22 ms·
Elon Musk calls NYT review of the Tesla Model S ‘fake,’ citing vehicle log data
- cryptoz 14y agoThis morning would have been a wonderful time to buy stock. TSLA was way down (due to this review?) and earnings are coming up soon. This makes me wonder if the NYTimes or this reporter had some ulterior motive; a conspiracy to discredit Tesla? A personal vendetta? Why would a reporter lie about the test?
- jstalin 14y agoA negative review would get a lot more attention than a positive one.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- avar 14y agoThere's probably a much simpler explanation: That automotive journalists are really lazy, have a story in mind before they ever drive the car in question, routinely do stuff like this, and are only being called out now because of black boxes being embedded into some newer cars such as Tesla's.
- jonknee 14y agoHe was not an automobile journalist, which is probably why it reads like he has no concept of how cars work or that planning a trip to test a car's theoretical range limit in winter is a poor way to review a car. John Broder is on the "Green" beat: http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/people/b/john_m_broder/index.html http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/peopl...
- cma 14y agoA positive review of something that is already Motortrend's Car of the Year would draw about zero views. A made up ordeal could draw millions (I've seen it posted all over the place). If the detour was really long, hopefully the NYT will get sued. If the car wasn't fully charged by the reviewer it will be much harder to prove.
- cjbprime 14y agoStock prices usually go down on extremely-hyped stocks just before earnings; I'm not sure the review had much to do with it. > Why would a reporter lie about the test? To get a story that's more interesting than "I tried this car and it was good".
- Thrymr 14y ago>> Why would a reporter lie about the test? > To get a story that's more interesting than "I tried this car and it was good". And because it fit the reporter's expectation of what would have happened, without having to bother with actually following through with the experiment.
- jlgreco 14y agoIt seems from the article he did perform the experiment, but lied about his procedure. He drove further than he claimed to, and didn't fill the battery as he claimed to. Why he would bother to do that instead of simply lie, I don't know.
- Thrymr 14y agoI agree, I would be surprised if the reporter did make it up completely. His description is quite detailed, and it would be a bizarre thing to do, especially for someone writing for the NY Times. But such bizarre things have happened. I will be interested to see the purported data. It may in fact turn out to be a relatively minor omission. I hope we'll see.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- scrabble 14y agoThe first thing I wondered upon seeing this story was whether or not the author was on the take with the oil or automotive industry. Is he paid to give talks at conferences? Or to speak at insider company events?
- adventured 14y agoOnly if you're planning to flip it for a short term gain and are willing to gamble on earnings being good. You'll be able to get it for $25 to $30 / share within the next 18 months. Save your money, bide your time. If we're just talking historical analysis (assuming you have no special knowledge of Tesla earnings etc), it's rarely a good idea to buy near the 52 week high, on top of being at its all time high, much less on top of a stock market near all time highs. Tesla is so volatile it's almost guaranteed to fall back to earth and provide a far cheaper buying entry point. The stock price is completely unsupported by earnings, meaning it's completely driven - without a buffer - by the typically manic mood swings of investors. Let the investors running Tesla up, swing to depressed and buy it far cheaper. Or to put it another way, wait until the herd is fearful and then be greedy.
- baggachipz 14y agoSounds like somebody is advocating a short!
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- mtgx 14y agoIf this is true, then he should sue NYT or the author, unless the author admits it's true in another article. I've heard quite a few random people use the NYT article as an argument against Tesla/electric cars, and I think that article can have long term negative impact on electric cars (even if it won't be a complete deal-breaker for electric cars). So he needs to either get them to admit the review was not accurate, or sue them.
- jlgreco 14y agoDidn't Tesla sue Top Gear for basically the same thing? I recall that didn't turn out well for Tesla, though perhaps the fact that Top Gear is widely recognized as being entertainment not serious journalism had something to do with that.
- eli 14y agoI don't know if their seriousness played into it. My understanding is that the judge ruled, essentially, that Top Gear was correct when they spoke about the car having extremely limited range when driven on their race track and that no reasonable person would confuse range on a racetrack with regular driving. (And IANAL, but the UK is somewhat infamous for its plaintiff-friendly libel laws.)
- jlgreco 14y agoMy impression was that the 'seriousness' came into play because they did not merely claim that the car had poor range on a track, but that it ran out of juice while they were testing it, which was not the case. Making untrue statements to make a true point about a limitation of the car was permissible since nobody reasonably expects anything else of Top Gear. I doubt a "serious" publication can get away with that sort of thing though. I'm a fan of both Tesla and Top Gear, and Tesla's complaints about Top Gear always seemed a bit daft to me. That is mostly because of who Top Gear is though.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- Eliezer 14y agoNaturally, on any occasion when it is actually possible to check a journalistic report against reality, the journalist will turn out to be lying. This is not absolutely universally true, but it is impossible to appreciate just how often it is true until you have been reported-on in a case where you know the facts yourself. tl;dr of course they're lying, it's easier to make stuff up then investigate so why wouldn't a reporter always just lie?
- jseliger 14y ago>Naturally, on any occasion when it is actually possible to check a journalistic report against reality, the journalist will turn out to be lying I don't think this is true "on any occasion"; that journalistic lying is news indicates that it rarely happens or rarely is caught. I think it's possible to see this as an example of a problem with this individual journalist, or with the culture of journalism, without assuming "the journalist will turn out to be lying" in all circumstances.
