Slashdot Mirror
Tesla Model 3 Achieves NHTSA's 'Lowest Probability' of Injury Ever (thedrive.com)
In a blog post on Monday, Tesla said that the Model 3 has been deemed to have the lowest probability of occupant injury than any vehicle ever tested by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). The Drive reports: Since 1979, the regulatory body has implemented the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) which, through a series of tests, ultimately produces a rating for a new-to-market vehicle based on how well it performs in a variety of safety-related tests. Over time the test has evolved to assess the injury to occupants based on data gathered for front, side, and rollover crashes. During the NHTSA's previous tests of Tesla vehicles, the Model S and Model X, respectively, became the two vehicles with the lowest probability for injury, outpacing all other automakers. The Model 3 has now widened that gap as it takes the new number-one position on the leaderboard for the safest overall vehicle for occupants.
The California-based auto manufacturer acknowledges the car's low center of gravity as a major factor in its gracious performance in rollover tests. Similar to The Model 3 places its heaviest component, the battery pack, into the floor, so this helps improve the overall stability and rigidity of the car, making it perform excellently in rollover crashes. Additionally, the automaker gives a subtle nod to its engineering team for their design of the vehicle's crumple zones. Working in conjunction with airbags placed in the front of the vehicle and at the occupant's knees, the Model 3 was able to safely control the deceleration of passengers in frontal crash tests. The NHTSA's assessment involved the Model 3 Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive variant, however, Tesla states that it believes other trims will receive similar results when tested.
The California-based auto manufacturer acknowledges the car's low center of gravity as a major factor in its gracious performance in rollover tests. Similar to The Model 3 places its heaviest component, the battery pack, into the floor, so this helps improve the overall stability and rigidity of the car, making it perform excellently in rollover crashes. Additionally, the automaker gives a subtle nod to its engineering team for their design of the vehicle's crumple zones. Working in conjunction with airbags placed in the front of the vehicle and at the occupant's knees, the Model 3 was able to safely control the deceleration of passengers in frontal crash tests. The NHTSA's assessment involved the Model 3 Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive variant, however, Tesla states that it believes other trims will receive similar results when tested.
Having many controls that would be buttons in most cars on the touch screen is going to be a distraction for drivers. Even stuff like the headlight controls and windscreen wiper settings are on the screen, meaning you have to glance aside and hit a touch target with no tactile feedback.
What do the accident stats say? Do we have per-model data on at-fault crashes?
const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
If you have to be in a crash, that's a good car to be in. However, they're not really taking into account the tendency for anyone to drives one to mash the accelerator (which is very fun) or be distracted by the huge iPad in the middle of the dash. On the other hand, I assume it handles quite well in the snow, both because of the low center of gravity and the full ESC and Traction Control capabilities. Overall it's a great car, but there's more to the safety of a vehicle than how it handles an accident. Probability of accident is a factor too.
"I have never let my schooling interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
Yes, TSLA currently trades at its lowest level since April 2018. But tell you what, GM does also, and Ford trades even lower than that. So whatever the Shorteners are trading, they would gained the same by shortening GM, and they would actually be better off, had they shortened Ford.
The demand for Tesla vehicles is not going to be an issue for the foreseeable future. The "fundamental" issues are supply (can they source or manufacture enough batteries, something many EV makers struggle with), and manufacturing (can they make these cars fast enough, reliably, without running at a loss). At a glance, the answer to those questions would seem to be Yes, and that hasn't changed. What has changed is Musk tweeting some rubbish and going one toke over the line, no fundamental stuff.
The big worry, as GP pointed out, is Tesla's current debt structure and cash flow. Not necessarily an issue if your stockholders have an unwavering trust in the company and the way it's being run, but Musk seems to be doing everything in his power to shake that trust.
If construction was anything like programming, an incorrectly fitted lock would bring down the entire building...
You think only 700,000 people can afford a $40,000 vehicle?
Well you're obviously retarded.
Article Topic: "Model 3 Achieves NHTSA's 'Lowest Probability' of Injury Ever"
GGP: "...either way, the tesla 3 goes on my list of 'cars to buy'..."
You: "Except for your extremely high probability of burning to death in a battery fire."
Me: "With a couple hundred million miles under their belt, the total number of battery fires in customer-owned Model 3s..."
You: "Go to Youtube and you will see plenty of videos of Tesla's on fire"
Notice how everyone else was talking about the Model 3 but you.
Wrong.
The top 5 cars people are trading in to buy Model 3s are: Toyota Prius, BMW 3-Series, Honda Accord, Honda Civic, Nissan Leaf.
That's like saying about rhubarb vs. water hemlock, "It isn't nontoxic. No food is devoid of toxic compounds". While true, people need cars and not all cars are equal.
My Shill Check strangely hasn't arrived! Do you know where it might be? Does this mean that they've gone Bankwupt?! ;)
Um, exactly what it says on the tin? I like the cars, I like the tech, and I like the company.
"Close the door! What, were you born in a barn?" -- Police chief, "Jesus Christ Supercop"
Because almost all modern cars are pretty good in this regard?
The 2014 Tesla Model S EuroNCAP tests (equivalent of this test, but only done on certain years, not EVERY possible year of model) actually put it below the Ford Mondeo (called a Fusion in the US) - all the scores are lower except the driver assist tech available on the Mondeo.
But they both score 5 stars. I'm sure in the 4 years since then the newer Mondeos probably score higher still, and the Tesla as well. As does pretty much every decent car - Ford Focus, Nissan Leaf, Kia Stonic, Honda Civic, Subaru Impreza.
It's the ones that DON'T pass with 5 stars that stand out. Pretty much they kill people and they are quickly resubmitted for testing after a redesign.
Do you really think that, in subjective tests, the difference between 5-stars and 5-stars being a small handful of points in things like "how many safety gadgets does the software boast" really make a difference?
I'm no Tesla fan. But I'm a massive safety fan. Safety is incredibly important to me - that's why I own a Mondeo and checked it first. But this is *one* factor - the question of "how much control do I have of the vehicle" is actually a bigger question for me. But orders of magnitude. Hence I don't have all the lane-assist junk on my car deliberately - I refused the option. Because I intend to drive it, not put software in the path of the steering wheel direction.
As one small factor, congratulations, it's a win for Tesla on a subjective test and may / may not actually be repeated around the world with stricter safety requirements on vehicles. In terms of "being a mass market car manufacturer", that puts you firmly in the... well... kinda "damn well expected" section of the statistics.
Congratulations. Tesla *isn't* shit at basic safety tests over a small portion of their cars, testing a small subjective portion of their ability to survive head-on/side collisions.
Go you.