DIY Electric Car Forums banner
21 - 38 of 38 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Simply no. It is very much by design. There are no "parts shortages" for the Model S or X Try buying them to repair a wreck.

They REALLY DO discourage such work and there are dozens of reports of people who tried to repair wrecked Teslas who have looked into this monster and retreated in horror at what they encountered.

The one I never understood was a guy in California who is essentially famous for doing SUPERB stretch limousines of everything but mostly luxury cars and notably a hummer. He bought a BRAND NEW Tesla Model S and did a stretch on it and Tesla deliberately, deceitfully, and emphatically shut him down and his car off.

Why they would NOT want a stretch Model S limo escapes me. And the guy doing it was no home tinkerer. He was a VERY accomplished professional much in demand.

Ironically, the build was a bespoke for INTEL, one of Teslas suppliers at the time.

For a supposedly open source car, Tesla has been a horror in recent years. Therre are currently no SCHEMATICS even of the Model 3. Shortage of PDF space?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
Is it? Or do they just not have the production capacity to produce extra stock items?


Like, if they're cranking out cars as fast as they can, which still isn't fast enough to meet demand, then any parts they make available for repairs will slow down the production line even further.


I don't think that's the same thing as them being deliberately obtuse and restrictive.
If they really are cranking out new product which can't be fixed (due to the lack of parts) at the expense of current owners, then it would be abusive and irresponsible rather than obtuse and restrictive. Is that better?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
I believe Tesla insurance rates are hurt by a couple of pretty basic things.

1. The combination of aluminum body and basically a requirement that Tesla's be repaired by Tesla or an approved body shop lead to astronomically high costs for even minor damage.

...

2. Because of high repair costs, the Insurance companies are quick to "total" the car. They recover some of the value by remaindering the car to salvage auctions. Your insurance rates are heavily affected by the prices they get from the salvage of the totalled vehicle.

Salvage value is driven by a couple of items. There are a lot of people who purchase salvaged autos and repair them and resell them. But again, Tesla does not make repair data and parts available almost at all. Indeed, they have been known to actively DISABLE cars over the air.

As most of the large electronic parts are under warranty in almost all of the cars on the road, there really isn't any automotive aftermarket for drive trains and batteies parted out.

...
This all makes good sense to me.

Even after warranties end, motors probably still won't be worth much because they are inherently reliable (not just Tesla motors - brushless motors in general). Gearboxes will see some failures, but these are so simple that the vast majority should still outlive the rest of the car. My guess is that the electronics will rise in value, because some portion of even properly designed and well-constructed electronics let the magic smoke out eventually.

Musk thinks he's just dealing with greedy insurance companies and seeks to start his own to counter this issue. But he'll run into the same issues unless he assumes repairs, which I guess he could do.
Such a conundrum for the Tesla Motors / Musk fan: is there a conspiracy in reporting to make insurance premiums for Tesla cars look high, or is the premium cost in fact high and there is a conspiracy by all insurance companies to exaggerate repair costs? The only certainty is that can't be Saint Elon's fault. :rolleyes:
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
Simply no. It is very much by design.
Oh, so you've spoken to someone from high up in Tesla that has confirmed their intentions?

There are no "parts shortages" for the Model S or X Try buying them to repair a wreck.
I'm not sure what your point is.

Is your point that there are plenty of parts in stock and they are easy to buy? If so, then what's the problem? Just buy them.

Or is your point that it is difficult to buy parts because they are not available anywhere? If so, then there's clearly parts shortages.

Why they would NOT want a stretch Model S limo escapes me.
I can think of several reasons off the top of my head. Since so much of the car is electronic, it is untested to perform correctly when you start adding signalling delays and structural changes. How will the autopilot react to being 8 feet longer? Lots of stuff going on in the brains to mess up.

Seems prudent to me that as the electronics are engineered for a certain platform, they should be disabled and, if someone wants to use the carcass to do something new with it, to do it from scratch.

For a supposedly open source car, Tesla has been a horror in recent years. Therre are currently no SCHEMATICS even of the Model 3. Shortage of PDF space?
I don't think the Tesla is supposed to be an opn source car. What was announced was that they were waiving rights to their patents and essentially giving that away. Not that this is a community project that everyone is also entitled to demand specifics. It's not an open source non-profit, it's a company that's not going to sue you for using specific parts of its IP.

I think perhaps you're letting personal motivation influence your objectiveness.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
I can think of several reasons off the top of my head. Since so much of the car is electronic, it is untested to perform correctly when you start adding signalling delays and structural changes. How will the autopilot react to being 8 feet longer? Lots of stuff going on in the brains to mess up.

Seems prudent to me that as the electronics are engineered for a certain platform, they should be disabled and, if someone wants to use the carcass to do something new with it, to do it from scratch.
There is some sense in this, but in reality all stretch limos are built from production vehicles with lots of electronic complexity, and it is all quite manageable. Autopilot is particularly easy: just don't use it - it is a chauffeur-driven vehicle, and the chauffeur can just drive.

Building a car from scratch for limo service is simply not reasonable.

Sure, Tesla Motors doesn't want the vehicles that they built on the road in a form which is out of their control, but that is true of every manufacturer. Most of them manage to deal with it, without limiting access to parts. Many of them even sell "crate" engines so that people can build custom vehicles with them. Some work directly with customization companies to make specialty vehicles with full factory warranties.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
Discussion Starter · #26 · (Edited)
I think perhaps you're letting personal motivation influence your objectiveness.
Assuming this post was by Jack from EVTV then he has plenty of ownership experience (and a large network of Tesla owners) to inform his opinion. iirc he was also involved in some Tesla litigation following the publication of the MA right to repair information.

Furthermore, I can confirm that in Europe Tesla are working really hard to prevent us from repairing our cars. I say this as an owner of an older Tesla vehicle who's had lots of part supply issues (including one incident where my car was off the road for six months despite having a full warranty), and someone who knows a lot of Tesla owners across Europe.

One important thing to remember is that the vast majority of proposed repairs do not involve electrical/electronics systems but rather mechanical damage resulting from minor accidents.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
Interestingly Tesla are a little schizophrenic on this... in the UK they have continued the warranty on a Tesla 'Shooting-brake' :confused:
An interesting decision by Tesla Motors!
I read about this car earlier, and noted from various article (including in Autoblog) that this body conversion involves no mechanical changes, probably no electronic changes (although there is re-routing of wiring), and...
RemetzCar says it left the Model S's major structural parts and crumple zones intact.
The extent of structural changes is important to repairability and potential manufacturer's liability.

It's apparent in RemetzCar's page about the conversion that one reason that the modified car's upper rear quarter area is so awkward is that they left the entire original structure, so there's aluminum behind those "windows" - it's a roof extension and new hatch stuck onto the hatchback body. The earlier effort by QWest looks much cleaner, but may have violated stock structure; I don't know what the Tesla Motors position on that might be.

RemetzCar's earlier hearse is a much more substantial body modification - I wonder if that still has a warranty? How about their 800 mm stretch (to be used for custom limousines or hearses, presumably)?
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
Assuming this post was by Jack from EVTV then he has plenty of ownership experience

Yeah, I know who he is.

When someone starts talking about how they know the secret intentions of company, just because of how they personally feel about it, I think it's reasonable to say they're not being as objective as they think they are.

Furthermore, I can confirm that in Europe Tesla are working really hard to prevent us from repairing our cars.

Okay, so, I get how it might feel that way, and how frustrating that can be. But I can think of other explanations too, beyond intent, malice, and conspiracy. Occam's Razor and all.

To me, it seems reasonable that a car company would want its vehicles on the road as much as possible with their owners as happy as possible. To not develop a reputation for being difficult to repair, or for not having spare parts. That is a desirable position to be in. So if that is the position Tesla is not in right now, why?

Is it because they're meanies who are out to get you? Or is it because they're doing the best they can but have limitations?


I have no skin in the game, I have no ego attached to the discussion. Either way it seems like Tesla is screwing this up, I don't doubt everyone's experiences that it's difficult to get repaired, I'm just not sure I buy the conclusion that it's intentional.

I say this as an owner of an older Tesla vehicle who's had lots of part supply issues

I believe you, and others that say that. But it seems more reasonable that Tesla lacks the production capacity (something we also know that they struggle with), versus that they have mountains of parts that they're hording and not letting anyone use just so that vehicles have to stay off the road for 6 months. That doesn't make sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
To me, it seems reasonable that a car company would want its vehicles on the road as much as possible with their owners as happy as possible. To not develop a reputation for being difficult to repair, or for not having spare parts. That is a desirable position to be in. So if that is the position Tesla is not in right now, why?

Is it because they're meanies who are out to get you? Or is it because they're doing the best they can but have limitations?
One possibility: they are relatively incompetent (in supply chain management in particular), and are not concerned about their reputation affecting anything they care about. What they care about would includes the ability to endlessly raise capital to cover operating losses. They are not likely concerned about sales, as they have a large backlog of orders from people who seem very tolerant... they put down deposits on vehicles with no delivery commitment and no pricing. They may be more concerned about maintaining a high level of control of the product even after is it sold than about pleasing paying customers, reflecting the attitude of the company's leader.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3 Posts
Nothing much has changed here since my last visit months ago. You guys type a tremendous amount of text with no information content but lots of conjecture.

Setting aside the Model 3 for the moment, and discussing JUST the Model S, there simply IS no shortage of parts. But many are "restricted" and even those repairing wrecks have actually PURCHASED non-restricted parts up to the point where Tesla became aware of what they were doing, and then suddenly they had ZERO access to parts.

This is not a theory. It is not conjecture. It isn't any of your wild eyed defense of your hero. We have first hand knowledge of numerous cases of this.

Elon Musk very specifically DID use the term OPEN SOURCE when originally describing his patent position, though he has furiously and regularly backpedalled away from that position at the behest of his legal team.

And yes, I am Jack Rickard and cannot help it. I always was.

