Live data from Hacker News

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

thedrive.com

231–240 of 564 posts

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

#231
post #91

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 train…

Cheaper for who? The customer?

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

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. Homeowners insurance covers the fire. They probably don't go after anyone unless they have specific reason to believe the loss was probably caused…

> Your peddling FUD. Just because you touched something in a way that wasn't specifically authorized by the original manufacturer of that something doesn't make you liable for anything that something does in perpetuity unless there is evidence that it's actually your fault. I dunno. I think if I walked in with some random "brake rotor" that wasn't like any of the OEM or aftermarket ones they were used to seeing, the…

>I dunno. I think if I walked in with some random...

They'd tell you not to bring your own parts because they make money off parts and it's a variable they can't control and can introduce warranty headaches for them if it fails and it can waste their time if it's not rich (which is a real PITA for the tech in a flat rate pay system, they lose money directly). They have suppliers they like to deal with and want to stick to. As you get into less cookie cutter, higher dollar or more informal work it is much more common for the customer to provide parts. Oddball or obsolete heavy equipment is often dropped off with a rebuild-able core the repair shop is expected to use and/or modify because that's more economically efficient than having the repair entity source parts. Of course this can create hang-ups but these businesses expect that to happen sometimes. It's not super streamlined for high speed parts swapping on consumer automobile repair is. For side gig type work the mechanic might just tell the customer to go to the car parts store or Rockauto and buy it himself.

>wasn't like any of the OEM or aftermarket ones they were used to seeing

>couldn't verify would work sufficiently

You're giving examples where the professional using their judgement is assessing the parts to be suspect causing the potential work to be sub par and not something they can stand behind. That's not what we're talking about here. We're talking about a case where the professional used their judgement and called the repair (tap the plastic, install a nipple) good enough and there was no reason to believe it wasn't other than pure speculation.

>but if I don't have assurance I'm making a good call

That's the thing, the guy tapping the plastic does have fairly good assurance he is making a good call because he has training and or experience repairing vehicles. He's going to have a good idea what does and doesn't work. At some point someone has to stick their neck out and make a judgement call. That's why people get paid, to make decisions. You can try and be a drone kick all the thinking up the chain to corporate but you're leaving money and satisfied customers on the table. You can run a business that way. It's perfectly valid. But you can also be the independent shop that just uses their professional judgement to do things like repair the battery on a Tesla or, a drain and fill plug to a Ford PTU or replace the Toyota oil filter cap with the metal one after the plastic one gets chewed up.

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

#233
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…

>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 But why are you calling it a hack fix? Also, why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"? A customer should be free to pick out an experienced and competent repair-shop just the way they currently do for their cars. And if they don't want to, they can…

> why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"?

because of terminology like this "Electrified Garage also notes that the cooling system doesn't get anywhere near as hot as an internal combustion engine, and it's not likely that it would either, given that the operating temperature for most lithium-ion batteries is well below 60 degrees Celsius."

So this repair is made on anecdotal observation of ideal conditions, and disregarding factory specifications, and actual Tesla trained technicians.

If this was your car, and this damaged was caused by someone else's fault, would you want a hack fix, or it fixed to the manufactures specification? He Broke Telsa's car.

>How is the risk different from the existing leased model in any industry?

Have you looked at a standard lease for cars, they dictate the terms of how their vehicles are to be maintained and repair, often hold authority of who, and how those repairs are done.

Some simply reserve the right to charge you, for services not performed by them.

Other's make even simpler, they charge you for damaging the vehicle or require you to convert the lease to a purchase, before work is done.

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

#234
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…

No, not stretch at all. If it's up to company to choose how their car (that they rented to someone) needs to be repaired - it should either be done by their expenses to be fair. Otherwise they will always just choose the most expensive way (like 10x, 100x, unlimited x) and that won't be fair at all. A car is just an utility, that's not a unique piece of art, such matters should be regulated, a price of $16k for a repair that can be done 10 fold cheaper is just not fair.

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

#235

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why the assumption that the independant tesla repair people don't know this? It might be unknown to you but I assume that people who work with metals and liquids all day long (including coolant) would have some idea of their interaction.

The point is not to call them incompetent - there absolutely are rigorous and good third party repair shops out there. Unfortunately, there are just as much of them just trying to get your money and then fixing it the simplest and cheapest way possible, without the consideration for long term safety and secondary effects that Tesla has probably put in. As an outsider, it's hard to tell the difference, but I agree wit…

Tesla shoves fucking wooden blocks throughout their cars to resolve fittment issues.

You'd be an idiot to think they're any more motivated to properly repair vehicles than a third party.

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

#236
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…

That fix was totally legit. I would considered the car better after having threaded in a brass nipple to replace the piece of crap that broke.

This feels like a classic repair rip off and they were fishing for a customer who had more money than brains.

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

#237

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is only one of the several failures that could theoretically be caused. The fitting could potentially cause galvanic corrosion in other parts of the system as well. In any case, I’m not saying this is likely, or that the system won’t work. I’m simply saying that it’s no longer the same system designed by the automotive engineers at Tesla.

What are you on about with the galvanic corrosion? The brass part is joining two plastic parts!

[deleted]

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

#238

Pretty sure, you loose the right to repair when you are leasing something, as all lease agreements for vehicles I've seen have direct stipulations on the requirements, and penalties of performing and not performing maintenance and repair to their vehicle. I fully support right to repair YOUR PROPERTY, but I also support as part of that, that if the car is owned by Tesla, they have the right to dictate maintenance req…

We should tighten the right to repair - not loosen it!

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

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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 But why are you calling it a hack fix? Also, why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"? A customer should be free to pick out an experienced and competent repair-shop just the way they currently do for their cars. And if they don't want to, they can…

its not like a brake light or a suspension part this was a inlet port for cooling fluid to the battery . If not done correctly it will spring a leak in a onroad driving situation , Tesla probably does have safety systems to stop the car to prevent the battery from overheating and exploding. besides they charged 700$ for 5$ worth of parts and 1~2 hours of labour :) that isnt the best advocacy for RTR IMO.

>5$ worth of parts and 1~2 hours of labour :)

I think you're vastly undervaluing the cost of operating a auto shop + skilled labor. $700 was the cost for an auto repair business to 1) have a skilled technician find the problem 2) devise a repair method and 3) execute the repair.

Car repair is an expensive business to operate. Rent/building costs are high, lots of expensive equipment, one of the highest insurance rates around (you're lifting expensive heavy weights up and down over people all day) and labor is us usually relatively skilled and costly.

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

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"R&D" ?? It's replacing a molded hose barb with a threaded fitting. Also FTA: "the shop had another significantly cheaper solution it had used once before ". What's pictured in the article looks like 2 hours of labor, which would be a few hundred dollars at the rate for generic labor. I'm specifically highlighting the additional premium that Tesla expertise is commanding right now. > mystery fitting You do realize th…

You have to know that repair is safe and meets all the coolant system design constraints. It certainly isn’t something most shops are going to just have a standard procedure for. That was what caused the problem in the first place.

Sure you technically have to "verify that repair is safe and meets all the coolant system design constraints". Except you don't, because common sense says most of those constraints are not critical. Like sure, the narrower ID of that 1/4" NPT nipple might cause a little more backpressure to the coolant pump. But there is no way the system would have been designed to be that marginal in the first place.

The main thing to worry about is chemical compatibility of the antifreeze to the new materials, but that's at worst a half hour to find the antifreeze datasheet. Or the mechanic already knows, from seeing the parts of other systems that antifreeze is used in.

Post reply on HN