Submitted by Additional-Two-7312 t3_yq1q1h in technology
vegemouse t1_ivm7z4q wrote
Reply to comment by b_a_t_m_4_n in Tesla Recalls 40,000 Vehicles Over Potential Power Steering Failure by Additional-Two-7312
Doing exactly what they’re legally obliged to do. Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don’t happen to other makes at the same frequency as Teslas. Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.
RunescapeAficionado t1_ivmd6de wrote
Not to defend Tesla or anything but ice cars have had plenty of problems...
th1341 t1_ivmeb83 wrote
Not to mention the fact it takes a lost lawsuit half the time for many other manufacturers to issue a recall. At least these are voluntary.
Because I can see the other comments here: Elon musk should be charged for fraud, Tesla is way overrated, Elons an idiot. You can believe all of this and still point out things a company does well
bit_pusher t1_ivmgedt wrote
>Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don’t happen to other makes at the same frequency as Teslas.
GM recalled half a million cars earliest this year for defective seatbelts. Please provide data that shows Teslas are experiencing safety recalls at a hire rate than other manufacturers.
​
>Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.
Chevy recalled 69000 Volts due to a risk of catching fire when they were charged to 100%.
These are problems that every manufacturer has.
whatyouwant5 t1_ivmm6bj wrote
They recalled the Bolt. They also bought my car back at full price (including taxes) minus a small mileage fee.
wildrussy t1_ivmdcc0 wrote
>Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don’t happen to other makes at the same frequency as Teslas. Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.
Gonna need a source for this. How many recalls per year does Tesla have, and how many do other car companies have on average?
And gasoline vehicles (i.e. the majority) are vastly more likely to catch fire than EVs are. This is according to accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. Tesla makes up a plurality of the EV portion of this data, and for every vehicle fire their cars undergo, the "average" vehicle catches fire over 61 times (1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles).
Curious to know where on earth you're getting the idea that these cars get recalled more or "spontaneously explode" more than other cars do, except perhaps your own perception of media coverage?
To put it more plainly: just because a vehicle fire or recall from a "normal" car company doesn't show up on your newsfeed doesn't mean they don't happen. They just happen without media coverage.
piray003 t1_ivmeqog wrote
>Gonna need a source for this.
"Trust me bro."
pacific_beach t1_ivmgbxz wrote
Clearly you've never looked at fire frequency data. Tesla's are 50%+ more likely to burn than their contemporary ICE counterparts.
wildrussy t1_ivmh1ot wrote
But... I just cited the fire frequency data? Conducted by a third party (a government institution)
Do you have anything to actually support this claim?
pacific_beach t1_ivmh73x wrote
wildrussy t1_ivmhqbt wrote
Right off the bat: this is already a cherry picked data set. You chose exclusively non-crash fires (a tiny minority of vehicle fires).
I question why we chose to focus on this tiny subset of vehicle fires. Is it, perhaps, because that's the dataset that EVs (and Teslas) underperform in?
When we focus on this subset, Teslas catch fire 50% more than ICE vehicles. When we widen our subset to all vehicle fires, ICE vehicles catch fire 6000% more than Teslas.
Strange.
pacific_beach t1_ivmnd0c wrote
It's not cherry picked, it's the only dataset that exists in the US (as far as I know)
The reason why the dataset is good is because it includes vehicle miles driven and is limited to the contemporary model years for tesla. Apples to apples.
wildrussy t1_ivmpcxx wrote
I agree that per mile driven is an important metric, and Teslas benefit from being newer than an average ICE vehicle.
But that's still far inferior to using every vehicle fire (in the dataset I cited above), due to how tiny this subset is. If you only pick non-crash fires, batteries will be disfavored heavily.
pacific_beach t1_ivmpsje wrote
They're comparing CONTEMPORARY model-year vehicles that spontaneously combust (not in an accident) and adjust for miles driven. Tesla's ignite more than ICE. This is not difficult.
wildrussy t1_ivmt3bd wrote
>They're comparing CONTEMPORARY model-year vehicles
Heard ya loud and clear the first time, my guy. I just pointed out that yes, Tesla benefits from having newer models. The idea that comparing by same model year has merit isn't lost on me.
>spontaneously combust (not in an accident)
Tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny minority of vehicle fires. You selected the exact subset where EVs perform worse.
>Tesla's ignite more than ICE. This is not difficult.
Good lord. Here, maybe if I adopt your methods and capitalize the letters:
ONLY if you SELECT a TINY subset of the data do Teslas ignite more than ICE vehicles. This is an EGREGIOUS mischaracterization of their ACTUAL RELATIVE SAFETIES.
The difference isn't minor. It's not even close. There's a SIXTY FOLD difference between the two. This is largely due to the enormous reservoir of explosive liquid they carry around with them.
ICE vehicles ignite more than Teslas. This is not difficult.
pacific_beach t1_ivn47bc wrote
You have no data and a lot of worthless paragraphs.
wildrussy t1_ivn5nes wrote
>And gasoline vehicles (i.e. the majority) are vastly more likely to catch fire than EVs are. This is according to accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. Tesla makes up a plurality of the EV portion of this data, and for every vehicle fire their cars undergo, the "average" vehicle catches fire over 61 times (1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles).
