211–220 of 463 posts
I saw my first Cybertruck the other day. It looked less weird in person than I expected it. It's a very different and new design. How many of the 91% we're comparing to are completely new designs. What's the correct benchmark? Let's rewrite the headline. "A radical new EV design from Tesla, the Cybertruck, is already ahead of 9% of all 2024 vehicles in quality as it just ramps up production". I'll likely never own th…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Surely the fact that it's a three ton machine that can accelerate from 0-60 in 3 seconds is relevant too. As far as I'm aware the F150 can't match that.
> Surely the fact that it's a three ton machine that can accelerate from 0-60 in 3 seconds is relevant too. As far as I'm aware the F150 can't match that. The F150 EV has similar weight and speed[1], not sure how it's relevant? In fact it proves the point, no one talks about how the F150 EV or the Silverado EV etc etc having similar characteristic flaws as the cyber truck, because that doesn't generate clicks. If any…
I saw my first Cybertruck the other day. It looked less weird in person than I expected it. It's a very different and new design. How many of the 91% we're comparing to are completely new designs. What's the correct benchmark? Let's rewrite the headline. "A radical new EV design from Tesla, the Cybertruck, is already ahead of 9% of all 2024 vehicles in quality as it just ramps up production". I'll likely never own th…
> Getting those gas guzzling truck owners to go electric would be nice too. Congratulations, you solved 1 issue related to car dependency and proliferation of huge vehicles, namely tailpipe emissions. Now the other 99 remain. The solution to gas guzzling trucks is "boring", it's good trains, it's protected bike lanes in urban environments, it's smaller and safer cars in less dense environments, etc. But these things…
Sorry but they are not solutions to gas guzzling trucks. Trucks are utility vehicles which carry things. Materials to building sites, hay bales to fields, sports equpiment to the beach/river etc. These functions are not going to be replaced by bike lanes, trains, and small efficient cars.
The real solutions are hydrogen and synthetic fuel.
Completely unrelated to safety, these vehicles don't look like they are aging well. They are all completely new but the ones I am seeing on the road already look a bit beat up. That finish on them and their general styling emphasize every minor blemish.
The panels will not rust, which is the reason to avoiding scratches on other vehicles. You can beat the hell out of it and not have to care.
It appears to be a triumph of aesthetic over function, needing only EL-wire underlighting to look like it escaped from the Tron storyboards and into low-poly life. I could only wonder if the entertainment system comes with a hidden Sirius/XM channel that only plays vaporwave music.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why have you put "recalls" in quotes? Maybe because an over-the-air update is hard to seriously consider a "recall"?
They are called recalls because that’s what the term for legalisation mandates. They are issued when a vehicle is unsafe to drive and they are mandated because a manufacturer is required to take a lot of steps to remedy their failure. If they fail to repair the issue they are forced to issue full refunds as an example. So no, the word recall is used because is the official terminology used for these issues regardless…
"We use a silly word for OTA software updates: 'recalls'"
"Recalls is the word we use"
"Yes..."
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Are safety issues not "serious"?
The word recall sort of implies that the vehicle is recalled to the manufacturer. Calling a software update that happens in your garage at night and takes 20 minutes a “recall” definitely is worthy of quotes.
It does not, no more than gaslighting implies lighting a gas lamp or the phrase crossing the Rubicon implies actually crossing a river in Italy, in any case. It hasn't meant anything of that sort since the mid-sixties.
Recall is what legislation requires you to call it if something is unsafe for public use and it has to be withdrawn for the market until it's remedied. It doesn't matter how that's done. The NHTSA guidelines don't include physically getting the product to a manufacturer or a distributor as a requirement to issue, or as a criteria for fulfillment, of a recall. (I don't think recall guidelines in any industry do, it's just the NHTSA's that apply in this case).
Yes, this also applies for firmware upgrades. No, it doesn't matter where they're performed. The FDA has issued firmware-related recalls for devices with programmable logic since programmable logic in medical devices was a thing so like... fourty years. If anyone in some company's safety staff just learned about that's let's all please give them a warm welcome to the 20th century.
The main reason why recalls typically involve returning the product to the manufacturer (or, more often, as the vast majority of recalls are for food, medicine or cosmetics, to the distributor) is traceability. Manufacturers need to maintain documentation that shows they took reasonable action to notify all customers, that depending on how they chose to handle it they made repairs for free, replaced them for free, or that the refund they issued made reasonable allowances for depreciation, and so on. Some foodstuffs or medicine also have disposal safety rules that require you to maintain adequate documentation as well. It's just the easiest way to deal with it, both in terms of remedying the actual issue, and in terms of legal risk.
But it's got nothing to do with returning something to the factory, it hasn't meant anything of that sort in like half a century.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
[flagged]
On https://www.nhtsa.gov/recalls#recalls-7746 it says: > A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards. Most decisions to conduct a recall and remedy a safety defect are made voluntarily by manufacturers prior to any involvement by NHTSA. > Manufacturers are required to fix the probl…
Most people are accustomed to our phones and devices (auto-)updating, so software recalls just get mentally bundled in with that.
The reporting seems dishonest because (in the mind of most readers) the headline exaggerates the inconvenience of Tesla ownership. Even though logically people shouldn't necessarily conclude that (because of the technical/legal definition of "recall" already discussed), that's still going to be the general public perception.