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

291–300 of 564 posts

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

#291

Post by bumby »

passivate wrote: post #102
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…

>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…

>Manufacturers are taking it away for future guaranteed service income

Maybe I don’t understand the industry, but I was under the assumption that most OEMs don’t do the repairs but only supply the OEM parts. Is this incorrect?

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

#292

Post by DannyBee »

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…

Look. I will never own or consider a Tesla given what i've seen, and will happily take them to task.

But i think this is a bit far. It's pretty common in ICE vehicles for the oil pan to be easily damaged by road debris, and the oil it spills is more toxic than coolant.

In particular, the Tesla's use glycol for cooling, which is not that bad to spill (certainly better than most oils).

So while certainly not better than the status quo from a design perspective, it also doesn't seem worse than most vehicles in this respect.

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

#293

Post by rtkwe »

xyst wrote: post #180

This is a design flaw. I wonder what other shameful design decisions were put in place to cut corners. Kind of glad I canceled a Tesla pre-order. I really hope other EV companies are learning from Tesla’s mistakes. From the lack of customer service from a maintenance aspect to poor repairability, that sort of reputation will stick with a company for a very long time. Going to run my current ICE to the ground until th…

There's other stuff like the moon roof motor is buried DEEP in the dash instead of right next to the window like most other cars so it requires huge amounts of labor to remove when it breaks. Or that the car can wind up with a dead (12v [0]) battery while connected to a charger. To then charge it you have to pull off numerous panels under the frunk.

https://jalopnik.com/james-may-had-to-dismantle-his-tesla-mo...

[0] Which is the battery that runs essentially everything except the motors. Doors, windows, etc.

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

#294

Post by asdfaoeu »

kube-system wrote: post #148
judge2020 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lease monthly payments are charges for depreciation plus profit, so they do expect you to keep it in like-new condition. Tesla's screw-up was giving the customer the car and not verifying that they have comprehensive insurance, which is what Tesla relies on for keeping it like-new.

I bet they do have comprehensive insurance, but their insurance company told them that this is a collision loss. Just read my policy, which is written by a very large insurer -- and this would, in fact, be a collision loss under mine.

They didn't have comprehensive insurance but Tesla didn't verify it's mentioned in the video.

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

#295

Post by makeitdouble »

gretch wrote: post #223
hrocha1 wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What motivates Tesla to write one? Woudn't they rather contiue selling battery packs for 16k?

Because $16k is a high barrier to entry and future prospective buyers will read about this case and think “hey I don’t want that” and buy a Toyota instead.

Are Tesla owners that price sensitive in the first place ? They could have bought 2 Toyota Corolla for the price of long range Model 3

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

#296

Post by awsthro00945 »

barrkel wrote: post #261
awsthro00945 wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have no clue why you're being downvoted (and I'm being downvoted now too, lol). If you hit a rock in the road, or a pothole, or a tree, it is covered under collision insurance. For posterity: https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/collision-insurance.asp > ... it will cover damage from potholes, and accidents involving an inanimate object.

Perhaps part of the confusion here is UK vs US? A collision in the UK would normally involve a third party. In the rental space, collision damage waivers - CDWs - explicitly don't cover undercarriage, wheels, windshields and so on, the kind of damage we're talking about here. https://www.aviva.co.uk/insurance/motor/car-insurance/what-a...

At the US rental companies I've used, CDWs specifically do cover those things, and in fact cover pretty much everything related to any damage of the vehicle (with caveats, like you were using the vehicle for something illegal). I guess the US/UK difference is good to keep in mind next time I head to the UK.

https://www.avis.com/en/help/usa-faqs/cdw-insurance

https://www.avis.com/en/products-and-services/protections/lo...

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

#297

Post by betwixthewires »

belval wrote: post #44
mschild wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, except Tesla has a history of performing just as janky repairs on their cars themselves. Its even stated in the article.[0] Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? Driving around with a shoddy fix on a combustion engine can be just as dang…

> Another question to consider is why the repair is 16k. Does is actually cost Tesla that much or do they just quote that much because they are realistically the only ones who can fix it so they can charge the price? The quote is to replace the whole battery pack so I really doubt that they are making a profit on it since it's one of the actually expensive part of the car. As GP pointed out this is hardly right to re…

You're ignoring the part of the transaction where Tesla gets a $16k battery pack for free with $700 worth of damage to it. Want to charge full price for the new pack? Fine, but I'm keeping the old one or you're paying me market value for it as is. This is where the profit margin is for Tesla, you think they just throw these slightly damaged packs in the trash?

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

#298

Post by rdtwo »

throwaway0a5e wrote: post #253
Meph504 wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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 con…

>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 actu…

Tesla’s own factories use all sorts of shoddy fixes. This is a legitimate fix that you could expect at any licensed mechanic and that Tesla would likely use it they had a parts shortage. Not every repair needs to be done with perfect oem replacement parts. Good luck getting an insurance company to cover 100% replacement during an accident for example.

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

#299

Post by rantwasp »

rasz wrote: post #157
rantwasp wrote: post #57

step 1) repair car (properly. yes it’s stupid. it is what it is at this point) step 2) get rid of car step 3) buy a car from a respectable brand that will do the right thing when it comes to repairs

like ford? https://www.autoevolution.com/news/mustang-mach-e-owner-gets...

was thinking a toyota or a honda.

btw, I would take a ford over a tesla any day

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

#300

Post by rurounijones »

beiller wrote: post #284
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…

If the customer is willing to take the risk, and the repair shop takes on liability, why would Tesla care? Brand image? This is already negatively affecting their brand image (for me).

Because Tesla owns the car (It is a leased car) and want it fixed according to the manufacturer's specifications (which happens to be them). It is not an unreasonable request.

However I completely understand the complaints people are making about repairability and insurance shennanigans etc.

Post reply on HN