- btilly 14y agoYou miss three important factors. The first is that few are in a position to prove journalistic lies. The second is that journalists do not like pushing reporting on other journalists lying because they are outing people they know, and they may get the same treatment some day. The third (and in some ways most important) is that since the rise of the "blogosphere" in recent years, facts have become much less important. (Why? Because if you report something wrong you get clicks, then you publish a retraction and get clicks, then you can do a puff piece about "how could this happen" and get more clicks. Bingo, you earned ad dollars 3x when fact checking would have earned you nothing. What incentive, then, is there to fact check?) Therefore there is an erosion of standards which means that we should expect lying to go up over time. My sister was famous back in "the good old days" of the 80s, back when media actually cared about its reputation. Even then it was a good idea to assume journalists were lying slime. Today I firmly believe that it is much worse. If you are a blogger and disagree, then tell me this. How much of a fact check did your last 5 stories get beyond, "Can I find someone else saying this?"
- cs702 14y agoI love this: Musk has promised to respond publicly to the negative NY Times review WITH DATA FROM THE CAR directly contradicting the assertions in the review. From now on, reviewers will be extremely careful about exaggerating the negatives of, or lying about, Tesla vehicles.
- TylerE 14y agoThis is also a good way to never get positive press coverage ever again.
- jonknee 14y agoHaving the most respected news organization in the world apologize for lying in its review of your vehicle will not harm your future press coverage. If anything it will ensure others take a more rigorous fact checking process in the future.
- prawks 14y agoThis is, of course, if Musk is correct and the NYT is indeed lying. If he can't prove it, I'd agree with TylerE.
- cremnob 14y agoAnd if Elon fails to actually prove this reporter lied/fabricated the review and just waffles, the NYT is going to skewer Tesla in their response and this story will get much more legs than if they had just ignored the review.
- nlh 14y agoI dunno - do you really think auto reviewers are all a same-think cabal who hold grudges on each other's behalf? I've met a bunch, and I don't think that's correct. Most are out to ... drumroll ... write reviews. If Tesla puts out a good product, they'll get good reviews.
- jonknee 14y agoIt was a bizarre piece, especially for the NY Times. It read like someone who got a car that had a 30MPG sticker on the window, put in exactly 10 gallons of gas and planned a trip of exactly 300 miles. In the snow. Any normal person wouldn't have even been in that situation, but the reporter then proceeded to use every opportunity to double down on his bad choices. Tucked towards the end was a note about how the mileage estimate is indeed an estimate and that cold weather (or hot!) among other things can affect milage. Shocker. Now finding out that the facts may not have been represented is even more curious.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- jonknee 14y ago> Why didn't he use the mobile charger overnight, or at a public charging station while he stopped in NYC? Because then his expose would have been, "Great road trip, no problems."
- Thrymr 14y agoTo be fair, the reporter did leave a margin of error. He may not have understood the uncertainty in the mileage estimates, but he wasn't planning things to the mile. It doesn't seem unreasonable for him to have believed that a range greater than the distance planned by a factor of 2 was safe before parking the car overnight.
- taylorbuley 14y agoForgetting to turn off the tape recorder: classic journalism trick.
- lotso 14y agoEven if the reporter fabricated parts of the story, aren't the concerns about driving in cold weather still relevant? Any Tesla owners want to weigh in?
- jonknee 14y agoNo more so than the concerns of driving in warm weather (AC uses electricity). You get less than optimal mileage in less than optimal conditions. This is true for any vehicle. My gas powered car jumps around on its range calculation too.
- marvin 14y agoAs a Norwegian and Tesla investor, I must admit I'm a bit worried by this story. Isn't range also affected by the batteries performing worse in cold weather? If this effect is worse than Tesla had anticipated (weather this cold is routine where I live, Norway, and this is slated to become the second biggest Model S market after the US), I am worried that they might have missed other things as well. Tesla is located in California. It's a really hot and really dry climate. How about cabin fogging and moisture? How about the #1 killer of cars in wet and icy climates, rust? It seems elementary, and it should be. But like I said, I must admit I'm a bit worried.
- rayiner 14y agoRoad salt, etc. I'm rooting for Tesla, but it would be a hilarious testament to Californian hubris if the Model S was undone by failure to consider the fact that other places have weather.
- vilda 14y agoBatteries heats up during discharge. I wouldn't worry about that. Starting a gasoline engine in cold is a different story - there, the battery is required to provide energy far above their normal working conditions.
- analyst74 14y agoAccording to an owner's report(1), driving Nissan Leaf in cold winter (Canada) with aggressive heating reduces its range to about half of its claimed 160km optimal range. 1, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/green-driving/news-and-notes/living-with-the-leaf-part-3-fuel-bills-and-range-anxiety/article552460/?page=all http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-drive/green-driving/new...
- cjensen 14y agoNYT takes facts seriously and they issue written corrections for even the most trivial inaccuracies. If the allegations by Musk are true, the article's author will be looking for a new job soon.
- lclarkmichalek 14y agoThat's good, as according to everyone in this thread, all journalists do is lie and every action they take is malicious.
