4 ms·

> why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"? because of terminology like this "Electrified Garage also notes that the cooling system doesn't get

> why would a competent third-party repair shop be "risky"? because of terminology like this "Electrified Garage also notes that the cooling system doesn't get anywhere near as hot as an internal combustion engine, and it's not likely that it would either, given that the operating temperature for most lithium-ion batteries is well below 60 degrees Celsius." So this repair is made on anecdotal observation of ideal conditions, and disregarding factory specifications, and actual Tesla trained technicians. If this was your car, and this damaged was caused by someone else's fault, would you want a hack fix, or it fixed to the manufactures specification? He Broke Telsa's car. >How is the risk different from the existing leased model in any industry? Have you looked at a standard lease for cars, they dictate the terms of how their vehicles are to be maintained and repair, often hold authority of who, and how those repairs are done. Some simply reserve the right to charge you, for services not performed by them. Other's make even simpler, they charge you for damaging the vehicle or require you to convert the lease to a purchase, before work is done.

sumedh 5y ago
> and disregarding factory specifications Does Tesla share those specifications, if they dont share it, can you really blame third party repair?
- rdtwo 5y ago
  Even for aerospace you can use equivalent or stronger parts for repair. You can even reverse engineer part capability and build a stronger part
throwaway0a5e 5y ago
>because of terminology like this "Electrified Garage also notes that the cooling system doesn't get anywhere near as hot as an internal combustion engine, and it's not likely that it would either, given that the operating temperature for most lithium-ion batteries is well below 60 degrees Celsius." >So this repair is made on anecdotal observation of ideal conditions, and disregarding factory specifications, and actual Tesla trained technicians. The context here is not "they're half-assing it because the system demand are minimal so they can". It's "this repair technique works just fine on real automotive cooling systems that are much more demanding". >If this was your car, and this damaged was caused by someone else's fault, would you want a hack fix, or it fixed to the manufactures specification? He Broke Telsa's car. Why don't you just be honest and say "if money was not object because it wasn't your money"? That's all your hypothetical situation changes. Most people's answer is going to be along the lines of "sure I'll take a free battery but if the hose barb is functionally equivalent and gets me my car a week sooner than it'll depend on how badly I want the car back"
- STRML 5y ago
  These engineers are actual ex-Tesla technicians, so it's a bit more than half-assing it.
  - lugged 5y ago
    Until it isn't. The attitude about this seems reminiscent of that cable snap in Italy recently. https://youtu.be/uCB1xbkn1Ps https://youtu.be/uCB1xbkn1Ps And I'm one that is for right to repair, I just don't think it holds up for the lease scenario, I expect my repairs to be done to manufacturers spec and would be concerned about any mechanic for any make making "half arsed" repairs.
    - ashtonkem 5y ago
      There’s a big gulf between “we’re using a common technique that’s regularly used in engines, even though it’s not OEM spec for this specific area” and “we’ve disabled an emergency safety system because it’s not working right”. Trying to equate the two is very disingenuous.
      - lugged 5y ago
