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

Tesla: Not so easily bricked

idc-insights-community.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 161 posts

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#91

Post by scott_s »

sounds wrote: post #78
scott_s wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is my frustration with getting news from blogs. Had this appeared in a standard newspaper, I am confident the reporter would have contacted Tesla and asked them directly if they did indeed charge $40,000. Hence, I am not comfortable taking the original post completely at face value, since the author (from what I can tell) did not perform the kind of reporting I expect from journalists. That leads me to doubt bas…

I'm sorry, you give too much credit to "standard newspapers." They do very little fact checking, if any. However, being well-established might make them an easier target for libel / defamation. That doesn't seem to scare them into better reporting, though.

That sentiment is popular, but I don't buy it. The original post made no effort (or, he told us about no efforts) to corroborate the anecdotes with Tesla or the people who performed the servicing. That is, he did no reporting. That story would not be run in the NY Times or Washington Post without doing that.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#92

Post by shock-value »

degusta wrote: post #74

I wrote the original blog post about Teslas bricking. This IDC/IDG post is embarrassingly wrong about basically everything. The cars are most definitely not "just in need of servicing". Tesla's not even arguing that - I even have a written statement from them that it's $40k to fix. This alleged "expert" can even get the number of cells right (6,831 by the way). The article should be retracted.

You should to post that statement regarding the $40k (with any sensitive info blacked out, of course). Seems like a lot of the back and forth on this issue hinges on whether they are really charging that much to correct this problem.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#93

Post by outworlder »

dodedo wrote: post #39
yardie wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A normal car engine unused for a long time has to be handled just as well. If you're lucky the worst you'll have is a dead battery. If you're unlucky the engine has seized and the tires are deformed and need to be replaced. Ask any university town mechanic what happens when students leave cars parked in the lot, untouched, for months. Actually as a former car owner (city dweller now), my biggest concern was making su…

I've run down the battery on my car, motorcycle, mower, or other vehicles I don't often use. It is not an expensive ($40,000) fix -- often it just takes a recharge because lead-acid batteries are not as easily damaged as lithium-ion. Replacement is relatively cheap too. When you talk about tire deformation, this is rare and would not happen before many years of disuse. And engine seizure? Again, unlikely to happen ev…

> When you talk about tire deformation, this is rare and would not happen before many years of disuse.

My Ford owner's manual says otherwise. According to it, the tires will be damaged at a prolonged period, if the car sits at the same spot. Maybe not deformed per se, but damaged. It's recommended that the car should be placed on supports if long-term (say, more than a month) storage is required.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#94

Post by gte910h »

The fundamentally silly part about all is that Tesla doesn't offer insurance for this rare thing.

Seems trivial to setup an insurance scheme for this rare, but exceedingly costly event, either internally, or via an external insurer. It may not be cheap but this PR issue can be fixed in an afternoon talking to Farmers insurance or the like.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#95

Post by feralchimp »

politician wrote: post #85
feralchimp wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"If you leave your $40k battery pack alone for months without a trickle charger, you will kill it" is no more challenging to communicate or implement than "if you run your ICE without oil, you will kill it."

There is a world of difference between overuse leading to failure, and non-use leading to failure. It's disingenuous to claim that the messages are similar because they have abOut the same number of words.

From a marketing and CRM perspective, the messages are identical: "Here is a simple and cheap routine maintenance behavior that will prevent a catastrophic repair bill: X".

In the ICE case, X is "maintain a minimum oil level while the engine is running." In the Tesla case, it's "maintain a minimum battery level, even during storage."

Given that the underlying drivetrain technologies actually are worlds-of-difference apart from each other, that strikes me as a pretty minimal difference in terms of routine maintenance. Unless it's somehow difficult to understand or costly to implement, we should assume Tesla customers aren't f'ing morons and go about our business.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#96

Post by X-Istence »

abruzzi wrote: post #70
feralchimp wrote: post #51

This whole bricking story is a little ridiculous. There are any number of easy ways to 'brick' an internal combustion engine, and yet we're not all torches 'n' pitchforks over them. Partially because ICEs have been around so long that the relatively short list of "things to avoid" is burned indelibly into the popular consciousness. Partially because over a hundred-odd years of continuous engineering, a typical ICE ca…

If you run your ICE without oil, yes, you will kill it. And maybe these should be thought of in the same way, but people worry about this because draining a battery to zero seems like running out of gas, and most of us have run out of gas at some point or another. Granted it's not the same because in the short term the battery management system should reserve the bottom 5% for the health of the battery. But the secon…

I've been driving for 6 years now and I have never ran out of gas. Is this really so uncommon that you can safely say that at some point or another most of us have run out of gas?

I keep an eye on my odometer and on the gas gauge and know when it is time to get gas. My car doesn't have a low fuel light warning so paying attention is definitely required.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#97

Post by DanBC »

gte910h wrote: post #94

The fundamentally silly part about all is that Tesla doesn't offer insurance for this rare thing. Seems trivial to setup an insurance scheme for this rare, but exceedingly costly event, either internally, or via an external insurer. It may not be cheap but this PR issue can be fixed in an afternoon talking to Farmers insurance or the like.

Or even just having big clear warnings in the manuals, and then pointing to those warnings when this comes up.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#98

Post by qdog »

degusta wrote: post #74

I wrote the original blog post about Teslas bricking. This IDC/IDG post is embarrassingly wrong about basically everything. The cars are most definitely not "just in need of servicing". Tesla's not even arguing that - I even have a written statement from them that it's $40k to fix. This alleged "expert" can even get the number of cells right (6,831 by the way). The article should be retracted.

My takeaway is that the Tesla Roadster is a very expensive toy at this point. There are some electric charging stations now at my work (I can only assume they would work with the Roadster, haven't look into it), but it really sounds to me like the early adopters are going to be paying out the nose for electric for a few more years.

I have a Civic Hyprid, which is pretty underwhelming, but functions pretty much like a regular car. If I don't end up giving it to my step-daughter, I almost assuredly will keep it until the more efficient electric vehicles are as reliable.

Re: Tesla: Not so easily bricked

#100

Post by ams6110 »

feralchimp wrote: post #51

This whole bricking story is a little ridiculous. There are any number of easy ways to 'brick' an internal combustion engine, and yet we're not all torches 'n' pitchforks over them. Partially because ICEs have been around so long that the relatively short list of "things to avoid" is burned indelibly into the popular consciousness. Partially because over a hundred-odd years of continuous engineering, a typical ICE ca…

I'm pretty sure anyone ever burned in a gas-fueled vehicle fire would gladly go back in time to fork over $40k to avoid that experience.

The reason gasoline is dangerous is that it stores a lot of energy. You need a lot of energy to move a heavy car a couple of hundred miles, and keep the occupants comfortable with heat and/or air conditioning. A battery in a Tesla contains a lot of energy. The dangers compared to a tank of gasoline are different, but in either case, the sudden and uncontrolled release of that energy can do a lot of damage.

Post reply on HN