>You have no data
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
pacific_beach t1_ivn6jl5 wrote
Post the data you fucking idiot
wildrussy t1_ivnaehr wrote
You have to be one of the pettiest human beings I've ever met. If you wanted a link, you could've just asked for a link. Much as I'd like to tell you to shove it:
The oft-cited study is this one, compiled by insurance analysts and published to their website (and, ostensibly, independently verified).
The fire data itself is, again, from the NTSB, with sales data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. It's all public and you're free to do a little legwork yourself, if you care to.
I'm not going to run the database searches for you, especially not after being called a "fucking idiot". You can take the study at face value, go verify it with the NTSB data yourself, or shut up about it.
Or I suppose you could keep spreading falsehoods and insulting people for pointing out you're wrong. I guess that's up to you at this point, isn't it?
Kirahei t1_ivmgrwb wrote
There are definitely recalls where traditional cars are in danger of exploding, I highly recommend people look into National Highway Traffic Safety Administration you can type in your VIN # and see all active recalls on your vehicle.
Source: worked for a car manufacturer and my job was to call people who’s cars were affected by recalls that were potentially deadly.
The amount of people who couldn’t be bothered to speak to me was insane, seriously even if you don’t want to talk to someone on the phone, go to the website to see if you have active recalls.
mandogvan t1_ivmci79 wrote
Actually gasoline cars explode at a significantly higher rate then BEVs.
As far as frequent Tesla recalls: If you counted the number of recalls where you have to physically bring the car in to the mechanic, it is less than average ICE cars. Like this issue, most of these “recalls” are addressed by an over the air software update
pacific_beach t1_ivmgg0n wrote
This is 100% false.
mandogvan t1_ivmgnhv wrote
https://www.autoweek.com/news/a38225037/how-much-you-should-worry-about-ev-fires/
> Researchers from insurance deal site Auto Insurance EZ compiled sales and accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. The site found that hybrid vehicles had the most fires per 100,000 sales at 3474.5. There were 1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles.
vegemouse t1_ivmcqdj wrote
Teslas explode at a significantly higher rate than other EVs. I’m not dunking on EVs, i’m dunking on Teslas.
mandogvan t1_ivmdybn wrote
> There were 1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles.
I’ve been driving gas cars all my life. EVs are even safer than gas cars when it comes to fires.
I’m not saying your wrong about teslas compared to other EVs. But even so, this is statistically negligible. Gas cars are almost 2 orders of magnitude more dangerous and I ain’t worrying about them either.
pacific_beach t1_ivmgs66 wrote
Tesla's ignite far more than their contemporary ICE counterparts.
mandogvan t1_ivmhtra wrote
There are many on those charts with greater frequency of fires than teslas.
And to reiterate: ALL of this is negligible. A ram pickup is more than 2x more likely to catch on fire than a Tesla model X (according to your source). And I’m not afraid of driving a ram.
wildrussy t1_ivmjtqr wrote
Adding onto this: this only counts non-crash fires (a tiny, cherry-picked subset of vehicle fires).
pacific_beach t1_ivmmguy wrote
A RAM pickup is a small subset of FIAT models while 2 of 2 tesla vehicles that were eligible for this report are substantially higher than ICE to catch on fire.
Your claim that ICE catch on fire more often is total bullshit, tesla's are firebombs compared to aggregated ICE vehicles.
MrChurro3164 t1_ivmtjli wrote
Can you explain your link? I’m looking at the ‘highest claim frequencies’ and the model S isn’t even on the list, and the X is behind the Jeep Renegade and just above the Jeep Cherokee and wrangler? (jfc I think Jeeps are the true firebombs here lol)
pacific_beach t1_ivmzsmg wrote
>Can you explain your link? I’m looking at the ‘highest claim frequencies’ and the model S isn’t even on the list, and the X is behind the Jeep Renegade and just above the Jeep Cherokee and wrangler? (jfc I think Jeeps are the true firebombs here lol)
Just search for tesla, you'll find them. And yes, don't buy a jeep (or tesla)
Dadarian t1_ivmghcn wrote
What is your source for this? And is this by volume or by rate?
swords-and-boreds t1_ivmg28u wrote
Internal combustion engines are more likely to catch fire, not less.
vegemouse t1_ivmgjcf wrote
Do you guys think Tesla is the only car company that makes EVs?
swords-and-boreds t1_ivmglc3 wrote
Given their market share, they might as well be.
Rodiruk t1_ivmihit wrote
"Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don't happen to other makes at the same frequency as Tesla's"
Well that's just wrong. I've had cars from many manufacturers and I've always gotten similar recall noticed on all of them.
LeonBlacksruckus t1_ivmekhi wrote
It's wild you can tell people like yourself didn't even read the article. They are fixing whatever this issue is with an over the air update pushed to the cars. Meaning no one even has to bring their car in to the shop.
Basically they updated the firmware (embedded software for hardware) and then realized that the update caused other issues so they are rolling it back to the previous version essentially.
b_a_t_m_4_n t1_ivm9ek6 wrote
My Kuga has just been recalled for potential engine fires.....
steadvii t1_ivmciib wrote
Right. There have never been issues with gasoline cars exploding.
bengringo2 t1_ivmeco3 wrote
>Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.
I see you weren't alive for the Ford Pinto.
penemuel13 t1_ivmgl9x wrote
The Ford Pinto didn’t spontaneously explode; it exploded when rear-ended because of the placement of the gas tank. That’s pretty much the direct opposite of spontaneous.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments