3 ms·
The comparisons to the Leaf and Volt are meaningless if none of those vehicles have been in similar accidents. You can't just point to numbers and imply that a
by TillE 13y ago
The comparisons to the Leaf and Volt are meaningless if none of those vehicles have been in similar accidents. You can't just point to numbers and imply that a lack of reported fires means they're safer.
- deleted 13y ago[deleted]
- Pitarou 13y agoAre you suggesting that Leafs and Volts never collide with road debris?
- enraged_camel 13y agoI don't know how you can read the parent and conclude that they are suggesting that.
- danso 13y agoThis is what the parent says: > The comparisons to the Leaf and Volt are meaningless if none of those vehicles have been in similar accidents. You can't just point to numbers and imply that a lack of reported fires means they're safer. So...the question is...well, why should we assume that the problem is underreporting...that it's just Tesla's that are getting all the attention? That's not even true: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/business/tsunami-reveals-durability-of-nissans-leaf.html http://www.nytimes.com/2011/12/22/business/tsunami-reveals-d... > DETROIT — Nissan inadvertently gained some valuable insight into the durability of its electric car, the Leaf, when about two dozen of them were destroyed in the tsunami that ravaged Japan in March. > > None of the cars caught fire, and their batteries remained fully intact, shielded by an airtight steel exoskeleton and two other layers of protection that surround the 660-pound packs. “Considering how they were tossed around and crushed, we think that is a very good indication of the safety performance of that vehicle,” said Bob Yakushi, the director of product safety for Nissan North America. Nissan’s decision to encase the Leaf’s battery in steel may help explain why federal safety regulators investigating postcrash fire risks in the Chevrolet Volt do not have the same concerns about the Leaf. General Motors packages the Volt’s battery cells on a T-shaped steel tray with a plastic cover.
- Pitarou 13y agoI took "similar accidents" to mean "collisions with road debris", because that's what triggered both Tesla fires reported in the US.
- Natsu 13y agoThey might appear safer given the available evidence, but if it's a small enough difference, we will need more data to discern the difference with any reliability. We should expect more fires given enough time. I wonder for how many they will continue to report on every single one?
- rgbrenner 13y agotwo of the three fires were from objects hitting the underside of the car. Nissan Leaf has sold 3x more vehicles than Tesla. Are you saying that objects don't hit the underside of Leafs? (Perhaps they are repelled magically?) Or that objects are somehow more attracted to the underside of Teslas cars? Or the Leaf accidents don't count because the Leaf owners didn't file a report that nothing happened?
- bgilroy26 13y agoYour points make sense. The only factor is that Tesla gets a TON more media attention, so we're more likely to hear about it.
- vertis 13y agoI wonder whether it has something to do with the way you would drive a Tesla vs how you would drive a Volt/Leaf. I'm not saying that the Tesla is necessarily better performing, just that two different types of people are the likely owners. NB: Just pondering.
- mbreese 13y agoThis might just be the case, simply due to the extended range of the Tesla. Since you can commute farther, you're more likely to be on a highway in a Tesla. I haven't seen many Leafs on 101/280, but I see Teslas all the time. Since these are high-energy impacts, you'd have to be traveling at highway speed to have a damaging impact. It might be more interesting to compare how a similar car style would behave (think high performance sedans).
- ars_technician 13y agoexactly. People that own the nissans don't drive them because they suck. :-)