5 ms·
There was the case of the unfavorable NY Times review. The Tesla was sensibly designed so that when the car was parked in an extremely cold garage, the batterie
by rz2k 10y ago
There was the case of the unfavorable NY Times review. The Tesla was sensibly designed so that when the car was parked in an extremely cold garage, the batteries were actively heated to protect them from a damaging freeze. That all makes sense, but it wouldn't make sense to someone new to such a car why the battery shows less range when you get to it in the morning.
The reviewer called support, and they guessed it was simply out of calibration or something, maybe because of the temperature, but without getting to the conclusion that the batteries had actually been used all night to keep themselves warm. Under that assumption, driving in circles for a couple minutes might warm up the system, then return accurate range estimates.
Anyway, the reviewer went on to try to continue his driving trip, the readings never returned to what he thought they should be, and he drove without heat to try to maximize the range. He then wrote a review based on his experience, and without the knowledge of why the batteries has been drained overnight.
Elon Musk ranted in response about a conspiracy to pan electric cars, and cited GPS readings of him driving in circles. There definitely had been instances of biased and rigged reviews against electric cars, but this was pretty clearly a misunderstanding, and Elon Musk never retracted his criticisms once it became obvious what had happened.
Tesla's unconditional supporters didn't do much to quiet potential worries. What should a mild-mannered prospective buyer think? According to the letter of the contracts with Tesla, even having tires on your Tesla rotated could invalidate the warranty on the batteries that cost tens of thousands of dollars to replace. That gives Tesla a lot of leverage to "punish" customers, and the mob of supporters that would gang up on you if you say anything publicly about what seems unfair gives you less recourse and should make people wary.
- TwoBit 10y agoNo, the NY Times reviewer faked the review and lied: https://www.slashgear.com/tesla-gets-nyt-apology-for-model-s-review-musk-approves-18269784/ https://www.slashgear.com/tesla-gets-nyt-apology-for-model-s...
- andrewem 10y agoThe response from the Public Editor does not say that the review was faked - it says the opposite, starting with the headline "Problems With Precision and Judgment, but Not Integrity, in Tesla Test". Later it says "I am convinced that he took on the test drive in good faith, and told the story as he experienced it." I have no interest in this dispute, but it's clear that the conclusion you drew about what the Times piece said is incorrect. https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/publiceditor/2013/02/18/problems-with-precision-and-judgment-but-not-integrity-in-tesla-test/ https://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/publiceditor/2013/02/18/pro...
- crdoconnor 10y ago"Problems With Precision and Judgment, but Not Integrity" The New York Times is hardly going to come out themselves and admit that they have a problem with integrity are they? The sheer number of inaccuracies and the fact that they all cast Tesla in a poor light in this case was pretty telling, as were the financial incentives (Big 3 pay NYT's bills, Tesla doesn't).
- rz2k 10y agoThat isn't what your link says. The reviewer was imperfect, and Musk still wrote "Faith in @nytimes restored" as though he were the aggrieved party. The journalist who made mistakes resembles customers, and his experience should serve as a warning. The comments under that link are an example of the people who discredit Tesla for prospective buyers. They care about the conflict, and root for their team, without considering what it says about how the car maker would treat them. I want to buy a good car, I don't want to buy into the experience of dealing with a thin-skinned billionaire on twitter, and his social media hangers-on, if I'm ever unhappy about the product in public.