Stop the Press! Tesla announces REAL HP numbers for P85D and P90L

[dsm363]

Why don't we wait until there is actually something new to report. I'm pretty sure every argument has already been made.

 

[P85DEE]

Why don't we wait until there is actually something new to report. I'm pretty sure every argument has already been made.

I'm game. I'm a team player. I'm with you and that idea.

The less posted in it, the further down the listing of threads it goes.

With any luck, it finds it's way into the deepest archives of this forum.

 

[JonG]

According to this article, in the UK "sold as seen" is not allowed for a car dealer or trader (aka online car dealer), but is allowed for private party and auction houses. The latter cases would be "unfair" in your definition, but it is allowed.
http://www.consumeruk.co.uk/31.asp

Similarly the criteria for the dealer or trader to satisfy is only that the vehicle matches its intended use and is reasonably reliable (this is similar to lemon laws here, except it seems it applies for used cars in the UK too). I doubt the horsepower (past some certain minimum threshold to qualify as a road legal vehicle) is included in it.

I've not said that. What I've tried to say is that you can't just write anything into a contract and anything you say is ok. For instance you can't write certain things into a contract that say invalidate a warranty - block exemption regulations in Europe came in that said anybody can service your car so long as they do certain things, a new car dealer can't therefore state you had to service the car with them to maintain the warranty and over ride the wider legislation. They can say if you do no maintenance at all then it's invalid.

A used car from a dealer has to be fit for purpose. A 10 year old shed with 100k on the clock would not need to be defect free but would need to be road worthy. Buy from an auction and it doesn't. The dealer can't remove all responsibility to the public but can in the trade.

Put it another way, VW are in a heap of pain but I bet their contracts had all the same 'errors and omissions excepted' and nowhere did the contract say certain performance criteria were a contracted deliverable. I'm sure they even reserved the right to vary the spec. But even that has to be reasonable. If you ordered a car and the marketing material said it had a sun roof and come delivery it didn't you may have a claim, if it was 2mm longer you wouldn't.

Im hoping we're just arguing extremes. I'm not saying there is no flexibility, only that there are limits on reasonable and fair. I'm hoping you're not saying that (as an extreme example) you can bury in the small print a term that says the contract is limited to the supply of 2200kg of stuff in a shape 5m long with a tesla badge on the front.

Save me rambling on....

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284426/oft311.pdf

 

[Nigel Tufnel]

A representation of when this argument will end:

 

[stopcrazypp]

I've not said that. What I've tried to say is that you can't just write anything into a contract and anything you say is ok. For instance you can't write certain things into a contract that say invalidate a warranty - block exemption regulations in Europe came in that said anybody can service your car so long as they do certain things, a new car dealer can't therefore state you had to service the car with them to maintain the warranty and over ride the wider legislation. They can say if you do no maintenance at all then it's invalid.

You used an example of "sold as seen" contracts, but that does not appear to be a result of the "unfair" contract law, but rather is similar to the lemon law here. If it was about unfair contracts, then "sold as seen" should be banned completely, but it obviously isn't, given the ban only applies to car dealers. That's why I doubted your application of "unfair" contracts in this example and your implication that it implies broadly and strictly in general.

Basically Canuck's point that there are specific statues that you can contract out of using the "as is" example seems to be correct:

Not true. It depends on the statute. Some statutes can, in fact, be specifically contracted out of and the courts have upheld those contracts -- in the UK (which is where we derive our law). Again, look it up if you don't believe. For instance, you can sell products "as is" with no warranty or express or implied representations that they will be fit for their intended purpose. This is against the Sale of Goods Act which most jurisdictions have, and which implies fitness for the intended purpose.

A used car from a dealer has to be fit for purpose. A 10 year old shed with 100k on the clock would not need to be defect free but would need to be road worthy. Buy from an auction and it doesn't. The dealer can't remove all responsibility to the public but can in the trade.

Put it another way, VW are in a heap of pain but I bet their contracts had all the same 'errors and omissions excepted' and nowhere did the contract say certain performance criteria were a contracted deliverable. I'm sure they even reserved the right to vary the spec. But even that has to be reasonable. If you ordered a car and the marketing material said it had a sun roof and come delivery it didn't you may have a claim, if it was 2mm longer you wouldn't.

Im hoping we're just arguing extremes. I'm not saying there is no flexibility, only that there are limits on reasonable and fair. I'm hoping you're not saying that (as an extreme example) you can bury in the small print a term that says the contract is limited to the supply of 2200kg of stuff in a shape 5m long with a tesla badge on the front.

Save me rambling on....

