Tesla Fires

[Al Sherman]

We will NOT be stopped. :smile:

 

[Electric1]

Part of the reason for the air suspension lowering the car in the first place - and one of the benefits the feature is sold with - is that it is safer to have the car lower at high speeds, because it reduces the amount of air going under the car which gives the car better handling which means you are better able to react to road situations and the car is less likely to have unpredictable handling at high speeds (this is the feeling Elon was talking about when discussing the Autobahn package). An inch makes a huge difference in terms of lift from turbulent air under the car, and yet makes zero difference for any road debris which is not between 5.1 and 6.0 inches tall (or whatever the numbers are, something like that).

This is why all of the completely uninformed commentary on this website about how Tesla absolutely positively had to raise the ride height of the car to the maximum possible at high speeds was crazy and unproductive. This site contributed to what I believe to be a poor decision which was made for no other reason than appeasing a hysterical public which knows nothing of the subject they are discussing.

Not only that, but if (when) another incident happens, if it happens after this update got pushed through but before the next one with driver-selectability (or even after that, honestly), it will only make the car look much worse, as the "problem" (which is not a problem) will then seem "unfixable." And all of you chicken littles will freak out over a non-issue once again.

Thankfully this decision was accompanied by the investigation and warranty announcements, which are both positive (even though they'll probably be covered negatively, e.g. "Tesla doesn't trust their cars so they're adding this to the warranty" and "NHTSA starts investigation" (leaving out that Tesla asked for one), since the media has a narrative to push). But I am very much disappointed in the level of commentary on this website, particularly considering the lack of basic engineering and car dynamics knowledge being thrown about, which I believe has helped to force this change and to keep this non-issue in the news and affecting the company. Stop being so hysterical, all of you.

Absolutely on point!

 

[AudubonB]

Not only was that a very good response by Mr. Musk, it taught me something new: don't try to burn down that SOB neighbor's house by using a battery pack....

 

[Krugerrand]

How does that help Tesla's "non-safety" "upgrade" though?

You can simply accelerate to 97mph on the onramp, then slow back down to 60mph when you hit the highway. (Like most people on here haven't done that at least once).

Tesla is effectively inviting & encouraging drivers to do this regularly now. If one of us get into an accident because of it, it will make the fire issue look like small potatoes.

Really? At what point do you think you'd like to take responsibility for your own actions...like, say...SPEEDING!?

 

[StapleGun]

I don't like the software update, I think it's a bad idea, and I think, if (when) another incident happens, it will end up being reported as "Tesla tried to make a change and it's still happening, this problem is unfixable and inherent to all electric cars and we need to ban this technology now for the safety of our children!!" or something similarly hysterical. I suppose this will satiate the "do something" crowd, but "doing something" for the sake of doing something isn't necessarily the best way to go about business.

I don't like the comment about mystical healing powers, it was out of place. The other snark about arsonists was awesome though.

I do like the warranty change (not that it matters much, given that insurance would rather pay to fix a car than a human), and I really like the paragraph about NHTSA investigations. That, there, I think is the slam-dunk paragraph which needs to be repeated as often as possible.

I also like the mention of the "law of large numbers" preparing people for the inevitability of an injury in a Tesla car, though I think perhaps that it should have been extended to cover further incidents, because this will happen again and people will likely overreact again, and preparing them for that might help, I don't know.

Why focus only on one variable? What about the fact that sportscars will likely have a higher chance, as they're generally driven harder and higher performance? If we compare the Model S to a Ferrari or Lamborghini, it's even more impressive in terms of fire risk. Ferraris and Lamborghinis catch fire all the time.

Further, the numbers presented are numbers which were culled from other articles, as obviously cited in the blog post itself. There is an extreme futility in attempting to extrapolate statistics when your denominator is 3, so most of those numbers should be taken with a grain of salt, obviously. Which is also why Elon mentioned there are more than 18k cars out there by now, as these numbers will continue to change, and the numerator and denominator will both get larger.

I was going to write out my thoughts, but you summed them up better than I could.

 

[brianman]

I don't like the comment about mystical healing powers, it was out of place.

No it wasn't. It was an evolution of what he said in a video recently. His point in that video was that Tesla's record was "0 injuries, 0 deaths" so for any vehicle to be "better" it would have to be "less than zero". In the post, he just put a name on it "the vehicle would have to heal you to be better than the Model S".

- - - Updated - - -

...You basically just rehashed what I said and called me wrong?

Hah. I thought the same thing.

- - - Updated - - -

Not only was that a very good response by Mr. Musk, it taught me something new: don't try to burn down that SOB neighbor's house by using a battery pack....

... unless you're "due" for a replacement, courtesy of Tesla.

