The Electric Vehicle Thread

[Montecfo]

I added a bit to my response. But the report still seems credible with lots of relevant details. And this was not just one complaint of course, there were thousands according to the piece. Which is why we are reading about it.

Most folks probably dislike having service appointments cancelled unilaterally. The customer should have a say in what is necessary.

That it would not matter to you is fine too. It is squarely in the arena for potential buyers.

 

[ken830]

Well sure. As long as each article which reports information you dislike can simply be dismissed.

I think folks in the market for Teslas, on the other hand, would care that Tesla "created a 'diversion team' to cancel range related appointments as possible" as the piece and several other sources state.

You can say it's dismissing, but read the headline: "Tesla created secret team to suppress thousands of driving range complaints" and then read the "article" and you'll see that the only thing in the headline that's actually supported by facts is the word, "Tesla."

Just try to quote something from the article that actually supports the headline. The "article" is about Tesla resolving service appointments. Service appointments are not "complaints." Service appointments are when a customer brings in a vehicle for repair/service. Bringing in a vehicle for a service appointment means something needs to be repaired or serviced -- Remote diagnostics can easily determine battery pack capacity. It's completely reasonable to resolve those without having a customer actually bring in a vehicle that doesn't actually have a defect or need for service.

Then like 90+% of the article is dedicated to falsely accusing Tesla of overstating their range, but Tesla simply runs the standard government-regulated range tests in each local jurisdiction and reports those. they don't claim any thing more and they don't nerf their numbers. The 5-cycle EPA test procedures and numbers can be easily re-produced by anyone... but you'll never see an "article" about it. Instead you'll see headlines like "Tesla range doesn't meet 'Real world' range"... well, duh! Tesla publishes EPA range... not some arbitrary range based on arbitrary unregulated test conditions. The car gives you real-world range in-car as you're driving... and the government provides real-world range on their fueleconomy.gov website (which I've linked to many, many times). There is nothing misleading or scandalous about Tesla's range numbers, but the "articles" never stop. It's been well over a decade, and it's always the same.

Then there are people that claim that it is impossible to achieve EPA range numbers, but I do it all the time driving at normal highway speeds (65-70mph). My lifetime efficiency is WELL above EPA at just under 200Wh/mile (back when I used to commute daily anyway).

 

[Montecfo]

The article appears well researched. Tesla has not rebutted it in any way as far as I know. Nor responded to detailed questions, which would be easy to do especially if it is false as you suggest.. So that says something right there.

There is a separate thread where you can go and avoid these discussions.

May I suggest that?

 

[joesxm3]

The article appears well researched. Tesla has not rebutted it in any way as far as I know. Nor responded to detailed questions, which would be easy to do especially if it is false as you suggest.. So that says something right there.

There is a separate thread where you can go and avoid these discussions.

May I suggest that?

I created the gas vehicle thread so you could go over there and spout how gas is superior to electric. Why don't you go hang out on that thread.

 

[Montecfo]

This thread is plainly for general discussion of EVs. In fact if you go back to the first post by Trombone Al, it was started for open discussion of EVs, not just views of EV enthusiasts. I discuss EVs here and also have participated in the gas vehicle thread. Thanks for doing that.

And now we have a second EV thread where and new vehicles and not pros/cons are to be discussed according to the imitial post. That seems perhaps a better place for people who prefer a more limited discussion.

There is also a general thread on PHEVs.

I think there is a thread for a wide variety of discussion types and topics. Something for everyone.

So not sure I see any issue with general discussion here.

 

[ken830]

The article appears well researched. Tesla has not rebutted it in any way as far as I know. Nor responded to detailed questions, which would be easy to do especially if it is false as you suggest.. So that says something right there.

There is a separate thread where you can go and avoid these discussions.

May I suggest that?

We can disagree on whether it appears to be "well researched," but Tesla not rebutting or responding to it does not "say something." In fact, Tesla used to rebut to false accusations mischaracterizations all the time.

They spent a lot of time writing blog posts explaining the range of the vehicles and the different factors that affect it -- being as transparent as possible: https://www.tesla.com/blog/driving-range-model-s-family

No better example than the infamous case with Top Gear faking running out of charge and falsely claiming it had less range. Tesla sued for libel and malicious falsehood, but the judge dismissed the case because they are "not capable of being defamatory at all, or, if it is, it is not capable of being a sufficiently serious defamatory meaning to constitute a real and substantial tort" and "as any reasonable motorist knows, a manufacturer's statement about the range of a motor vehicle is always qualified by a statement as to the driving conditions under which that range may be expected."

That was a decade ago. Tesla learned. Basically, you can say anything defamatory about Tesla vehicles' range as you want. Tesla can't do or say anything because "any reasonable motorist knows, a manufacturer's statement about the range of a motor vehicle is always qualified by a statement as to the driving conditions under which that range may be expected." Whatever you say can't be defamation to a "reasonable motorist" because, duh, it's obvious!!

 

[Mr. Tightwad]

This thread is plainly for general discussion of EVs. In fact if you go back to the first post by Trombone Al, it was started for open discussion of EVs, not just views of EV enthusiasts. I discuss EVs here and also have participated in the gas vehicle thread. Thanks for doing that.

And now we have a second EV thread where and new vehicles and not pros/cons are to be discussed according to the imitial post. That seems perhaps a better place for people who prefer a more limited discussion.

There is also a general thread on PHEVs.

I think there is a thread for a wide variety of discussion types and topics. Something for everyone.

So not sure I see any issue with general discussion here.

There is no issue with general discussion.

There is an issue with your obvious trolling.

 

[Cayman]

Let's take this thread in a positive direction. Thanks.

 

[Montecfo]

Perhaps a dedicated electric vehicle thread would help non EV enthusiasts avoid reading the holier-than-thou posts that EV owners write.

Yes, there are dedicated EV forums, but as with other topics, I've found that members here are both smarter and more even keeled than those on other places in the intergoogle.

Before we got our Tesla, I didn't expect we would make any super long trips because there would be too much charging time required. However, I've learned that supercharging can be very fast. It's fastest when the battery is lower, so by making more stops and charging less at each, you actually get to your destination faster.

Driving to Denver from the coast would require 23 hours of driving and 3 hours of charging. The longest charging stop would be 23 minutes. And charging could happen while eating or stretching legs. Here's what it would look like:

Above is the first post in this thread. That is why the thread was started.

Suggest we continue to have an open discussion in the spirit suggested in that post.

There are other threads for other discussions as noted.

 

[Aerides]

We are over 340 pages on EV's here, and a good 100+ is snark, one-up-manship, and disengenuous arguments on "both sides" of this political proxy war.

There is little "new" on the EV front these days. We are at the point of incremental improvements and changes, a little news here and there. New models, etc.

Still, there are many er.org members who wish to discuss EV's in good faith. There are those who still question them, also in good faith. Then there are those who seek only to dump on the idea, and those who will accept zero criticism on EV's. Who post the same arguments over and over, basically trolling.

And therein lies the issue for the ER.org team: The arguments between those most for, and most against, become distasteful to a plurality of members. We get more member reports about this thread than any other, every single day.

Why don't we just ignore it and let everyone argue it out, hands off? Because those conflicts absolutely spill into other interactions beyond just this thread. It's plainly obvious when two members who spar here take it to other discussions.

Why not just end the topic? Because many members are truly interested in it and want to know more, and trust the community here to help.

So, while we figure the best path forward, this thread will be closed for a few days.