4 ms·

I will be blunt, I really wish "salvage" cars had no right to exist. There is insufficient consistency between states as to what can be titled as such and still

I will be blunt, I really wish "salvage" cars had no right to exist. There is insufficient consistency between states as to what can be titled as such and still driven on our roads. You can get on the road most of the time just fixing cosmetic items and inspection in some states more concerned with emissions than much else; some states don't even check for working ABS or airbags. I think companies like Tesla are correct in blocking access to their own charging network and I have no issue with another company blocking access to theirs. However I do not agree with the idea Tesla can block you from using another fast charging system.

dundarious 6y ago
The article claims that many cars are declared "salvage" merely due to Tesla's expensive repairs, which they claim is caused by their (unique?) restrictions on parts availability. As such, Tesla would arguably be responsible for the fact that the cars are "salvage" in the first place. I'm strongly in favor of greater re-use of these enormous machines that require intense capital investment, and valuable and limited resources to create.
- eru 6y ago
  > I'm strongly in favor of greater re-use of these enormous machines that require intense capital investment, and valuable and limited resources to create. Yes, though as long as Tesla is up-front about their restrictions, people can take those considerations into account when they make their capital investment.
  - dundarious 6y ago
    Sure, I can agree with that. And we can also be critical of Tesla for it. It does run somewhat counter to their environmental mission.
    - srtjstjsj 6y ago
      Tesla has an environmental marketing, not an environmental mission. An environmental car is something like a LEAF.
      - dundarious 6y ago
        Agreed about it being marketing, I should have said something like purported mission.
AnthonyMouse 6y ago
Salvage just means the insurance company paid out the policy rather than repairing the car. A 20 year old car might have a market value of $500. If somebody keys it up and down both sides, it's totaled and gets a salvage title, because that's more than $500 worth of paint damage. In some cases a car gets stolen, the insurance pays out because they can't find it, then later they do find it and there is nothing wrong with it but the policy is already paid out so now it has a salvage title. It has nothing to do with the safety of the car.
emodendroket 6y ago
In some sense I agree that the certification process is way too loose for cars, but 1) it's more than salvage cars that are the issue 2) it's not really clear that remote disabling a feature is doing anything to help.

dundarious 6y ago

The article claims that many cars are declared "salvage" merely due to Tesla's expensive repairs, which they claim is caused by their (unique?) restrictions on parts availability. As such, Tesla would arguably be responsible for the fact that the cars are "salvage" in the first place. I'm strongly in favor of greater re-use of these enormous machines that require intense capital investment, and valuable and limited resources to create.

eru 6y ago
> I'm strongly in favor of greater re-use of these enormous machines that require intense capital investment, and valuable and limited resources to create. Yes, though as long as Tesla is up-front about their restrictions, people can take those considerations into account when they make their capital investment.
- dundarious 6y ago
  Sure, I can agree with that. And we can also be critical of Tesla for it. It does run somewhat counter to their environmental mission.
  - srtjstjsj 6y ago
    Tesla has an environmental marketing, not an environmental mission. An environmental car is something like a LEAF.
    - dundarious 6y ago
      Agreed about it being marketing, I should have said something like purported mission.

AnthonyMouse 6y ago

Salvage just means the insurance company paid out the policy rather than repairing the car. A 20 year old car might have a market value of $500. If somebody keys it up and down both sides, it's totaled and gets a salvage title, because that's more than $500 worth of paint damage. In some cases a car gets stolen, the insurance pays out because they can't find it, then later they do find it and there is nothing wrong with it but the policy is already paid out so now it has a salvage title. It has nothing to do with the safety of the car.

emodendroket 6y ago

In some sense I agree that the certification process is way too loose for cars, but 1) it's more than salvage cars that are the issue 2) it's not really clear that remote disabling a feature is doing anything to help.