 

[dave]

Part of the reason for the air suspension lowering the car in the first place - and one of the benefits the feature is sold with - is that it is safer to have the car lower at high speeds, because it reduces the amount of air going under the car which gives the car better handling which means you are better able to react to road situations and the car is less likely to have unpredictable handling at high speeds (this is the feeling Elon was talking about when discussing the Autobahn package). An inch makes a huge difference in terms of lift from turbulent air under the car, and yet makes zero difference for any road debris which is not between 5.1 and 6.0 inches tall (or whatever the numbers are, something like that).

This is why all of the completely uninformed commentary on this website about how Tesla absolutely positively had to raise the ride height of the car to the maximum possible at high speeds was crazy and unproductive. This site contributed to what I believe to be a poor decision which was made for no other reason than appeasing a hysterical public which knows nothing of the subject they are discussing.

Not only that, but if (when) another incident happens, if it happens after this update got pushed through but before the next one with driver-selectability (or even after that, honestly), it will only make the car look much worse, as the "problem" (which is not a problem) will then seem "unfixable." And all of you chicken littles will freak out over a non-issue once again.

Thankfully this decision was accompanied by the investigation and warranty announcements, which are both positive (even though they'll probably be covered negatively, e.g. "Tesla doesn't trust their cars so they're adding this to the warranty" and "NHTSA starts investigation" (leaving out that Tesla asked for one), since the media has a narrative to push). But I am very much disappointed in the level of commentary on this website, particularly considering the lack of basic engineering and car dynamics knowledge being thrown about, which I believe has helped to force this change and to keep this non-issue in the news and affecting the company. Stop being so hysterical, all of you.

+11111

This and your previous post sum up my feelings exactly.

I am actually embarassed by all the drama on TMC lately. There have been thousands of posts about this issue now. I am a Tesla fan, owner, stockholder, and general advocate. However, I think the drama and near hysteria here is almost as bad as what's being reported in the media itself. I think I saw a post where people are trying to sign a petition to get the old firmware back. Come on people... We know the fires are not the issue the media is making it out to be. Let Tesla handle it, stop freaking out and feeding the beast which is the media / social media buzz about this, and go out and enjoy your car!

 

[yobigd20]

You know, I was confused on who requested what because on one side, Elon/Tesla has said that they requested NHSTA to investigate these fires, and on the other hand, I'm seeing news reports that NHSTA is investigating these fires with no mention that this was requested by Tesla (which makes Tesla look bad). And then Elon's twitter posts where he's bugging out about the media focus and these investigations, seems to contradict himself. If they requested the investigation, why is he making a stink about being investigated?

Well, now the government is responding to Elons statement. They are denying that Tesla has asked them to investigate.

NHTSA: Tesla Didn't Request Investigation - Business Insider

He said / she said.

 

[Realist]

...You basically just rehashed what I said and called me wrong?

It's not entirely wrong but the COG effect is far more relevant especially taking into account that camber will be more positive meaning less grip.

 

[willowspuppy]

If they requested the investigation, why is he making a stink about being investigated?

Please show me where Elon "made a stink about being investigated", because I'm not seeing that at all. What Elon is making a stink of is that he believes the media is taking these 3 fires completely out of proportion to their overall significance and is not reporting the worse statistical track record of gasoline cars when it comes to both fires and personal safety.

 

[bosgig]

I'm thinking TM didn't really ask for an investigation.

Washington — The head of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration flatly denied Tuesday that Tesla Motors had sought an investigation into battery fires in Model S vehicles, and questioned if it would even be proper for the electric vehicle company to make the request. . .“Investigations are independent,” Strickland told The Detroit News in an interview after the hearing. “We have never — in my recollection, before I got to NHTSA (as a Senate staffer) or as administrator — have actually had an automaker ask for a formal investigation, but it causes a couple of implications: If a manufacturer asks me or asks the agency for a formal investigation, you’ve already made a determination that you may have a defect that imposes an unreasonable risk to safety. ... I don’t think that would ever happen.” If that happened, then under federal law Tesla would be compelled to recall the vehicles. A Tesla spokeswoman didn’t immediately comment on the discrepancy.

From The Detroit News: NHTSA: Tesla didn't ask for Model S investigation | The Detroit News

 

[Krugerrand]

I'm thinking TM didn't really ask for an investigation.

Elon Musk has absolutely no reason lie. It serves no purpose and he's smart enough to know that the NHTSA would simply say it wasn't true...just like they did. The problem is the NHTSA has more than one person working there and it's quite possible Jim Chen (the person who was calling on Tesla's behalf) spoke to someone else who either hasn't come forward to verify the story, or misunderstood what was said in the conversation.

I could come up with a thousand possibilites why both parties could be telling the truth.

