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

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

#331

Post by craig131 » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:00 AM UTC

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…

Kind of bad faith to throw rent in there, of course right to repair doesn't mean you have the right to repair rented things.

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

#332

Post by alistairSH » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:00 AM UTC

codeddesign wrote: post #319

crmrc114 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mate, your talking about a brass nipple being threaded into a broken plastic part to replace a plastic reducer that was [probably] poorly ultrasonic welded in place. What I see in the article is a common sense repair. Anyone who turns a wrench is laughing at the Tesla fanboy pearl clutching over this. Not an attack on your post btw, just a general statement that every Tesla owner comes out of the cracks in these post…

This is a leased vehicle, meaning that “right to repair” is not associated at all unless you wish to break the lease agreement and owe BIG $$$. All leases are essentially like initial warranties. The dealer has to fix or your warranty goes invalid. This is a mute argument.

Moot

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

#333

Post by gameswithgo » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:01 AM UTC

cartoonworld wrote: post #264

bonestamp2 wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This is a design flaw. How do you know? I mean, maybe they very intentionally designed that part out of plastic so that it would break away from the battery in a case like this (instead of not breaking away and creating a higher risk of damaging the battery).

The right move is to route the coolant lines away from harmful road debris or add a shield or deflector. If the coolant line is the protection for the case, that sounds like a big mistake. The owner is indeed lucky that the bunge snapped off rather than crack the case, spilling gallons of toxic coolant all over the place and resting his un-burnt flesh in the failsafes of this battery monitoring system. It really smac…

its tucked pretty far from the road, to get further away would make it harder to service, then might call tesla engineers foolish for thst.

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

#334

Post by cma » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:02 AM UTC

toomuchtodo wrote: post #136

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #131

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…

I highly recommend you ask an attorney about it, that's what I did (and paid for) and I'm reiterating the opinion they provided. Not an attorney, not your attorney, not legal advice. I'm not in the repair business, and I own no TSLA stock; I have no incentive to peddle FUD, and actively support right to repair. Crucially, right to repair does not mean an absence of or indemnification from liability.

I would bet a lawyer would tell you not plug a third party phone into the AT&T phone system either in case you damaged it, as AT&T disingenuously argued would happen.

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

#335

Post by mulmen » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:08 AM UTC

barrkel wrote: post #145

kube-system wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When I rent a car I am not responsible for repairs. You certainly are, in most places, if you crash it into something. This wasn't a failure of the manufacturer's materials or workmanship, it was a collision loss.

It's a stretch to describe road debris hitting the undercarriage of a car a "collision". You should expect a vehicle to be engineered so that small objects hitting the undercarriage don't cause significant damage. Making subassemblies replaceable in part rather than in whole is definitely a bonus. When they're only replaceable in whole, I do consider it deficient engineering, especially if a small change would make i…

That's a pretty typical construction for a cradle tube frame. A Triumph Tiger 800 is not a high performance bike. Cradle frames are cheap, the bikes that have bolted on subframes typically have backbone frames and use the engines as stressed members. Also that subframe attachment is an adjustment point for fine-tuning rider position.

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

#336

Post by lolinder » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:10 AM UTC

mulmen wrote: post #159

kuratkull wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

When I lease a new car repairs happen under the warranty. The manufacturer is “on the hook” for fixing the car. Not necessarily because it is leased but because it is under warranty. Leases are a way to always have a car that is under warranty. You are replying to a counter argument to the claim that leases are always a bad idea.

The article this thread is on is a strong counterexample to your assertion. You may very well end up on the hook for a repair that isn't covered by the warranty.

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

#337

Post by anfilt » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:10 AM UTC

sparrc wrote: post #143

passivate wrote: post #102

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…

Exactly. I used to work for a time in a bicycle repair shop, drilling out and re-tapping a broken or stripped hole or thread was a common fix, I would hardly consider it a "hack".

Similar thought, i find it funny people call this hacky. It looks like it was well done. Also most auto-shops own a set of taps for jobs just like this.

Hacky too me would be using JBweld, while its a strong epoxy that would be getting into what i would call hack territory.

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

#338

Post by lolinder » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:12 AM UTC

craig131 wrote: post #331

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…

Kind of bad faith to throw rent in there, of course right to repair doesn't mean you have the right to repair rented things.

Why is it bad faith? The article is about a guy who leased a Tesla.

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

#339

Post by bluGill » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:12 AM UTC

belval wrote: post #249

Arch-TK wrote: post #242

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please stop calling this a "clever fix". The fix is standard procedure in the industry of fixing these kinds of things (be it an electric car or an industrial 100 ton press. That being said, the design of the car underside and this pack is poor. It should not be a single 16k part which has to be replaced as a unit, that's just purely incompetent. I also guarantee that Tesla DOES make money on this part. Nobody sells…

It does not matter how standard in the industry that fix is, I am not arguing for Tesla here, I am contesting the idea that this situation is covered by "right-to-repair". Right to repair is about availability of replacement parts and repair manuals so that third parties can do repair on X. It's about Apple no controlling flow of parts so tightly that they can sue someone for doing "unauthorized repairs" when they ch…

What you want right to repair to be, and what the law becomes is unlikely to have much in common - judging by other laws

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

#340

Post by cartoonworld » Tue, Jul 13, 2021, 2:15 AM UTC

mindslight wrote: post #281

cartoonworld wrote: post #243

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding your confounding over R&D -- Yes it is. I am on board with you that the specialized Tesla mechanics are gonna charge more per hour, $200-$350 sounds reasonable for a car you can buy and sell for %30 more than you paid for it -- But its R&D for this reason: The worthiness of Tesla repairs are totally unknown. These technicians are taking a chance (and I'll bet they offer a warranty, standard practice among r…

Maybe I didn't state my original point well, but I'm only trying to point out that this type of repair done as well-known problem on a popular car would be a few hundred dollars. I don't think you could find a Tesla-focused shop that would do the repair for much less, and the customer here is definitely happy with the price. I'm not putting down Electric Garage for charging "too much", but rather pointing out how luc…

Oh for sure, once these things have been around and there exists an aftermarket, there's going to be all kind of fixes and repair kits available once people figure out how these fixes work. I feel a lot more in accord with your comments.

I don't think its disingenuous or crazy unreasonable for Tesla to not support a repair like this, I kind of think they can't wrap their heads around it. Their service network is still very underdeveloped and they don't have the benefit of real-world repair data like everybody else. Their solution to everything seems to be "Replace the unit." It does indeed seem crazy that Tesla does service this way and has such a weak cooling port on such a critical component though.

I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that broken Tesla windows come only as the whole door, too.

The thing about the plastic repair is for real though, brass is the way to go. Nothing will make it less susceptible to this kind of damage aside from protecting and anchoring the cooling line in a much less dumb way.