- Ygg2 14y agoI had experience with journalist and they don't so much as lie as much as they "enhance the truth". Like your battery was lowish on cold weather but you still got there, but in your journal you write "Battery took cold badly and I was unsure if it would get there with the charge I had. By grace of gods and not Tesla I managed to get there". Compare that sentence to this "Battery worked below optimal when weather was below freezing, but I still got where I wanted." Which one sounds more appealing to general public? Which one is more sensational. TL;DR http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1623#comic http://www.smbc-comics.com/index.php?db=comics&id=1623#c...
- arjie 14y agoExperience shows that this is a myth. Judith Miller was peddling rubbish for months (years, according to Salon.com) before she was stopped. The NYT isn't special and belief that it is so is dangerous.
- abat 14y agoThe thing about product reviews in mainstream publications like the NYTimes, is that their goal isn't just to tell you how good the product is. Most of the readers aren't actually on the market for a Tesla, they just want to be entertained and feel like they learned something new. To reach these casual readers, the reviews really need to be narrative stories. "Range anxiety" makes for a very good narrative because it adds a layer of suspense (ie "will he make it?"), so it makes sense that the reviewer would have a motive for faking the review even if his goal isn't to hurt Tesla. That being said I have no idea if the allegations are true and am eagerly awaiting Tesla's full blog post with evidence.
- michael_miller 14y agoI'm skeptical of Musk's claim that the review was fabricated. What motive would the author have to fake the review? He would lose all of his credibility as a reporter, essentially killing his carer if anyone found out. Seems like a really high price to pay. That said, Musk also has a lot to lose by calling out a reporter for fabricating data. It's a pretty serious allegation, and he could get into hot water over it. Therefore, my intuition is that either: 1) Musk is not reading the data correctly, missing some important details, or 2) The data was recorded incorrectly by the car. My bets are on (2).
- el_cuadrado 14y agoAccording to this logic, reporters should not lie about anything. Unfortunately, this phrase: "lose all of his credibility as a reporter" is already an oxymoron.
- stdgy 14y agoI'm not particularly optimistic about modern journalistic integrity, but the New York Times is a far cry from being a 'TMZ'. They're an organization I respect and trust, and I suspect I'm not alone. I'll be very upset if the data clearly supports Musk's claims.
- yajoe 14y agoApparently lying or exaggerating is common in 'journalism.' Probably based on our desire to weave narratives. I don't disagree with you or know anything about this case, but let me provide an anecdote where (1) seems more likely despite the abundance of attention, reputation, and high stakes (I just read this on plane yesterday by coincidence): http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323951904578290341604113984.html http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142412788732395190457829... Context on cultural significance: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Cold_Blood http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In_Cold_Blood
- nlh 14y agoI have absolutely no idea what the facts of this case are - BUT - to your point, an author's motive to "enhance" his reporting a very simple: It makes for a more interesting story. A more interesting story gets more views, more people talk about it, and it enhances the (perceived) reputation of the reporter. Also, as much as it pains me to say it, there's precedence for this sort of thing. Simply put: reporters make shit up from time to time. Again, however, I have absolutely no idea who's right/wrong here and won't make a single assumption until the facts are out.
- smackfu 14y agoThe main thrust of the article seemed to be that Tesla's charging stations aren't sufficient in the Northeast, being almost at max range apart. I doubt even Musk would disagree with that.
- jonknee 14y agoNo, the crux was that this car is useless because Tesla's charging stations are sufficient in the Northeast and that the car doesn't have the range that it should and that if you get this car it will leave you stranded. Tesla has just started making their charging network so of course it's not sufficient in the Northeast, it's not sufficient anywhere. It's also not intended to be the sole supplier of electricity for your car, and the indented use of a Tesla vehicle is not long road trips. Most people will leave their home every day with a full charge and arrive home at night with almost a full charge.
- srlake 14y agoI'm impressed that he doesn't hesitate to call out the NY Times. Musk clearly doesn't care about politics or tiptoeing around sensitive issues.
- natural219 14y agoThe length of the detour really matters here. Even if Tesla's claims were true, unless there was truly malicious reporting going on, I think even this kind of basic negligence is still a valid point against the Model S. Consumers might forget to charge their car properly, or not take into account detours/pitstops when planning for the Model S's range. Note -- I absolutely love Tesla and I can't wait for them to prove everyone wrong, but that still doesn't make the initial claim entirely invalid. I want to see the data before I make conclusions.
- rthomas6 14y agoI don't really see how this is different than forgetting to put gas in a car, other than the larger amount of time it takes to charge a Tesla.
- codex 14y agoIt is different, because range can change depending on external factors you have no control over. You can charge the car thinking you have 300 miles of range, and you do. Then you make the same trip again, but an overnight frost takes a huge chunk of that away from you, and now you can't make it back. That's the apparent situation, anyway. It won't happen often but can happen in special situations: ski trips, having to park your car outside due to lack of indoor spots, an extra day in the airport parking lot, etc.
- jessaustin 14y agoIt's different because when you realize your mistake with a gasoline engine, as long as you aren't driving in eastern Utah or some similar remote location, you can easily stop at any one of thousands of convenient gas stations to correct your error. Perhaps that will be true someday for Tesla, but it isn't today.
- dublinben 14y ago>other than the larger amount of time it takes to charge a Tesla That's exactly what they said. You can (slowly) charge a Tesla at any electrical outlet.