Good to hear from you Kevin.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
Elon Musk very specifically DID use the term OPEN SOURCE when originally describing his patent position, though he has furiously and regularly backpedalled away from that position at the behest of his legal team.
Since Musk's experience is in the IT business, failing to use the term "open source" properly is disturbing. Generally, I assume that his statements express the genuine intentions (product plans, etc) which he wants to share, and have little to do with current reality or even Musk's own knowledge of of what is coming.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
7,933 Posts
... discussing JUST the Model S, there simply IS no shortage of parts. But many are "restricted"...
So, when owners are waiting long periods for genuine OEM parts to complete authorized repairs, are they subject to a "restriction" for some mysterious reason... or are people such as Kevin just mistaken about the delays which they have experienced? :confused:

Whatever the cause, vehicles held up for extended periods for repair increase the cost of repair costs to insurers, because the owner is typically being provided with a replacement vehicle.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
Nothing much has changed here since my last visit months ago. You guys type a tremendous amount of text with no information content but lots of conjecture.
Sure Jack, just go insult and belittle an entire community because of what 2 or 3 people you're interacting with say. We're all a hivemind, not individuals.

Yes, go on and become as narrow-minded as possible so you never have to think. Everyone here on these forums is the same personality with exactly the same opinions.

And, pot and kettles and all that, you're not really one to lecture others on verbosity or drivel. Have you looked in a mirror or experienced your own content?

Setting aside the Model 3 for the moment, and discussing JUST the Model S, there simply IS no shortage of parts. But many are "restricted" and even those repairing wrecks have actually PURCHASED non-restricted parts up to the point where Tesla became aware of what they were doing, and then suddenly they had ZERO access to parts.
To what end?

How does this conspiracy benefit them as a company?

Maybe you're right, I dunno, but it's not very convincing.

This is not a theory. It is not conjecture. It isn't any of your wild eyed defense of your hero.
Once again, unless you know their intentions, then sorry, but, yeah, it is just a theory and conjecture. All you know is that it's difficult for you to buy parts in some cases.

Or just dumb the world down to black & white, yes and no, you're with me or against me.

It couldn't be just that I have a reasonable, middle-of-the-road approach to things and haven't formed a solid opinion one way or the other. No, the only reason anyone wouldn't jump aboard taking everything you say on faith alone, is because they must be delusionally defensive about someone you've branded your enemy.

Again, like almost everyone, I have no skin in the game. It's a company, not a way of life.

Elon Musk very specifically DID use the term OPEN SOURCE when originally describing his patent position, though he has furiously and regularly backpedalled away from that position at the behest of his legal team.
Okay, so, he made an immediate correction because he misspoke? Because the term for what they want to do isn't legally equivalent to Open Source?

I.E. "We choose to let you do what you want with this information, but we still own it" is slightly different than "We choose to no longer own this information and are making it public property". In terms of use it's identical, but in ownership it's different.

Are we entitled to this? How many years are you going to run around complaining about it?

And yes, I am Jack Rickard and cannot help it. I always was.
You make acknowledgement of yourself as if doing so excuses your behavior rather than defines it. You can choose to act however you want, regardless of how you excuse it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,359 Posts
Discussion Starter · #36 · (Edited)
Maybe you're right, I dunno, but it's not very convincing.
I would recommend you do some more research on the topic. Jack has multiple blogs and videos which are relevant and I suspect some research into the Tesla Right To Repair 'litigation' with Jack might be helpful (my memory is a little hazy and I don't have time to research the topic in full today).

Some useful background reading;

Right to Repair – Why it Matters…

Tesla Doesn’t Want You to Work on Its Cars

Fight over Right to Repair will heat up in 2018

Interesting video from EVTV (start at 13:00);

 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
1,513 Posts
Fascinating video from Rich Benoit which includes a list of repair costs from an authorised Tesla body shop... easy to see why insurers are writing off these cars :eek:
I mean, no one takes their car back to a dealership to get repaired unless it's under warranty. There's a reason they call them "stealerships". Him claiming the dealership is charging a ridiculous amount for new parts, with the counterclaim that you can buy used refurbished parts cheaper and he'll give you a shock so there's no need to buy one... so? That's true of any car. And dealer prices for any kind of work on a high-end car are always gouging rates.

His example of his one buddy who had one shipped to Bangladesh and then complained there was no service center there, well... he's just being absurdist and dramatic. No shit when you take it to a third world country that they have no presence in that... there's no presence there.

Those are such poor arguments that it makes me doubt the truth or reasonableness of some of the other things he says.

The interesting part to me wasn't how expensive OEM parts were, I expect that, it was the lack of authorized service centers.

Why is this?

Is it because Tesla is restrictive or because most shops, for the volume of Teslas in the area, have no incentive or interest in investing in tooling and training to meet Tesla's standards? That to me is a combination of EV-specific and small-manufacturer issues. A rare low-volume ICE car a regular mechanic could at least know his way around, an EV, not so much. Meanwhile, GM and Nissan don't have that issue because of their built in scope.

Either way, doesn't matter from a spending standpoint, if it's expensive then it's expensive. But it does matter for those that are all angry about it as to who's to blame and making claims about Tesla's intentions.

These are things that make Tesla look bad, so, to me it doesn't make sense to claim it's intentional. More, they lack competence or ability.
 
21 - 38 of 38 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top