Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

thedrive.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 564 posts

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#91

Post by Pyramus »

I'm a bit surprised the original video (from Youtube channel Rich Rebuilds) that this article bases on, is not more prominently mentioned in the discussion.

I've linked the part below [1] where Chad (ex Tesla repair technician) explains why Tesla do what they do, i.e. only replace the whole battery pack (which costs 16k) when some sub unit is broken.

The main reason is cost effectiveness (for Tesla): Instead of training staff how to disassemble, have parts in storage, maintain facilities, assemble again etc, it's cheaper to do 'assembly replacement' and replace the battery pack as a whole.

[1] https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#92

Post by cptskippy »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #33
mschild wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0] Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? Driving around with a shoddy fix on a combustion engine can be just as dang…

>Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0] Drilling and tapping a broken off plastic barb for a brass (or steel, or plastic, or whatever) barb is a very, very, very, standard procedure in any trade where you repair things. I wouldn't call this hack. Appealing to authority is fashionable. People will poo-poo anything if they think…

> Because the service writer couldn't get that part separately so they chose to quote for the whole assembly rather than ask the tech who did the diagnosis if there's any other options.

This makes it sound like the part in question could have been easily replaced. The assembly in this case was the seal pack that isn't intended to be serviced. Even if they could have ordered the plastic coolant line, the removal and tear down of the pack to replace the line would have been a tremendous effort. It's debatable that it would have been easier to replace the pack AND then part out the old pack.

The plastic coolant tube should have ended at the pack housing with a threaded insert and the tap should have just threaded into it. If pack had been designed in this manner, the repair would have been trivial.

The pack is has a severe design flaw in my opinion.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#93

Post by kube-system »

giobox wrote: post #66
belval wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? The quote is to replace the whole battery pack so I really doubt that they are making a profit on it since it's one of the actually expensive part of the car. As GP pointed out this is hardly right to re…

Update: reread the article, customer has the 50kWh rear wheel drive car. That means he’s been offered a battery at 320 bucks per kWh - at that price, of course tesla are profiting from the sale. If you have the 75 kWh car the bill is presumably then north of $20k… We can speculate pretty easily on how profitable that $16k pack is. Let’s assume the customer has the largest pack Tesla fit to a model 3 (~75kwh). He has…

Not that I disagree, but I'm sure these packs have a significant amount of overhead costs as well.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#94

Post by turtlebits »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #45
turtlebits wrote: post #27

Considering that a 3rd party was able to repair it, I'm not sure why this is classified as "right to repair". That said, while 16k is outrageous (and the part is not well designed), no dealer/manufacturer would repair a car by cutting off a broken part, adding threads both ends and joining them together.

Replacing a broken hose barb by threading the part and inserting a threaded hose barb is pretty standard in any trade where you repair stuff. Plastic is just so easy to form you'd be stupid not to. There's really no downsides if you're competent enough to install a pipe threaded object without it leaking (a low bar). Worst case it was already in need of replacement. Best case if it breaks again the next guy only has…

I'm sure the fix will work fine, it's just there are things like liability that car manufacturers and dealers have to deal with.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#96

Post by kuratkull »

mulmen wrote: post #81
yarky wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP but "If you can’t buy it, don’t!" might mean not owning/renting it. Either buy it or don't even think about it.

Why though? What if renting makes more sense for my use case? Why not leave the dealer/bank on the hook for the depreciation and maintenance?

The dealer/bank are running a profitable business. They are not on the hook for anything, you are paying for it all.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#97

Post by eikenberry »

turtlebits wrote: post #27

Considering that a 3rd party was able to repair it, I'm not sure why this is classified as "right to repair". That said, while 16k is outrageous (and the part is not well designed), no dealer/manufacturer would repair a car by cutting off a broken part, adding threads both ends and joining them together.

"Right to repair" doesn't mean you have to do it yourself. Paying someone else to do it would still be made possible by "right to repair" laws.

Similar to free software. Free software means you can change the code as needed, even if you don't know how to code and pay someone else... that is still free software working as intended.

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#98

Post by kube-system »

mulmen wrote: post #81
yarky wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not the OP but "If you can’t buy it, don’t!" might mean not owning/renting it. Either buy it or don't even think about it.

Why though? What if renting makes more sense for my use case? Why not leave the dealer/bank on the hook for the depreciation and maintenance?

If it makes sense for you, do it. The question isn't who pays the depreciation or maintenance (this is explicitly factored into leases) -- the question is, who can predict it more accurately?

Re: Tesla’s $16k Quote for a $700 Fix Is Why Right to Repair Matters

#99

Post by throwaway0a5e »

namdnay wrote: post #3

A bit of a stretch to classify this under right to repair.. if you rent a car from tesla, it’s going to be up to tesla to choose how it’s repaired. And it doesn’t seem unreasonable that they won’t accept a hack fix (however safe it may be) - that car is going to be sold to someone once the lease expires, they just can’t take the risk I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy i…

>I would read this as a cautionary tale against renting your cars. If you can’t buy it, don’t! This holds true for any depreciating asset.

If it flies, floats...

The calculation on whether to lease or buy is a little more complicated than can be captured with rules of thumb.

Post reply on HN