- kmfrk 14y agoIf anyone even doubts whether the NYT are going to respond to this (of course they are), you can ping their public editor @sulliview, who's an immense treasure to the paper. She'll report on it, no doubt.
- Zimahl 14y agoTesla blog coming soon detailing what actually happened on Broder’s NYTimes “range test”. Also lining up other journalists to do same drive. I'm not a journalist but I would be more than happy to test drive and do a write-up! I would think it would be pretty easy to find 1000 journalists willing to do this.
- eli 14y agoTesla previously accused BBC's Top Gear of airing a "phony" review and sued them. The case was thrown out by a judge who ruled that the review was essentially true and that no reasonable person would draw untrue conclusions from it. (my words) I haven't read every last word on the case, but it seems to me that Top Gear gave Tesla a very harsh review... but that they didn't cheat or do anything really wrong. IMHO, I would at least give the NYTimes a chance to respond before jumping to any conclusions. Top Gear's take on the lawsuit: http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/04/02/tesla-vs-top-gear-andy-wilman-on-our-current-legal-action/ http://transmission.blogs.topgear.com/2011/04/02/tesla-vs-to... Tesla's reply: http://www.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/how-we-see-it-top-gear-lawsuit http://www.teslamotors.com/forum/forums/how-we-see-it-top-ge... Article on case being thrown out for a second time: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/feb/23/top-gear-libel-case-tesla-struck-out http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/feb/23/top-gear-libel-c...
- smackfu 14y agoAnd that's with the UK libel laws, which wikipedia describes as: "English defamation law puts the burden of proof on the defendant, rather than the plaintiff, and is considered an impediment to free speech in much of the developed world. "
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- ImprovedSilence 14y agoI like Tesla, and wish them really well, but it's TOP GEAR... I love Top Gear, but to expect any sort of honest, unbiased, and completely factual review from them is madness in the first place. That's really what makes the show so great is that it is nothing but jokes. The only thing in it though, is that there's a little bit of truth behind every funny joke...
- Jamiecon 14y agoAgreed. I love Tesla. I'm really excited by what they're doing, and have nothing but admiration for Elon Musk. However, Top Gear have made their reputation winding people up. He was being pretty touchy by responding. Here's what I posted at the time: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2856821 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=2856821 Of course, only time will tell in the case of the NYT.
- dave1619 14y agoFor those interested, here's an interview with Elon Musk on CNBC this morning. He explains his reasoning pretty clearly. http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000147320 http://video.cnbc.com/gallery/?video=3000147320 I'm sure Elon Musk and Tesla are glad that they have the data logs for the trip. In my view, this is going to be key. All you need to do is compare the account by the journalist with the actual data and see where the discrepancies are. It might be too earlier to tell w/o looking at the data ourselves, by if I had to bet I'd bet on Elon/Tesla for this one.
- ricardobeat 14y agoWell said: "if you had a gas vehicle, filled the tank halfway, meandered through downtown manhattan, and then expected to reach your previous destination people would just think you're a fool"
- artursapek 14y agoraced to your previous destination
- revelation 14y agoSince the video player on their site is both Flash and not working for me, get the raw MP4 from here: http://pdl.iphone.cnbc.com/VCPS/Y2013/M02D11/3000147320/2ED3-CB-elonmusk0210_H264_720x405_30p_1M.mp4 http://pdl.iphone.cnbc.com/VCPS/Y2013/M02D11/3000147320/2ED3...
- imjk 14y agoIt's easy to write off Elon Musk's attacks on Top Gear and the NYT as an overzealous founder defending his company or as a savvy PR strategy against bad press, but you also have to keep in mind the number of parties that want to to see Tesla fail and the huge amount of influence they have, namely the oil and traditional auto industries. Most "revolutionary" companies come under similar resistance. I'm interested to see what facts Musk lays out. Also, it's interesting to note the archive of the article's author: http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b/john_m_broder/index.html http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/b.... Seems like he's a climate/energy specialist rather than an automobile specialist as I had assumed.
- vor_ 14y agoImplying that the the oil and auto industries have gotten to the NYT is a serious accusation. Incidentally, the NYT is sticking by its story and has called Musk's accusations "flatly untrue".
- smackfu 14y agoJalopnik has a response from the Times: "The Times's February 10 article recounting a reporter's test drive in a Tesla Model S was completely factual, describing the trip in detail exactly as it occurred. Any suggestion that the account was "fake" is, of course, flatly untrue. Our reporter followed the instructions he was given in multiple conversations with Tesla personnel. He described the entire drive in the story; there was no unreported detour. And he was never told to plug the car in overnight in cold weather, despite repeated contact with Tesla." http://jalopnik.com/elon-musk-super-pissed-about-new-york-times-tesla-range-128299695 http://jalopnik.com/elon-musk-super-pissed-about-new-york-ti...
- jonknee 14y agoFrom the land of common sense: http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts http://www.teslamotors.com/models/facts > Tesla recommends charging Model S each night or when convenient to maintain optimum driving range and battery health. If you go on vacation, plug in your Model S before you leave. The reporter is either an idiot or he wanted to become stranded.
- smackfu 14y agoThat doesn't make it seem like the charge should go down overnight, just that you should top it up whenever you can because the range is pretty limited.
- dublinben 14y agoI think it should be common knowledge among anyone reviewing an electric car that battery performance degrades in cold weather.
