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

341–350 of 564 posts

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

#341

Post by rdtwo »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #282
Retric wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The listed residual value is normally set to make it extremely unfavorable to buy out the lease. The appropriate amount of depreciation still occurs, they just achieve this by inflating the sales price for leases as most people only care about direct costs to themselves when starting a lease. It’s stuff like this that’s the real reason dealerships love leases. Their much more complex than a sale so the dealerships ha…

>The listed residual value is normally set to make it extremely unfavorable to buy out the lease. Close but it's a little more nuanced. You lease a trendy car (4Runner or something) and they expect able to turn it around, detail it and sell it on their CPO lot for way to much money to someone who thinks they're being savvy by buying CPO. You wanna keep it then you gotta pay them the way too much money they'd otherwis…

The buy out on the black sheep cars can be a really good deal. Instead of lowering the price a manufacturer can artificially raise the residual thereby dropping the lease rates down.

They loose more money but they make up for it in volume and get to book profits now and losses later (financial engineering).

I don’t think leasing a 4Runner ever makes financial sense unless you flip though cars every 2 years and live in a high sales tax state.

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

#342

Post by bluGill »

kube-system wrote: post #219
anthonygd wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It seems clear the original engineering was also an _unknown_. Planning for failure cases is part of engineering: making a $16k part that is easily damaged and non-repairable is simply shoddy engineering.

Tesla doesn’t market their cars as exceptionally repairable, I don’t think that repairability was an engineering priority. Prioritizing certain product attributes above others is not “shoddy engineering”, it is part of the normal textbook engineering process. The project management triad is a relationship between Cost, Quality, and Timeline. Elon wanted to be the first-to-market with an affordable modern electric car…

It doesn't matter, the industry as a whole has marketed cars as repairable (mostly indirect marketing). They had to 100 years ago and it stuck.

Tesla doesn't have a choice as the precident is already set in law

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

#343

Post by smileysteve »

throwawayboise wrote: post #112
ricardobeat wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those never-ending payments are covering depreciation. Unless you keep your car for 10+ years and it’s one of the rare models that holds value after that, you’re not much better off buying it.

Buying 10 year old cars that are nearly fully depreciated is where you save big money. You can get a dependable car for a few thousand dollars, and even if it needs more repairs than a new car you still come out money ahead especially if you can do small repairs yourself.

This. I drive a bmw 3 series. It retailed for $41k in 2004. I bought used in 2011 for $11k. It's now worth about $4. I still drive it, my maintenance costs are minimal, about $250 a year (I do it myself)

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

#344

Post by anfilt »

barrkel wrote: post #265
kube-system wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These terms are clearly defined in auto policies and are strictly regulated. I just read mine, and the things that are covered under my comprehensive policy are in a plain-english list that, clear as day, wouldn't cover this. Although if we're just talking plain-english and not legalese, I'd say that your assertion is a stretch: that colliding with debris is not a "collision". And yes, Tesla repairability is poor. Th…

As pointed out in another comment, I think this is a case of US / UK difference in insurance jargon. Debris damaging the undercarriage would not be covered by the closest UK equivalent of collision insurance (CDW on rentals), as I understand it. I also think insurance is a bit of a red herring here. You wouldn't claim on insurance for a flat tyre either; some things are just bad luck. It's the quality of engineering…

Except, in most vehicles something like this would not result in 16k quote to repair so the insurance not covering it is not the end of the world.

This I would say is more of design oversight on tesla’s part. At the very least there should have been a shroud or cover over more vulnerable parts.

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

#345

Post by rdtwo »

giobox wrote: post #111
kube-system wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I’m more surprised there are people out there who think Tesla would by design offer after sales parts “at cost” or a loss personally!

Yeah spares are 30- 50% percent mark up.

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

#346

Post by anfilt »

vel0city wrote: post #178
barrkel wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

From Merriam-Webster: Definition of collide intransitive verb 1 : to come together with solid or direct impact https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collide Its a stretch to describe road debris coming together with solid impact to the undercarriage a collision?

Not really the debris is colliding with the car. Even a pebble hitting a wind shield can hit with quite a bit of force and is also a collision. Let alone larger debris on the road. Also both objects dont need to be moving for instance you can collide into a tree or guard rail.

Now insurance certainly can exclude things that are collisions. A common on in the US are animal collisions like deer ect...

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

#347

Post by femto »

Please do put a submission into Australia's currently open inquiry into the Right to Repair, being run by the Productivity Commission! Submissions are due by Friday 23rd of July.

https://www.pc.gov.au/inquiries/current/repair/draft

They are after real world information and examples about how the Right to Repair is being nobbled by current laws, and they will recommend changes to Australia's law. So far they are leaning towards copyright exemptions for service material, such as manuals, and the removal of "Technical Protection Measures".

The Australian Government frequently implements Productivity Commission recommendations, so this is a real opportunity for positive change to Australia's laws (which might also have international flow ons). Please do make a thoughtful submission!

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

#348

Post by belval »

dheera wrote: post #272
judge2020 wrote: post #110

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> on your car. As OP pointed out, it wasn't even OP's car - it was a lease, not a loan. The risk of allowing mechanics to do quick fixes is too high for them.

Which also means that OP shouldn't be on the hook for repairs unless it's due to negligence. And even IF OP is on the hook they should be able to choose how to repair it, as long as it fits NHTSA/DMV/whatever code.

It is mentioned in the article that the person was actually driving without the right insurance due to an error when moving his policy from his old to his new car so while it sucks, the liability is not with Tesla nor should it considering the consumer made the error.

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

#349

Post by Sebb767 »

lolinder wrote: post #329
rdtwo wrote: post #307

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a complicated formula sometimes it works for you but most of the time the manufacturer gets gets the better deal

Why would that be? If I'm leasing a vehicle, not only does the manufacturer need to earn back the cost of manufacturing plus some margin, they also need to earn back the cost of administrating a lease and the cost of selling the car again later (with depreciation). They're not going to cover those extra costs for free, they're going to pass them on to the consumer. So how can leasing a vehicle possibly work out in th…

Via risk miscalculation or bad luck on the side of the manufacturer. The lease conditions are usually fixed at the start; if the car ends up requiring a lot of warranty covered repairs or deprecates faster than anticipated (for example because they cheated on emissions), the manufacturer ends up with a bad deal.

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

#350

Post by [deleted] »

abrokenpipe wrote: post #252
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.

Usually rentals require/include max comprehensive insurance (regulations vary based on the state in US), so if the warranty doesn't cover it then the insurance should. While I am on the side of right to repair I don't see how this is that relevant to the issue. It seems like more of an issue with insurance/rental laws, transparency in legal agreements, tesla's pricing & service being a bad deal, and possibly negligen…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN