4 ms·

Tesla voluntarily recalls 53,000 cars due to faulty parking brakes from supplier

18 points by fmihaila 10y ago

sfeng 10y ago
This to me is always great PR for Tesla (for those who look into the details). If they're willing to do a recall for something as not-safety-critical as this, it means when a real safety issue occurs they will recall. There have been many cases of car companies not recalling for cost reasons, this shows that's not how this decision gets made at Tesla.
- bryanlarsen 10y ago
  The part manufacturer is covering the cost in this case, not Tesla.
  - developerdanny 10y ago
    And rightly so, they screwed up. Had the part screwed up whilst a customer was driving their tesla; tesla would be on the receiving end of a PR nightmare!
- dlanouette 10y ago
  To play the devil's advocate. While I agree with you, the article did say the costs were being incurred by the part manufacturer.
  - sfeng 10y ago
    Yes, but the PR hit would be felt by Tesla.
hackuser 10y ago
> faulty parking brakes from supplier When the parts in its cars work well, does Tesla give the suppliers the credit? Tesla is very good at PR, if not parking brakes. The faulty parking break is from Tesla, not the supplier; Tesla is responsible for the car, including all parts from suppliers; it's Tesla's responsibility, technically and legally, to make sure the part works properly. Any engineer would (I hope) be embarrassed if it was suggested otherwise about their work product. I would be ashamed to deliver something to a client and blame a supplier for a problem. It implies that I'm not in control and that worse, I don't understand that I should be in control and my fundamental responsibilities, and that I lack judgement. My client couldn't care less why my product has a problem; from their perspective it's my fault - which is true and exactly how I want them to think. I'm sure the supplier could blame their suppliers, who could blame yet more.
- jacquesm 10y ago
  That's why most manufacturers have extensive QA on their input side to make sure that what they ordered is what they get and that quality does not change from what was supplied in test batches. In other industries these problems are so large that QA is done in the country of origin of the parts to make sure problems are caught as early as possible. In some cases that means that company representatives are found dockside inspecting containers and taking samples before they are being loaded.
- ErikVandeWater 10y ago
  I'm not sure the extent to which Tesla blamed the 3rd party. This is obviously a pro-electric-vehicle source. They are trying to give Tesla a pass.
- dragontamer 10y ago
  It depends really. Takata airbags got the PR damage, even though its airbags were installed into Ford / GM / etc. etc.
  - hackuser 10y ago
    I understand that who gets the blame depends on PR fu, but that doesn't affect who is really responsible.
- xiphias 10y ago
  Both companies are responsible, and both companies take full responsibility. Tesla doesn't make you go to the supplier. Also it's a very rare problem, so it's probably hard to find in QA. People (maybe not you) are still interested in the source of the problem, but it's an ortoghonal question.
lostmsu 10y ago
Does "voluntarily" here mean they did not wait for the lawsuit? Were they legally obligated to do it? If yes, that "voluntarily" is a pure shit PR move.

18 points by fmihaila 10y ago

sfeng 10y ago

This to me is always great PR for Tesla (for those who look into the details). If they're willing to do a recall for something as not-safety-critical as this, it means when a real safety issue occurs they will recall. There have been many cases of car companies not recalling for cost reasons, this shows that's not how this decision gets made at Tesla.

bryanlarsen 10y ago
The part manufacturer is covering the cost in this case, not Tesla.
- developerdanny 10y ago
  And rightly so, they screwed up. Had the part screwed up whilst a customer was driving their tesla; tesla would be on the receiving end of a PR nightmare!
dlanouette 10y ago
To play the devil's advocate. While I agree with you, the article did say the costs were being incurred by the part manufacturer.
- sfeng 10y ago
  Yes, but the PR hit would be felt by Tesla.

hackuser 10y ago

> faulty parking brakes from supplier When the parts in its cars work well, does Tesla give the suppliers the credit? Tesla is very good at PR, if not parking brakes. The faulty parking break is from Tesla, not the supplier; Tesla is responsible for the car, including all parts from suppliers; it's Tesla's responsibility, technically and legally, to make sure the part works properly. Any engineer would (I hope) be embarrassed if it was suggested otherwise about their work product. I would be ashamed to deliver something to a client and blame a supplier for a problem. It implies that I'm not in control and that worse, I don't understand that I should be in control and my fundamental responsibilities, and that I lack judgement. My client couldn't care less why my product has a problem; from their perspective it's my fault - which is true and exactly how I want them to think. I'm sure the supplier could blame their suppliers, who could blame yet more.

jacquesm 10y ago
That's why most manufacturers have extensive QA on their input side to make sure that what they ordered is what they get and that quality does not change from what was supplied in test batches. In other industries these problems are so large that QA is done in the country of origin of the parts to make sure problems are caught as early as possible. In some cases that means that company representatives are found dockside inspecting containers and taking samples before they are being loaded.
ErikVandeWater 10y ago
I'm not sure the extent to which Tesla blamed the 3rd party. This is obviously a pro-electric-vehicle source. They are trying to give Tesla a pass.
dragontamer 10y ago
It depends really. Takata airbags got the PR damage, even though its airbags were installed into Ford / GM / etc. etc.
- hackuser 10y ago
  I understand that who gets the blame depends on PR fu, but that doesn't affect who is really responsible.
xiphias 10y ago
Both companies are responsible, and both companies take full responsibility. Tesla doesn't make you go to the supplier. Also it's a very rare problem, so it's probably hard to find in QA. People (maybe not you) are still interested in the source of the problem, but it's an ortoghonal question.

lostmsu 10y ago

Does "voluntarily" here mean they did not wait for the lawsuit? Were they legally obligated to do it? If yes, that "voluntarily" is a pure shit PR move.