        They didn't disable it because it wasn't working right. They disabled it because they thought they knew better and that the cable would never fail in the way they thought it would. Spoiler: it didn't. But: it did in a completely different way they were not aware was possible. I'm sorry you couldn't see the similarity. Obviously it is a less likely to cause ten deaths scenario, but how do you know it won't?
        ashtonkem 5y ago
        Again, there is a difference between fixing a non-safety critical system in a non-spec but commonly used way, and completely disabling a safety system. If they were disabling this car’s airbags or ABS to solve a different issue, this would be a good comparison. But they’re just not the same at all.
Spooky23 5y ago
How do you know what the specifications are, as Tesla flaunts the law and doesn’t publish them? Given the many examples of poor build quality with Tesla cars, it’s laughable to make some sort of case that any third party part doesn’t meet some standards that nobody can see. I have leased many cars in my lifetime, and never used anything but the cheapest parts available for out of warranty parts. Federal law allows you to use a third party part.
- perl4ever 5y ago
  >Tesla flaunts the law They flaunt it when they flout the law.
- Meph504 5y ago
  Firstly, did you read the article, this isn't a replacement part, its a hack job, look at the pictures, read what they did, this isn't about 3rd party part, this is a service, and a poor one. Additionally, the terms of your lease, dictate how maintenance is done, and if third party parts are allowed. Magnuson-Moss act is likely what you are talking about, which wouldn't apply here, firstly because it only applies to warranty claims, and voiding warranties it wouldn't play a role here, additionally because Tesla owns the car, this person is just renting it it has no barring.
  - bserge 5y ago
    Oof, you'd have a heart attack if you knew what mechanics regularly do to "normal" cars. But yeah, it's the lease contract dictating things. Read your contracts carefully kids, they're often designed to screw you over and (sadly) rarely negotiable.
gameswithgo 5y ago
As someone who has a great deal of experience working on high performance cars and racing them, I feel your characterization of this fix as a “hack” is ridiculous. People do more questionable fixes and ferraris and lambos regularly.
- stjohnswarts 5y ago
  Yeah some people can't think outside the box though. Probably not worth arguing with them. Nothing short of a Tesla engineering team coming out to inspect it will they be happy.
- Meph504 5y ago
  Do you rent most of them? Because that is the crux of matter, if the guy owned the car, hell I'm all for them doing what they want, and fixing how they choose, and I think Telsa should legally be required to provide the manuals, software, and within reason make the parts available. But this case is, that the guy is renting the car, and Tesla wants him to fix to their standards, and he's trying to pass of this fix, which you have to admit is questionably, and they didn't agree to it. In this case, I'm not sure how right to repair would make any difference. And when your motor is going to only last 30k miles, you can probably get away with a lot more, as opposed to a fix that is expected to last 200-300k.
  - CRConrad 5y ago
    > But this case is, that the guy is renting the car, and Tesla wants him to fix to their standards If Tesla the manufacturer charges twenty times more for a repair, it's certainly reasonable to check other alternatives first. If Tesla the leasor insists that repairs must be done by Tesla the manufacturer, then it seems only fair and equitable that the leasor pays the 1,900 % excess charge to the manufacturer. (It's not as if they'll be that much out of pocket anyway.)
    - Meph504 5y ago
      If the terms of the lease dictate that Tesla get final say and he signed it. I don't really see how this has anything to do with right to repair, and is a contract dispute, one the renter won't likely have a leg to stand on.

