical uncertainties, ranges, actual numbers, etc. Since that's all hidden from readers, I tend to assume their ratings are bogus.
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.
The Suzuki Samurai, the model that Consumer Reports went after, actually DID have a stability problem. It wasn't anything unique about its design; the problem was inherent to its short wheelbase and high center of gravity. The original Jeep, later named the CJ-5 after the company introduced the larger CJ-7, had the same problem, and CR successfully pushed that vehicle off the market.
The problems with the Samurai were exacerbated by its advertising and market positioning. It was sold primarily as a fun and inexpensive car for young drivers. That meant that most of them were in the hands of drivers who were unprepared for the fact that the car was all too easy to roll over.
Suzuki's larger SUVs like the Sidekick were no worse than anybody else's SUVs of the time. (They're all terrible compared to modern ones because electronic stability control is now mandated on SUVs.) Unlike Jeep, the Suzuki brand was unable to recover from the bad publicity and so the company abandoned the US market.
To be fair Jeeps are shit.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
You can't say your Jeeps are literal life savers and then not tell the story about how they saved lives. We all want to know now.
All I want is a secure system where it's easy to do anything I want. Is that too much to ask ~~ Randall Munroe
To be fair Jeeps are shit.
To be accurate, they are about 25 percent of the vehicles in my area. Weather is unpredictable, and we need vehicles that go. And sometimes we need something sure footed to pull those non-shit vehicles out of the ditches they slide into.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
You can't say your Jeeps are literal life savers and then not tell the story about how they saved lives. We all want to know now.
Weather here in the Northeast has become really unpredictable. For both my wife and I we have been caught in ice storms in the middle of nowhere.
The magic of the Jeep and it's modern day traction control is that it will actually go on ice, and go well.
Biiig caveat! the Laws of physics still hold, stopping is still a huge issue on glare ice, even with ABS. But we've both been able to limp off the road, in her case, getting off the interstate for stopping on a side road, and for me, getting out of the woods in sub zero weather on glare ice.
Not very exciting stories, but being able to maintain control on an icy interstate and to get off before you are nuked by some nut is a lifesaver, and getting out of the woods so you don't freeze to death is nice as well.
I've also pulled a fair number of other vehicles out of ditches when they've slid off the road.
For everyone: Be extremely careful if you have a 4 wheel drive. Every winter we have people that end up in ditches because they think just because they can go in a straight line, that they can round a curve on ice at 70 mph, or stop just like on a dry road, even with ABS. You can't.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I've always wondered about that particular insult. I can't say the hair on my neck grows all that fast, and frankly, aren't big beards currently in fashion?
I have no idea what a neckbeard even is, is that a beard that grows out of your neck, or a neck length beard? Are Gandalf and Confucius now neckbeards?
I personally don't believe I have something that could be called a neckbeard, but I just never understood the insult to be an insult at all.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
On top of all that, I would like to point out that the Jeep Wrangler always shows up high on their list of unreliable vehicles, while being a highly popular vehicle. Some level of unreliability seems to be acceptable to people in general, after all, doesn't the reliability of any car line go down when they release a new model. The X has been out for less than a year, how reliable was any model of car its first year?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I am with you, but my requirement is tow capable. I will trade in my Tundra the day they release an electric that can tow like it (I need at least 8klb capacity with a 200-300 mile range while towing).
So, are you saying that the X does poorly offroad? It is AWD, with a low center of gravity, it should do decent in most off road situations? Is it a ground clearance issue?
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
I have tried to explain this to people before too, it seems like there are people out there who think 4WD helps in all situations and just don't get that is makes steering worse, and breaking no better. At least those are the ones who get taken out in the first storm and don't have their vehicles through the rest of winter.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
So, are you saying that the X does poorly offroad? It is AWD, with a low center of gravity, it should do decent in most off road situations? Is it a ground clearance issue?
he X would be great for my wife's use. She's a mostly street, but want's something sure footed in nasty weather. I'm not certain about the offroad capabilities of the X. Ground clearance is important though. I tend to get myself into "situations" if you know what I mean, driving in places with lots of rocks. Although I drive a Patriot, even it is a compromise for me since I also do a lot of road driving. I'd be a CJ type except for that.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.
I have tried to explain this to people before too, it seems like there are people out there who think 4WD helps in all situations and just don't get that is makes steering worse, and breaking no better. At least those are the ones who get taken out in the first storm and don't have their vehicles through the rest of winter.
We've had some bad pileups on the local interstates, with people still thinking they can travel 85 on them in nasty weather. Idiot formula is 70 +10+another 5 just because.
The amazing thing is that as soon as this happens, they start playing the blame game. The highway crews are the usual target - even though the damn snowplows can't go 85 mph except in freefall, and for one especially bad pileup they were blaming NOAA!
My rule of thumb is that when it starts snowing, I get off the interstate at the next exit and avoid the parade of idiots.
The shepherds did so well protecting the flock that the sheep no longer believed that wolves existed.