- toomuchtodo 14y agoAnd if you don't know this information, you have no business reviewing electric vehicles, because you clearly haven't done your homework.
- 14y ago
- mongol 14y agoThe review gave me the impression that the vehicle did not provide accurate (over a period of time) predictions of how much mileage was left. If that is the case, why should the vehicle logs be more accurate? If the car measures something wrong, the logs would reflect that.
- CamperBob2 14y agoPresumably the vehicle is logging its GPS position at regular intervals. That's a pretty uncontroversial thing to do. Then, the car uses the GPS mileage data alongside numerous other inputs to update its cruising range estimate based on what it thinks the batteries' current state of charge is. As anyone who has ever used a laptop or a cell phone knows, that is a far-from-solved problem.
- wcchandler 14y agoFTA: > "the tested Tesla was filmed being pushed into the shed in order to show what would happen if the Roadster had run out of charge." Is this true? Is there no "emergency portable charge kit" that one could haul to anyplace with electricity and get a quick charge, possibly good for ~15 miles? If not then I smell a business opportunity.
- ricardobeat 14y agoAFAIK every car comes with a portable charger that works from standard wall outlets. http://www.teslamotors.com/charging#/outlet http://www.teslamotors.com/charging#/outlet
- codex 14y agoWhat is it about Elon Musk's companies constantly suing people? Tesla sued Top Gear for libel. SpaceX sued a safety consultant asking clarification about a rumor [1]. Now this tiff may well end in a lawsuit. [1] http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/20/spacex_sues_consultant/print.html http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/06/20/spacex_sues_consulta...
- jlgreco 14y agoActually reading that article you link, that seems like a pretty massive mischaracterization of that lawsuit.
- codex 14y agoYeah, it's a bad article, but the best I could find. The article is slanted because the it only contains quotes from SpaceX, so you hear only one side of the story, with nothing from the defense. The case was settled.
- jlgreco 14y agoUnless there is absolutely no truth whatsoever to SpaceX's side of the story, that guy sounds like a major sleaze who deserved a lawsuit.
- neurotech1 14y agoSo how many lawsuits is that? 1 for SpaceX and 1 for Tesla... The SpaceX lawsuit seems justified, since it was basically extortion, as a thinly veiled consulting offer. SpaceX have real astronauts, with real experience, to advise them. This includes retired astronaut & shuttle commander Mark Kelly.
- mikec3k 14y agoI'm willing to bet that guy was paid off by an oil company.
- twoodfin 14y agoReally? I'll take that bet. Shall we say $1,000?
- solsenNet 14y agoI think we've proven that we don't need the East Coast for: the PC revolution, the Internet revolution and the Mobile revolution. They can sit out the electric car revolution as well... Who the hell wants to go to "Milford, Conn." anyways ;)
- tokenadult 14y agoFrom the update to the submitted article: "Update: A New York Times statement as reported by CNBC https://twitter.com/CNBC https://twitter.com/CNBC doesn’t mince its words: 'Jan. 10 article recounting a reporter’s test drive in a Tesla Model S was completely factual [...] Any suggestion that the account was "fake" is, of course, flatly untrue.'" Well, that joins issue directly with what Musk is claiming. Now it will be interesting to check the facts. Earlier Hacker News thread about the New York Times review: http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5191086 http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5191086 AFTER EDIT: I wonder if the reporter had a GPS-enabled tracking device on his person while he was doing the reporting? Maybe, maybe not, but that would be one more way to establish where the reporter (and, thus, presumptively the vehicle) was at different times during the test drive.
- revelation 14y agoThe car has a GPS on it, and (for owners) theres a REST API from Tesla that will relay its coordinates to you. I assume they are logging positions when logging is enabled.
- spikels 14y agoI used to take for granted that what I read in the NYT and learned from other highly regarded sources was factual and thoughtful. Then I read an articles about a subject I knew really, really well and the reporter got it completely wrong. Then it happened again and again. This made me worry about the quality of the information on subjects I don't know about. I began to realize that journalists are not experts in all things or sometimes even one thing. Instead they are usually simply good writers operating under tight deadlines. And their goal is to write pieces that attract the attention of readers not simply provide accurate information. Lastly they are humans who make mistakes and have biases. Take everything you read with a grain of salt. Think about how likely it is to be correct and not sensationalized or biased in some way. Check with others sources before you add what you read to your knowledge. The most dangerous thing is to think you know something that is either not known or wrong.
- ChuckMcM 14y agoChallenging thing. I agree the NYT article read like a hatchet job but still. Nobody likes having their baby called ugly, the response though could be a bit more measured. Looking forward to Tesla's log analysis and their take on the situation.
- krschultz 14y agoI went to school in Newark Delaware and lived in Groton Connecticut.It's a long drive. There is almost always traffic somewhere. I wouldn't expect an electric car to make it without a charge. I would usually fill up my gas tank twice. The fact that they made it close is great. The fact that the charging stations are that far apart sucks.
- vilda 14y agoThat's a chicken and egg problem. Electrical charging stations are far cheaper to build than gas stations. At least until there's enough electrical cars to require an upgrade of the whole infrastructure.
- jasonkolb 14y agoFrom the NYT: "[The reporter] was never told to plug the car in overnight in cold weather, despite repeated contact with Tesla." This sounds like a customer service failure to me.
