Our car inspections are handled by German TÜV, and they do not inspect superficially. If, ~14% of a single brand of car which is ridden with LEDs (which should live forever when compared to halogens), advanced drive systems and other stuff are failing, and has to be re-inspected because of they can't meet the standards, that's pretty bad to be honest.
Failing TÜV means your safety critical systems have problems. This means brakes, suspensions, lighting (front and rear), screen wipers, etc.
So they check for pretty basic, but crucial stuff, and they're tested in a pretty detailed way (brake fade, stopping power, etc.). If your car is failing in just two years in these areas, you're not reliable, and your car will not age well, period.
My 25 year old car aces the test all the time, and the biggest complaint I got on my report is "Your wipers leave streaks, LOL!".
Nope, I don't. I only do its normal interval services. I don't like the cheat the system.
> Also, this doesn't sound environmentally friendly to me.
I'm planning to buy a new hybrid. On the other hand, it has a cat, is our family car since the beginning, so it's in a very good shape emissions-wise (it's tested regularly). Newer cars are better, of course, but it's not an oil burning, smoking, smelling smoke-stack. Its exhaust isn't covered in carbon even.
It's safety, yes. To fail this test there can be any number of causes but for Tesla they specifically mention light, axle, and breaks as failure points.
The 14.2% was for cars receiving their first Hauptuntersuchung (main inspection) done every 24 months (so 2-3 years old cars). If a car model has that many problems while competitors in a similar price range and use model don't, that could point to an issue with part quality.
Other than lights, the problem with control arms and brakes are known. Brake service is recommended and ignored because unlike VW, et all - there's not stealership model to charge you $500 a year for worthless maintenance.
No it doesn't. Service intervals are dependent on mileage. You should be detecting the problems and fixing them at regular servicing.
Ignoring brake checks is endangering life. Even though you have regenerative braking, brakes are used way more often in automatic and gearbox-free cars due to driving dynamics.
Just because there's no so-called stealership, ignoring brakes is not justifiable. So, I can mark Tesla as an irresponsible car company, with a bright and bold marker.
Thanks for narrowing my future car choices and pushing Tesla more out of my mind.
You can mark whatever you want with your bright and bold marker. It doesn't make your argument more sound.
If you are worried about the brakes, brake hard occasionally to avoid rust.
Alternatively, you can charge the car up to near 100% if you go on a roadtrip. Regen will be limited initially so you will be able to use your brakes without braking hard.
If you are still worried about the brakes, go to an independent car mechanic regularly and have them checked.
It's as easy as that.
Nobody is preventing you from doing service even though it's not deemed necessary by the vendor.
Your comment doesn't seem to be about the actual issue but about some form of generalized Tesla brand hatred.
I'm not a person who keeps grudges, or hates things in general. I just take note what companies do, and change my choices based on my observation. VAG also took a good hit after their dieselgate scandal, and not recovered much in my mind, for example. Stellantis is also not doing well, and I was considering a vehicle from them, so I'm not so sure anymore.
I don't live in a flat city, of course I'm worried and aware of my brakes all times, and know how to condition and refresh my brakes.
My problem is Tesla's service policies, like ignoring "recommended" checks on a car. Oh sorry, I can go to an independent mechanic to further spend my non-existing time, you're right.
What's more interesting is Tesla not having brake pad thickness warnings, which our old 1999 Fiat Tipo had.
Being apologetic about problems doesn't make your arguments any more sound, either.
No. You are obviously not doing that. You take note of what the media emphasizes in an obvious press campaign that oversimplifies the actual information to a degree where it becomes borderline useless in order to reach political goals. This is not the same.
> You take note of what the media emphasizes in an obvious press campaign that oversimplifies the actual information to a degree where it becomes borderline useless in order to reach political goals.
No, I'm not doing that. To be frank, my exposure to cars, engines and related technology goes back 30+ years,. I'm not naive enough to read a single article and change my mind about Tesla, "because Elon bad, so Tesla bad".
I'm not someone who sees his car as a black box. I can diagnose, disassemble and service my car to a certain degree (and recently did that by logging weeks of data from ECU because my mechanic was not able to pinpoint the problem, and I diagnosed the problem myself). I'm also not afraid or refrain from getting my hands dirty.
If something, this article I have read is a literal drop in a bucket of things I have read only about Tesla. My information consumption about cars is increased again recently, because I'm planning to buy something new, but I'm already familiar what I might be getting under the bonnet with every choice I make.
So, you're projecting your assumptions onto me, and not only your assumptions are wrong, what you're doing is also wrong.
If that's the case, then please cite reliable sources about the exact issues that occur and what Tesla did or did not do to mitigate them or let them slip.
If you'd have those, you could have posted them earlier here in the thread.
First, I don't keep bookmarks of everything I read, second I can't record conversations I've had with people owning cars I'm interested in and store them in publicly accessible places.
I understand that we will not be able to meet somewhere in the middle. Also, I'm not someone who'd leave personal opinions and experiences to appease and please someone.
So, have a nice day. Hope your cars never break down and give you infinite joy.
Let's play your game, then. The URL contains a list of links I have found in my browser and YouTube history, mostly about Tesla, in 20 minutes. I especially searched for Tesla, since this is what we're talking about.