 

[bosgig]

Elon Musk has absolutely no reason lie. It serves no purpose and he's smart enough to know that the NHTSA would simply say it wasn't true...just like they did. The problem is the NHTSA has more than one person working there and it's quite possible Jim Chen (the person who was calling on Tesla's behalf) spoke to someone else who either hasn't come forward to verify the story, or misunderstood what was said in the conversation.

I could come up with a thousand possibilites why both parties could be telling the truth.

You could be right. I suspect, as I posted during an OT segment of another thread, that they "requested" it because they knew it was coming and wanted to be able to make the claim that they requested it. I have no inside knowledge here, though, so yes, there are lots of possibilities.

I think the company has to watch its claims, though--while you're right they have no reason to lie, they for quite a while claimed the Model S was "the safest car in America" based on the NHTSA crash score. This was simply not a verifiably true claim, particularly since the NHTSA doesn't test most luxury vehicles, and you'll note that they've now taken down the original blog and changed the claim to "the highest safety rating in America" to comply with NHTSA rules. So I do think they stretch a bit--a practice I truly hope they cease because it damages their credibility. And in the case of the safety claim it annoyed the NHTSA, which of course is now investigating the fires (not suggesting a link--just pointing out you generally don't want to piss off the governmental body that helps oversee your products).

 

[Grendal]

You could be right. I suspect, as I posted during an OT segment of another thread, that they "requested" it because they knew it was coming and wanted to be able to make the claim that they requested it. I have no inside knowledge here, though, so yes, there are lots of possibilities.

I think the company has to watch its claims, though--while you're right they have no reason to lie, they for quite a while claimed the Model S was "the safest car in America" based on the NHTSA crash score. This was simply not a verifiably true claim, particularly since the NHTSA doesn't test most luxury vehicles, and you'll note that they've now taken down the original blog and changed the claim to "the highest safety rating in America" to comply with NHTSA rules. So I do think they stretch a bit--a practice I truly hope they cease because it damages their credibility. And in the case of the safety claim it annoyed the NHTSA, which of course is now investigating the fires (not suggesting a link--just pointing out you generally don't want to piss off the governmental body that helps oversee your products).

There was no lie.

1. You have incidents that are beating Tesla up in the media and the stock market.

2. Tesla and Elon finally decide to do something about it last Friday. Elon has Chen send in a request to the NHTSA to do an investigation. Chen confirmed this in an interview.

3. The NHTSA is probably hearing a lot about this through the media and decides to open an investigation. This happens on Friday too. There is no announcement at this time.

4. The NHTSA is a government bureaucracy. It is no surprise that the person receiving the request is not in direct communication with Strickland. Strickland is interviewed and knows nothing of Tesla's request.

5. Someone in the press decides that someone is lying since the two things happen at the same time. It makes a nice controversial piece.

No one is lying. It is simply miscommunication and bad timing.

 

[Krugerrand]

And in the case of the safety claim it annoyed the NHTSA, which of course is now investigating the fires (not suggesting a link--just pointing out you generally don't want to piss off the governmental body that helps oversee your products).

I answered this in another thread, but essentially I don't believe is tip-toeing around a government body just because they are a government body (or might be testing the safety of a product my company produces). They work for us (the public) and 'we' (the public) give them a certain amount of power (and they sometimes overstep their bounds). None of the people who make up these government bodies are infallible or somehow God-like entities that can't be questioned. Indeed, they should be under significant scrutiny all the time to make sure they are serving us in the capacity we've hired and put them there to do.

I suggest the NHTSA look at their system and either stop giving manufacturers 'private' scoring they aren't allowed to tell the public or let manufacturers reveal ALL the scores, in their entirety and context, that their vehicles are assigned, instead of being annoyed. It's a rule that serves no purpose other than to hide information from the public that they have a right to know.

 

[bosgig]

I think they were annoyed by the "safest" claim, which I'll reiterate just simply could not be made based on the crash test scores. To your first paragraph, my point was less the NHTSA reaction, but rather TM making a claim that couldn't be substantiated.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

A sad answer to Elon's question about Tesla Model S fires

Maybe that some journalists should give a look to this video:

A Sad Answer to Elon Musks Question About Tesla Model S Fires - YouTube

 

[Cattledog]

Good for Rocco - stand up video.

 

[sp4rk]

Brilliant video. Thanks for posting.

 

[Grendal]

I've recently come across a growing number of outside commenters that think Tesla's batteries are more volatile and so should be banned. My response has been to say that ethanol is less explosive than gasoline so all gas cars should immediately be switched over to ethanol since it is safer.

Tesla has used the chemistry they chose and have created a battery pack to deal with it. Much the same as gas cars have developed their system for dealing with thousands of small explosions in a gas engine.