- grecy 14y agoIf a person writing a car review were test-driving a brand new Ferrarri, and was in constant contact with customer service about something-or-other, do you think they'd tell them to fill up the gas tank? or drive carefully in snow? No. They would assume a person writing a car review is not an idiot and understands basic car concepts.
- friendly_chap 14y agoBut there are a lot more people familiar with gas based cars than electric cars.
- codex 14y agoIt's a bit disingeious of Musk to propose that journalists repeat this trip, knowing full well that the problems reported in the original article stem from cold weather. The weather on the East Coast is getting warmer by the day. It is almost spring. Even if Tesla can tell each journalist to stop charging at Norwich at the same point they did originally (assuming they can determine that reliably), the battery state at that point, and going forward, will be different because of the weather. The sensationalist part of this review is the bricking of the car. This happens shortly after the reporter claims that "after an hour they (Tesla) cleared me to resume the trip to Milford." So, any detour is only meaningful to the outcome of this review if it occurs after this clearance, because at that point Tesla HQ knows what the range of the car should be, and whether or not he will make it, and when to tell him to stop charging. Milford is a straight shot from Norwich. If a detour did occur in this critical period, it would reflect very badly on the author.
- joering2 14y agohmmm lets see: a journalist of media behemoth that major stake is in hands of the same people that have stakes in gasoline car manufacturers drafted a negative review for a company with a product that may forever shift the way we drive cars and how much we spend for this privilege... > Tesla Model S was completely factual [...] Any suggestion that the account was ‘fake’ is, of course, flatly untrue.” Yes of course, CNBC never lied in the entire history of a written word! [1]. Also, my memory ma not serve well, but weren't the CNBC journalist send to take photos from camps in Afganistan and when it turned out that there were no camps, they found some fence and faked the story of a reporter being inside the "camp" by taking photos through said fence? [1] http://www.imediaethics.org/News/3061/Cnbc_corrects__apologizes_for_fake_2011_story_about_nba_lockout___escorts.php http://www.imediaethics.org/News/3061/Cnbc_corrects__apologi...
- salimmadjd 14y agoHorrible reporting by TNW! Musk claims, "NYTimes article about Tesla range in cold is fake. Vehicle logs tell true story that he didn't actually charge to max & took a long detour" If you read the NYT, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highway.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the... The reporter doesn't claim he had charged the battery fully in all occasions. He states how long he charged the car for and what the milage indicator provided. I can argue Musk is trying to get ahead of the story and create doubt among potential buyers about the veracity of the story. That's all he needs to do. Basically, Tesla will probably come out with data that shows the battery was not fully charged and hence why lower milage. However, the reporter says he only charged the car for the distance he thought he needed. Therefore, Tesla will be a head of the story and the headlines his PR will create is that the car was not fully charged. And most people, including readers of this site, will not do further investigation. Rest assure those who are still considering buying a Tesla will buy it not knowing if the battery might have a temperature range issue.
- newman314 14y agoI'm looking at this from a different angle. Based on what I read from this article [1], Tesla is able to send data from a car back to the factory and on at least one occasion has done so without the permission and knowledge of the owner. "In at least one case, Tesla went even further. The Tesla service manager admitted that, unable to contact an owner by phone, Tesla remotely activated a dying vehicle’s GPS to determine its location and then dispatched Tesla staff to go there. It is not clear if Tesla had obtained this owner’s consent to allow this tracking5, or if the owner is even aware that his vehicle had been tracked. Further, the service manager acknowledged that this use of tracking was not something they generally tell customers about." "There appears to be no reference to Tesla having the ability to track a vehicle’s location at its discretion in either the data recording section of the Roadster Owners Manual [Page 1-2, Column 2: PDF] or the addendum that covers the GSM connection [Page 9: PDF] " AFAIK, Tesla has never addressed this publicly. [1] http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-tesla-motors-devastating-design http://theunderstatement.com/post/18030062041/its-a-brick-te...
- jessaustin 14y agoI agree this is troubling, but sadly I don't think it will be much longer until most of us submit to this sort of monitoring by our insurance companies.
- Vinnix 14y agoYeah I met an owner of one of these and not a single problem was with it...As enthusiasts we read articles to know about what makes something great. FWIW, NYT is the last place I would go for a good car review ;)
- Lazare 14y agoTesla really does themselves no favours by their confrontational stance with the media. I hope - for their sakes - they are on stronger ground here than they were with their embarrassing lawsuit against the BBC. Backstory: The BBC show Top Gear reviewed a Tesla, and gave it a glowing review, but noted that it was very expensive, that it would only last 55 miles if driven hard on a race track, that the brakes broke once during testing, that if you run out of charge you'd have to push it, and that at one point it overheated and suffered reduced performance. Tesla hit the ceiling and sued for libel over every negative comment in the review. But as even they eventually admitted, every single claim was absolutely true, and a judge threw the lawsuit out as completely groundless. Tesla's argument was that it may have been true, but it was misleading, but even in Britain the truth is an absolute defence for libel, as 30 seconds with Google would have told them. Now they're going after another news organisation, again claiming that a review contained lies. If they can't substantiate this one either, they're going to look like idiots.
