4 ms·
If you watch the video [1] Chad (former Tesla repair technician) clearly states it's the issue is due to cost effectiveness not whether the car is under lease.
by Pyramus 5y ago
If you watch the video [1] Chad (former Tesla repair technician) clearly states it's the issue is due to cost effectiveness not whether the car is under lease.
It's also not constrained the nose that was damaged here - whenever a part of the battery pack is damaged (could be a single cell) Tesla will replace the whole battery pack but not the part.
I believe Chad calls it "assembly replacement". It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair.
[1] https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415 https://youtu.be/vVSw3KSevEc?t=1415
- wnevets 5y ago> It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts Surely its more cost effective for the customer that requires this repair?
- Pyramus 5y agoAbsolutely - when I say cost effective I'm talking on behalf of the company of course.
- majormajor 5y agoDoes Tesla then have a separate workflow that re-uses the components of the "broken" 16K battery pack? Seems like that is necessary in order for spending an extra 15K in parts to be worth more than training some more people to repair them... but then in that case, the sticker price of the repair also doesn't seem like it should be 16k, since Tesla's taking the old battery and capturing that side of the value too.
- vfclists 5y ago> It's not cost effective to train staff, have facilities and parts, and do the (dis-)assembly. Which is exactly why we need right to repair. I think he means "Its not cost effective "for Tesla" to train staff, have facilities and parts ..."
- ErikVandeWater 5y agoI thought a big part of the pack being made of modular cells is that the software can disengage cells that are problematic and you can keep running with the 999 remaining cells?