11 ms·
Tesla's response is pretty non-sensical. Tesla basically says the vehicles they're being compared to aren't real competitors, and that their cars are very safe.
by tuna-piano 9y ago
Tesla's response is pretty non-sensical. Tesla basically says the vehicles they're being compared to aren't real competitors, and that their cars are very safe. Both of those things may be true, but it doesn't respond to the institutes' point:
"In the large luxury SUV class, where collision coverage claim frequency is the same as the average for all vehicles and the cost of claims is 43 percent above average, the owners of the Model X file for claims 41 percent more often than average, and those claims cost 89 percent more than average, according to the institute."
- Animats 9y agoAlso "the rear-wheel-drive Tesla Model S is involved in 46 percent more claims than average, and those claims cost more than twice than average." The big problem seems to be cost of repair. Tesla owners have complained about the high cost and poor availability of body parts.[1][2] (I miss the 5mph bumper standard. For a few years in the 1980s, US cars were required to have bumpers that could withstand a 5mph collision with no damage. I have a Ford Bronco which complies with that. It was once rear-ended by a SamTrans van. The van's nose and front end collapsed, as it should, for crush depth. Damage to the Bronco was a bent bracket for the trailer power connector.) [1] https://electrek.co/2017/03/09/tesla-parts-repairs-lead/ https://electrek.co/2017/03/09/tesla-parts-repairs-lead/ [2] http://jalopnik.com/teslas-potential-body-shop-backlog-nightmare-1793269803 http://jalopnik.com/teslas-potential-body-shop-backlog-night...
- ryandrake 9y agoI'm curious as to why Teslas are involved in 46% more claims than average. Are the cars shopping cart magnets or something? Are they falling apart? Do Tesla owners get into more accidents than non-Tesla owners? Or do they just file claims for every little scratch and paint chip?
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- marvinv3 9y agoMaybe one the reasons A lot of owners have said that the car being wider and longer than most of the cars, they initially had a hard time at corners, parking and other places where intuition is needed.
- bhauer 9y agoI think for the reasons cited by the parent comment: the cost of repairs are higher than for other vehicles, so the incentive to file a claim is greater for a broader set of collision events. Let's say they are involved in exactly the same number of collisions and the same severity distribution. If the costs for repair are higher across the board, claims are more likely for repairs that would have otherwise been paid out of pocket by owners of other vehicles. If my 10-year old car is involved in a minor collision and the estimated cost of repair is $250, I am just going to pay for it and not bother with an insurance claim. If instead I owned a car that was more costly to repair, and the repair estimate for my collision were $2,500, I might decide to file a claim.
- sokoloff 9y agoI'd wager most people with a 10-year old car facing a $250 cosmetic repair would opt to "do nothing".
- nbanks 9y agoThis is only true if the repair is cosmetic. The nice thing about 10-20 year old cars is that anything that doesn't wear out is cheap and easy to find from a wrecker. I recently hit a deer and bought a hood, headlight & grill for $200.
- jmharvey 9y agoOne plausible explanation would be if Teslas logged more miles than comparable cars. If I drove more, I'd be more inclined to spend money up front for a more fuel efficient (and more fun to drive) car. And on the flip side, if I drove a gas-guzzling luxury SUV, I might not put as many miles on it. I have no data to support this, and I'm not an actuary, but Teslas driving more miles than luxury SUV's and claims being proportional to miles driven seem like a plausible hypothesis.
- jjeaff 9y agoI think any group whose vehicle purchase decisions are colored by gas prices are not the same group buying Tesla's or luxury SUVs. I would expect the overlap to be very small at least. My guess is Tesla drivers put fewer miles on them than average.
- gambiting 9y agoIf that was true, then Mercedes and BMW wouldn't sell any diesel S-class or 7-series cars, and yet they do(and they are majority of sales of these models in EU) - people want luxury and great fuel economy at the same time.