- hristov 14y agoTop Gear did not use the truth as a defense. On the contrary the judge ruled that the truth did not matter. In other words the judge ruled that Tesla would not be entitled to win even if Top Gear had lied. The case never got to the fact finding stage. Tesla did have evidence that Top Gear lied -- the car had never run out of charge, even though Top Gear said it did. But the case never got to the stage where Tesla would present this evidence.
- jusben1369 14y agoI admire Musk and love what he's doing in general. I think he's an inspirational entrepreneur. It makes sense that he's defending his company. Having said that I think this is an interesting tack to take. Firstly, this is the New York Times. I'm sure they take their integrity pretty seriously. Secondly, Musk has sued before so that would make them particularly sensitive to ensuring that they got their facts and figures correct if they're going to post a negative article. Thirdly, I'm not sure how much of an argument Musk is really mounting here. There are still a bunch of charges left unaddressed. That the charge dissipated much faster than it was telling the driver. That cutting things like heating and speed were solutions? That it didn't have a sufficient charge to unlock a handbrake etc. Why does this matter? Well, we all know Tesla is a cutting edge technology. Those who buy that car understand that they're going to take on additional hardships and risks vs a gasoline vehicle. Culturally, what message is Musk sending by attacking the author and avoiding many of the issues raised? If you buy a Tesla and experience problems do you want a company that questions your honesty and integrity or one that says "Sounds like a horrible experience let's do everything on our power to fix it?"
- mncolinlee 14y agoThis is why range extenders will stay popular even as battery technology improves. In ten years' time, I predict that straight battery-only electric vehicles will cost less than the gasoline equivalent and be VERY popular as commuter vehicles because gasoline prices will be over $6/gallon (especially if we build the Keystone XL pipeline to send more oil overseas). One car in many households will likely require some kind of range extender, which increases the purchase and maintenance costs. There's a reason why SUVs are so rare in Europe: we've been spoiled by cheap gasoline in America.
- DigitalJack 14y agoHopefully we'll be on capacitors by then. Perhaps backed by a battery, in a similar fashion to some hybrids today having a battery backed by gas.
- gdeglin 14y agoThe NY Times article didn't pass the sniff test the first time I read it. If you look at the map on the article, it clearly shows that the writer chose not to charge in Manhattan when remaining range read 79 miles and destination was 73 miles away (he barely made it). Later he leaves Norwich after only charging the car up to 32 miles of range remaining while the destination is 68 miles away... No wonder he ran out and had to be towed after 51 miles. http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2013/02/10/automobiles/10tesla-map.html http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2013/02/10/automobiles/10t... Oddly, some of this data is conveniently excluded from the article. The writer claims Tesla cleared him to drive from Norwich to Milford (68 miles). But he fails to mention that at the time the car reported 32 miles of range remaining (As indicated in the data on the map). Something is very fishy here.
- danielweber 14y agoIt does seem colossally stupid to drive a 79+ mile trip when the meter says you only have 32 miles left. There are issues with how Tesla reports its charge and maintains it charge, but, seriously, why try a trip that the car is telling you you cannot make? (EDIT: and that's after the car has been over-reporting its range for you the whole time. What, did you think it suddenly flipped the way it makes mistakes??) ANOTHER EDIT: The writer says in his article: "after an hour they cleared me to resume the trip to Milford." The trip wasn't 79+ miles, it was about 46 + 11 miles. I wonder if it's going to be he-said-she-said about whether he was approved to make the drive.
- stcredzero 14y agoOur culture is badly broken. When "the social contract" for broad swathes of society is so little regarded that lying is a matter of course, then we have already reached worrying levels of dysfunction, of the sort that historians point out when they discuss the fall of the Roman Empire, Czarist Russia, or the USSR. A point all of those have in common: The denizens came to assume public information was false as a matter of course, as a time and sanity saving measure. Large swathes of our society think of lying, even when deceiving large swathes of the public, as a kind of sport, and profiting from such lying as a kind of serendipitous fortune to be exploited without conscience, like finding cash on the sidewalk. Such attitudes are shoved in my face when I see exclamations like, "Pictures or it didn't happen!" It's the same when big media corporations trade in innuendo and conspiracy theories and deliberately sabotage the dissemination of knowledge for their own ends. Such attitudes are so pervasive, that large swathes of the population actually disbelieve in any kind of objective truth, and accept mere social proof as its substitute and superior. It's entirely possible that the journalist in question is innocent of deception and only guilty of poor journalism and/or poor trip planning and/or insufficient UI design. However, the issue with the review and that of the social contract are entirely related. In a world where reality itself is relative and subject to social proof, there is no need to double check your facts or to prove the null hypothesis. In a world where science is just another fabricated self-serving belief system, there's no need to apply one's scientific literacy or application of physics learned in school when doing things like taking a car trip in winter. One only need know enough to read the dials and gauges to be a good consumer, then complain loudly if things do not go one's way. True competence, be it in programming or journalism or any significant endeavor, requires diligence with and prostration to the truth. Our society as a whole has forgotten this and our society as a whole is oblivious to the price it is paying as a consequence. Another way to think of it: Our society as a whole doesn't have the epistemological foundation needed for the level of technical sophistication it has.