sumedh 5y ago

> and disregarding factory specifications Does Tesla share those specifications, if they dont share it, can you really blame third party repair?

rdtwo 5y ago
Even for aerospace you can use equivalent or stronger parts for repair. You can even reverse engineer part capability and build a stronger part

throwaway0a5e 5y ago

>because of terminology like this "Electrified Garage also notes that the cooling system doesn't get anywhere near as hot as an internal combustion engine, and it's not likely that it would either, given that the operating temperature for most lithium-ion batteries is well below 60 degrees Celsius." >So this repair is made on anecdotal observation of ideal conditions, and disregarding factory specifications, and actual Tesla trained technicians. The context here is not "they're half-assing it because the system demand are minimal so they can". It's "this repair technique works just fine on real automotive cooling systems that are much more demanding". >If this was your car, and this damaged was caused by someone else's fault, would you want a hack fix, or it fixed to the manufactures specification? He Broke Telsa's car. Why don't you just be honest and say "if money was not object because it wasn't your money"? That's all your hypothetical situation changes. Most people's answer is going to be along the lines of "sure I'll take a free battery but if the hose barb is functionally equivalent and gets me my car a week sooner than it'll depend on how badly I want the car back"

STRML 5y ago
These engineers are actual ex-Tesla technicians, so it's a bit more than half-assing it.
- lugged 5y ago
  Until it isn't. The attitude about this seems reminiscent of that cable snap in Italy recently. https://youtu.be/uCB1xbkn1Ps https://youtu.be/uCB1xbkn1Ps And I'm one that is for right to repair, I just don't think it holds up for the lease scenario, I expect my repairs to be done to manufacturers spec and would be concerned about any mechanic for any make making "half arsed" repairs.
  - ashtonkem 5y ago
    There’s a big gulf between “we’re using a common technique that’s regularly used in engines, even though it’s not OEM spec for this specific area” and “we’ve disabled an emergency safety system because it’s not working right”. Trying to equate the two is very disingenuous.
    - lugged 5y ago
      They didn't disable it because it wasn't working right. They disabled it because they thought they knew better and that the cable would never fail in the way they thought it would. Spoiler: it didn't. But: it did in a completely different way they were not aware was possible. I'm sorry you couldn't see the similarity. Obviously it is a less likely to cause ten deaths scenario, but how do you know it won't?
      - ashtonkem 5y ago
        Again, there is a difference between fixing a non-safety critical system in a non-spec but commonly used way, and completely disabling a safety system. If they were disabling this car’s airbags or ABS to solve a different issue, this would be a good comparison. But they’re just not the same at all.

Spooky23 5y ago

How do you know what the specifications are, as Tesla flaunts the law and doesn’t publish them? Given the many examples of poor build quality with Tesla cars, it’s laughable to make some sort of case that any third party part doesn’t meet some standards that nobody can see. I have leased many cars in my lifetime, and never used anything but the cheapest parts available for out of warranty parts. Federal law allows you to use a third party part.

perl4ever 5y ago
>Tesla flaunts the law They flaunt it when they flout the law.
Meph504 5y ago
Firstly, did you read the article, this isn't a replacement part, its a hack job, look at the pictures, read what they did, this isn't about 3rd party part, this is a service, and a poor one. Additionally, the terms of your lease, dictate how maintenance is done, and if third party parts are allowed. Magnuson-Moss act is likely what you are talking about, which wouldn't apply here, firstly because it only applies to warranty claims, and voiding warranties it wouldn't play a role here, additionally because Tesla owns the car, this person is just renting it it has no barring.
- bserge 5y ago
  Oof, you'd have a heart attack if you knew what mechanics regularly do to "normal" cars. But yeah, it's the lease contract dictating things. Read your contracts carefully kids, they're often designed to screw you over and (sadly) rarely negotiable.

gameswithgo 5y ago

As someone who has a great deal of experience working on high performance cars and racing them, I feel your characterization of this fix as a “hack” is ridiculous. People do more questionable fixes and ferraris and lambos regularly.

stjohnswarts 5y ago
Yeah some people can't think outside the box though. Probably not worth arguing with them. Nothing short of a Tesla engineering team coming out to inspect it will they be happy.
Meph504 5y ago
Do you rent most of them? Because that is the crux of matter, if the guy owned the car, hell I'm all for them doing what they want, and fixing how they choose, and I think Telsa should legally be required to provide the manuals, software, and within reason make the parts available. But this case is, that the guy is renting the car, and Tesla wants him to fix to their standards, and he's trying to pass of this fix, which you have to admit is questionably, and they didn't agree to it. In this case, I'm not sure how right to repair would make any difference. And when your motor is going to only last 30k miles, you can probably get away with a lot more, as opposed to a fix that is expected to last 200-300k.
- CRConrad 5y ago
  > But this case is, that the guy is renting the car, and Tesla wants him to fix to their standards If Tesla the manufacturer charges twenty times more for a repair, it's certainly reasonable to check other alternatives first. If Tesla the leasor insists that repairs must be done by Tesla the manufacturer, then it seems only fair and equitable that the leasor pays the 1,900 % excess charge to the manufacturer. (It's not as if they'll be that much out of pocket anyway.)
  - Meph504 5y ago
    If the terms of the lease dictate that Tesla get final say and he signed it. I don't really see how this has anything to do with right to repair, and is a contract dispute, one the renter won't likely have a leg to stand on.