- tehlike 9y agoI think there are people like that commuting from SF to Mountain View, or such long distances. I don't believe that they are a majority, though.
- prostoalex 9y agoI can corroborate this explanation. We're a two vehicle household - a model S and a hybrid SUV, and all long-haul trips are done on Tesla. For one, the supercharging is free and is usually near restrooms/Starbucks/amenities that we would've stopped by anyways. For two, Tesla's barren interior and generous trunk provides quite a bit of storage for random things you have to haul when traveling with kids. For three, the autopilot takes out a lot of stress and makes road trips almost pleasurable.
- takeda 9y agoI could think of few: - better acceleration than other cars (this a bit encourages people tho show it off) - autopilot which is still in beta, it works most of the time, which is a bit dangerous because people get used to it and reduce their attention, which is dangerous when it fails[1] - autoparking similar as autopilot, it works but once in a while can make a mistake The repairs are also expensive, my friend recently purchased model S and when he was parking he judged distance poorly and went too far hitting a parked truck in front of him and slightly bending his bumper on the side. The repair apparently will cost $3,500. I'm guessing they want to replace whole bumper, but it still way more expensive that bumper replacement in other cars. [1] For example: https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6egn1z/2_days_in_a_row_ap2_has_tried_to_slam_me_into_the/ https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/6egn1z/2_days_...
- akira2501 9y agocombined with: - people not familiar with how rear wheel drive cars are different from front wheel drive cars. - people not familiar with how a vehicle that has a near 50/50 spread of weight between the front and rear axle is different from a more standard vehicle.
- semi-extrinsic 9y ago> "In a front wheel drive car, you understeer, crash into a tree and you die. In a rear-wheel drive car, you oversteer, spin around, crash into a tree and you die. In the rear-wheel drive car, you don't see the tree that kills you." But if what you say is true, Mercedes, BMW, Audi etc. should be in the same boat, and TFA indicates they're not.
- sk5t 9y agoAt least in North America, I'll wager the majority of new MB (4matic), BMW (Xdrive), and especially Audi (Quattro) vehicles are not rear-wheel drive. Most of the Audis nevertheless understeer, though...
- 9y ago
- Spooky23 9y agoThere are very few bodyshops and repair facilities, and Tesla makes it impossible to get manuals, tools and parts. My neighbor needed to get his car towed 100 miles for car/deer mishap. So it's both expensive and a hassle to deal with minor repairs, so people file claims. Even with a BMW or Mercedes, you don't have those sorts of challenges. Hell, some insurers even maintain their own service centers.
- gambiting 9y ago>>(I miss the 5mph bumper standard. For a few years in the 1980s, US cars were required to have bumpers that could withstand a 5mph collision with no damage. I have a Ford Bronco which complies with that. It was once rear-ended by a SamTrans van. The van's nose and front end collapsed, as it should, for crush depth. Damage to the Bronco was a bent bracket for the trailer power connector.) The problem with older cars is that in a crash at a higher speed(even 30mph) you might be left with a fully functional bronco and a dead driver, while the van(or any newer car) is absolutely destroyed but the driver doesn't have a scratch. I mean I guess we could make cars that are still safe in collisions but which can survive minor fender benders without much damage, but I don't have enough data on this.
- Theodores 9y agoThe big plastic bumpers on the Ford Ka were designed to survive city driving as well as comply with the law for motorway speed requirements of safety. The original version of the a had the same bumpers in the same black plastic regardless of the car colour. However, the version 2 Ka had colour coded bumpers, as if this 'easy to park' headline feature mattered not. The updated bumpers will show scratches whereas the black bumpers were visually more forgiving of damage. So 'bumpers that you can hit things with' failed the market test (as did bull bars).
- robotresearcher 9y agoThey are very common in Europe, where parking is often very challenging. Watching people shunt their way out of spot in Rome, with no damage done, is entertaining for the first time tourist.