Moreover, I failed to find some of the links I wanted to add, which were more positive ones about Tesla, nonetheless (e.g.: the famous consultancy which gutted a Model S and found very good engineering alongside some rookie mistakes).
Now, this is your turn to provide me information about how I'm mislead, and what Tesla does instead. Waiting a similar links trove from you, since you claim that you're very knowledgeable about the subject matter.
If you translate the article and read it, you will find that there are a lot of reported issues with the headlights. It is hard to find exact information on the actual issue in detail, but I'd suspect it's about the calibration of the headlights in most cases. That's a minor issue and calling it a reliability problem doesn't seem accurate. Also quite conveniently, they don't really mention that Teslas have significantly more mileage on average than other electric cars when they have their first TÜV visit. It's common for the German press to blow things like these out of proportion when they don't like a brand.
I think the German car industry and the press around it as a whole have a serious corruption issue.
I am sure HN has made up their mind already and this discussion wouldn't have an effect on your opinion anyway, so please feel free to continue downvoting.
> you will find that there are a lot of reported issues with the headlights.
Correct, but you just happen to leave out the mentioned issues with the brakes and axles as clearly stated in the article.
> In addition to defects in the brakes and axles, the Tesla also has a particularly high number of lighting defects.
If you want to point out issues, which is absolutely fair, please don't cherry-pick.
> but I'd suspect it's about the calibration of the headlights in most cases
So its a guess on your part. Lightning defects can mean any number of things.
>Defects in the lighting such as defective bulbs, broken or blind lenses or incorrect adjustment are significant defects.
Incorrect adjustments are part of it, yes, but if that's the case I would argue something with the construction of Tesla's lamps is not done correctly. Other manufacturers seem to have fewer problems. That or Tesla owners don't service their cars often enough. Regardless, it guessing on our part unless we have access to detailed data.
-----
You linked to an article that is over 10 years old. Besides that, ADAC, which that particular piece is about, is not the company responsible for doing the TÜV inspection, nor is it the one to actually publish the report.
> I think the German car industry and the press around it as a whole have a serious corruption issue.
The car industry I can agree on. The emissions scandal is a particularly shady example. As for the press, I'd take a more neutral stance. There are absolutely a large amount of low quality news papers and magazines pumping out hot garbage. Others do offer much higher quality writing and research.
Look, HN people don't like Tesla. A lot of German people in positions of power don't like Tesla. Suddenly an article appears that explicitly highlights Tesla vehicles as not passing TÜV because they allegedly have quality issues. The article mentions no details. If you search for details on Google, you get a list of very similar looking articles all citing the same statement from a TÜV person. None of those provide any details on the actual issues. If no details are provided, the only thing to do is guess.
It's really quite clear what's going on here.
The TÜV does not assess the reliability of a car. The reasons for a car failing an inspection after 3 years can be manifold. It doesn't mean that the car "won't age well" or anything along those lines.
If you dislike Tesla, then say it - it's fine. No need to support vague smear campaigns.
In fact, right now Tesla has the best electric car technology available on the market. Along with the best charging network available on the market. And the best software (light years ahead of the competition) on the market. Also they don't require you to service the car for a long time. That makes German people especially afraid that they lose their car manufacturing, selling and servicing business. And rightly so. No smear campaign and no comparing apples to oranges will save them from reforming and restoring their competitiveness in a very long painful process.
What do you mean suddenly? The report is released every year. There's nothing mysterious about news pages, especially those related to cars, writing articles about a yearly report.
The article mentions no in-depth detail because it is an excerpt from the full report which you are free to purchase and read if you would like more information.
The reason Tesla gets mentioned is twofold: electric cars have been a topic of discussion in Germany for quite some time and the failure rate of Tesla Model 3s is significantly higher than other comparable cars.
I don't know why you have it in your head that this is some big conspiracy by Big Car TM.
Yes, TÜV does not assess reliability of a car, but road-worthiness. Evidently something that Tesla has a larger problem with than other manufacturers. I don't know why, nor do I claim to.
I don't care about Tesla. Neither do I care about VW or any other manufacturer for that matter. They are profit oriented companies that are selling you a product.
> In fact, right now Tesla has the best electric car technology available on the market.
By what measure exactly? The best isn't a measure and as of right now a subjective statement.
> Along with the best charging network available on the market.
Again, subjective. What do you mean by best? The amount of chargers? The cost/kWh? Location? And what market exactly?
> And the best software (light years ahead of the competition) on the market.
Again, subjective. You complain about an article having no detail, then make statements praising Tesla as the best electric car but provide 0 evidence or numbers.
Just because you like something, doesn't mean I have to as well. I'm not a mechanical/electrical engineer so I cannot speak to their car technology or reliability. I do know their software, because I drove one for work reasons for 3 months. You might like it and get along fine with it, I don't.
I didn't buy a Tesla because their choice to start placing all functionality into the touch screen is counterintuitive to the whole point of the car: getting me safely from point A to B. Other manufacturers, including VW are horrendous at this as well. I didn't buy a car from them either.
> Also they don't require you to service the car for a long time.
Given the percentage of their cars failing the inspection, perhaps they should.