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/284426/oft311.pdf

I touched on a similar point here about lighted vanity mirrors and reading lights (advertised but not listed as included equipment in contract or legally required Monroney sticker). I also talked about how an extreme example doesn't work (delivering a 2 wheeled vehicle). Link, so I don't rehash:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...P90L/page151?p=1240760&viewfull=1#post1240760

To bring it back on topic. Basically in the US at least, any claim over horsepower (other than the minimum required to be a road legal vehicle) would be a false advertising lawsuit, not a breach of contract lawsuit from what I can tell. The way you describe the your law seems to say the same (car manufacturer selling through or as a dealer is required to deliver what generally meets the use of it regardless of what is written in contract, but the exact specifics not specified in contract can vary).

I'll let Canuck go through the document and see how applicable it is to the horsepower case.

 

[Mike Strauss]

Luckily we proved ourselves as honest, though the stats could be better...

 

[FlasherZ]

A representation of when this argument will end:

or...

 

[Krugerrand]

However, if you want to see if it will die on it's own...

I'm willing to help it die. I'll rent the empty warehouse and send the invites (all the alcohol one can drink will be provided at no charge), you bring the assortment of sharp objects, and then we lock the doors. Face to face people are generally more civil, so I'll allow a little extra time and say it'll take 48 hours to sort out.

 

[lolachampcar]

look

a squirrel

 

[wk057]

look

a squirrel

No, it's a kitten!

 

[Johan]

I'm willing to help it die. I'll rent the empty warehouse and send the invites (all the alcohol one can drink will be provided at no charge), you bring the assortment of sharp objects, and then we lock the doors. Face to face people are generally more civil, so I'll allow a little extra time and say it'll take 48 hours to sort out.

I'm coming. Be sure to PM me time and location. RSVP.

 

[brianman]

For all those expecting a thread to die by taking it off-topic, or by insulting other forum members (either directly or with veiled insults via cartoons), you certainly have a weird way of accomplishing your goal.

Discuss the merits of the topic rather than detouring and perhaps the content will either stop or be productive. Either way is an improvement over the latest turn of babble.

 

[P85DEE]

I'm willing to help it die. I'll rent the empty warehouse and send the invites (all the alcohol one can drink will be provided at no charge), you bring the assortment of sharp objects, and then we lock the doors. Face to face people are generally more civil, so I'll allow a little extra time and say it'll take 48 hours to sort out.

Agreed, except on two points.

I'm thinking instead of sharp objects, we go with blunt objects.

Also, since you bring up alcohol, I'm skeptical as to just how civil people will actually be "face to face", if we're including "all the alcohol one can drink" and at no charge.

I mention this out of past personal experience at numerous sporting events, and prior participation at championship celebrations, where the alcohol was flowing freely before, during and after the event.

Alcohol, in my experience, does not make those I've observed more civil, but tends to do just the opposite.

 

[bonnie]

So how's the whole strategy of 'not posting so the thread can die' working out?

 

[lolachampcar]

Bonnie, you are a trouble maker

Don't you have a Model X coming in to worry about? I'm looking forward to a full report.

 

[wk057]

Bonnie, you are a trouble maker

Q playing God - YouTube

"Blasphemy! You're lucky I don't cast you out, or smite you, or something."

 

[P85DEE]

So how's the whole strategy of 'not posting so the thread can die' working out?

As good as the last strategies I suppose.

I'm new here. How did the prior strategies work out?

 

[vgrinshpun]

Well that was my point all along, i.e. that while for an ICEs, which have similar torque/power curves the (max) horsepower per pound metrics *is* a valid way to compare different cars, it is not valid between the ICE and an EV, and not even valid between different EVs. For an EV to ICE comparison, or and EV to EV comparison one needs to look at torque/power curves

Tesla veteran explains how electric motors crash gas engines, with one notable exception

Gas engines do still perform better at very high speeds than electric—so motorsports and law enforcement may stay gas-dependent for longer.

 

[Canuck]

Gas engines do still perform better at very high speeds than electric—so motorsports and law enforcement may stay gas-dependent for longer.

Motorsport I can understand but law enforcement makes no sense to me. The amount of innocent carnage from high speed chases is unacceptable, especially when tracking by air, or coordination on the ground, is more effective and efficient. In fact, you need to catch the culprit fast, and that's where a Tesla excels, but if you can't bring him down fast, then it's much better to track from air, or have others cut him off in the directions he is heading, then to be chasing him at high speeds for long distances. That just puts me and my family at risk of the culprit, or even the cop, smacking into us, and in the majority of cases, the offence is one of drugs, of which the prisons are already overloaded, but I digress.

 

[AWDtsla]

Tesla is now in mediation with 150 Model S owners in Norway over horsepower claims | Electrek