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- iyulaev 14y agoThere's an interesting thread from the Tesla Motors club, with lots of input from actual Tesla owners: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/13633-NYT-article-Stalled-on-the-EV-Highway/page1 http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/13633-NYT-arti... From actual Tesla owners, the performance seen by the NYT reporter appears to be par for the course. To date most all-electric vehicles have struggled in the cold. The Nissan Leaf has a terrible time of it, with the range decreased significantly. I was honestly excited to see how Tesla S card would fare in cold weather, and how the Tesla engineers got around this problem. Disappointingly it looks like they didn't, and (anecdotally) the problem may be even worse on the Tesla S than on the roadster or even the Leaf. Bummer. To everyone comparing the cold weather performance of the Tesla to an ICE: yes, ICEs do get harder to start and less efficient in the cold. But for an ICE, that kind of cold is significantly under 0 farenheit - most of the U.S. is at a low enough latitude that temperatures like this are rarely seen and modern ICE cars will start happily without the need for block heaters and other measures. The reporter had significant trouble at temperatures around 30F which even an air-cooled car from decades ago will shrug off. We're talking about maybe 10% of the population having to take special measures during especially cold times of the year (block heaters for temps < 0F) vs >50% of the population (plugging in overnight, every day, for temperatures <= 30F). HUGE difference Another blog post which sounds a bit more horrific than the NYT experience, although the Tesla owner really takes it with a good attitude: http://andwediditourway.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-not-so-ev-life.html http://andwediditourway.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/the-not-so-ev... Other interesting information gleaned from the thread - 120V is useless for electric cars, you really have to have a dedicated circuit for them. And did I mention they hate the cold? I'm rooting for Tesla and for electric cars. But I do wish they were rated to perform at lower temperatures, and that everyone (Tesla and reporters alike) was more transparent about this. I'd rather see a few people turned off on electric cars and the rest informed and trained with the care and feeding of the cars during winter, than to see people stranded out in the cold because they weren't aware of their cars' performance envelopes.
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- insaneirish 14y ago
- hakaaaaak 14y agoGood for Elon. Every CEO should stand up for his product like that.
- notdrunkatall 14y agoTesla needs to pay gas stations to install 220v receptacles and include an adapter kit with every Model S that will fit all of the common plugs out there. That's all there is to it. Consumers aren't going to want to buy these cars en masse if they're scared of being stranded somewhere, and they're going to be scared of being stranded somewhere if it's 100 miles either way to the nearest charging station, regardless of how much range the car has left. Are you reading this, Elon? Pay gas stations to install 220v receptacles, and map the locations of those stations onto your cars' GPS systems. Make the kit, and make a compartment for the kit. Make an announcement that you're going to start doing this, and start doing it NOW.
- kennethcwilbur 14y agoThis is silly. It's like buying a toaster and then complaining when it fails to make panini. You don't get an electric vehicle for the purpose of driving from DC to New York. I have always plugged my EV in on a 120 volt circuit. It gets about 50-60 miles of charge per night. My commute is 10 miles. The car is full every morning, no matter how cold it is. YMMV
- anona 14y agoBased on Tesla's past claims against Top Gear (that turned out in favor of Top Gear in court), I would give the NY Times the benefit of the doubt here. Especially since Tesla hasn't produced any evidence yet.
- hristov 14y agoThat court case does not mean as much as you think it does. Just because Top Gear won, does not mean that they were truthful. The judge merely said that even if Top Gear lied their lie would not be legally actionable.
- lectrick 14y agoI own a Chevy Volt and it gets about 20% less range in the ~32 degrees F temperatures we have around here in NYC environs right now.
- rtrunck 14y agoNYT says the author drove the first 114 miles in 84 minutes (~81 mph avg)....
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- ck2 14y agoI'm curious if a private owner tried to sue Tesla for range claims if Tesla would magically show up with the logging data for the customer. This will a be moot point with drones in the near future though, most vehicles will have a 24/7 travel log from the government, just like they track all phone calls domestically without warrants. It will be super easy for a cluster of drones to track every car from start to destination.
- bobsy 14y agoIs this a design problem with the Tesla? With my petrol car I know when the car is completely filled with fuel. It is obvious in Tesla? Pure speculation. This could be a UI problem. The journalist thought the car was charged and ready to go but it wasn't.
- ed_blackburn 14y agoIs it terribly smart picking fights with the media when you're in the consumer business. Good luck to him for taking it on.
- cardine 14y agoIf you are rich enough to own a Tesla, you probably also are rich enough to have a second car or to fly. I've been considering getting a Tesla, and long distance doesn't matter that much to me because I'd take a 2 hour flight over a 7 hour drive any day.
- martinced 14y agoI told you so right here on HN, just after the journalist posted his sensational article. This is all too common from car journalists: some of them will try to fake any test they can to try to harm the reputation of an upcoming car many people do believe in. I'm not saying that journalist did it: all I said is that you should always be suspicious of claims like that by journalists. Many of them are little attention whores so you have to read between the lines. And wait for more tests, counter-claims, car owners reports, etc. It's sad that the journalists (not this one specifically) lack integrity because you can never know if an article was honestly done or not (like in this case).
- Gravityloss 14y agoMaybe when Tesla becomes a more global brand, they'll start using heat pumps for heating. It takes some effort to make a car that works in different conditions. Some brands that might work great in Central Europe have bad reputation in cold climates. Failure to start, puny indoor heating power, door insulation freezing shut, water lodging in concave spots and freezing. It is common enough that it is probably a conscious strategic choice to just not test / fix it. Then again, locally built houses also often fail in the weather. I guess humans never learn.