- jakobegger 9y agoI had a minor collision with an original Ford Ka after I switched lanes without looking. My car had no damage at all, but the Ka hat a bit of red paint on the black plastic bumper. It had to be replaced, since the owner didn't care how "forgiving of damage" it was, they wanted a car without scratches.
- andygates 9y ago
- kdot 9y agoSensor and ADAS technology integrated directly into the body of these newer vehicles increases repair cost substantially.
- objclxt 9y agoIn Tesla's case I think it's more they can't make the spares, or are having trouble training shops to handle bodywork and the like. You see nightmare stories on the various Tesla forums of owners who have gone months without a car, just because there aren't parts available (months during which insurance must cover a rental, thus raising the repair cost even more).
- interfixus 9y agoMany years ago, I had an old Saab V4, the one with a two stroke engine, from somewhere in the sixties. The thing finally died, and as there was a scrapyard very close to my place of work, a colleague and I decided to push it over there by hand one lunchbreak. Enter a pair of other colleagues, in the company's brand new Dodge van, probably a 1980 model. "Ha ha, we'll give you a push", which they promptly did. A very, very gentle nudge, walking pace. On the Saab, nothing. On the Dodge, two nasty dents from rear fender extrusions.
- gwern 9y agoMore Tesla PR. It reminds me of Musk's post on the autopilot after those crashes: 'Tesla drivers have fewer accidents than the average American driver!' Yeah, that's great, but that's not the question that was being asked, now was it?
- Judgmentality 9y agoAs much as I agree with you, it's clearly working for the overall public as most of the world still has a love affair with Tesla (just look at their stock price).
- paulddraper 9y agoWhat was the question bring asked?
- gambiting 9y ago"why do you have a feature that cannot see an obstacle in the middle of the road called autopilot?" Answering this with "it crashes less than your average driver!" is not an answer to that question, despite being true. If a Boeing plane crashes on autopilot, Boeing cannot dismiss questions about safety of the system by saying "hey, our planes on autopilot crash less than manually controlled planes!", even though that is true.
- paulddraper 9y agoI don't think anyone was asking "What is the purpose in having a bug in your autopilot?" I think people were asking "Is your autopilot actually dependable/safe?" And that latter question is what Musk was responding to.
- legolas2412 9y agoHe didn't really answer about autopilot. He said that Tesla are safer cars (due to reasons not related to being autopilot).
- 9y ago
- IBM 9y agoThis is the standard PR response of Musk whenever criticized.
- mikeash 9y agoI don't get why you'd compare to other cars at all. Take the average payout per month for this model, divide by the number of cars of this model that you insure, add some overhead, and that should be your average premium, shouldn't it? If the model is brand new and you don't have enough data to do that then I could understand finding something comparable to make a guess at costs, but I'd think Teslas have been around long enough now that this is no longer needed.
- laumars 9y ago> I don't get why you'd compare to other cars at all. Because it's good marketing. Not only are Tesla putting forward a counter argument (albeit one that's easily dismissed by most of us on here) but they're also promoting the exclusivity of their brand in the process. It's like in job interviews where you spin your negatives into positives rather than admitting you might have poor organisation skills or spend too much time on HN.
- mikeash 9y agoThat explains why Tesla is doing it, but what about AAA?
- laumars 9y agoAhh I get your point now. Apologies
- mikeash 9y agoNo problem. You weren't wrong!
- Tloewald 9y agoThey're trying to explain why they want to charge higher premiums for X vs. Y. They can either explain their entire business model for X in isolation, including assumed profit margins, investment yields, or simply point out that X is worse by such and such a margin than Y and hence will cost so much more than Y. Oh, and they do NOT want to explain their business model because it has lots of shady bits. E.g. all insurance businesses involve authorized providers who bill fictional rates and then accept discounted payments the customer doesn't see. (How can replacing a $50 moulded part cost $2000? Why does spending 15 minutes with a $200,000 ultrasound machine cost $4000?)