this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
135 points (94.7% liked)

Enough Musk Spam

2215 readers
4 users here now

For those that have had enough of the Elon Musk worship online.

No flaming, baiting, etc. This community is intended for those opposed to the influx of Elon Musk-related advertising online. Coming here to defend Musk or his companies will not get you banned, but it likely will result in downvotes. Please use the reporting feature if you see a rule violation.

Opinions from all sides of the political spectrum are welcome here. However, we kindly ask that off-topic political discussion be kept to a minimum, so as to focus on the goal of this sub. This community is minimally moderated, so discussion and the power of upvotes/downvotes are allowed, provided lemmy.world rules are not broken.

Post links to instances of obvious Elon Musk fanboy brigading in default subreddits, lemmy/kbin communities/instances, astroturfing from Tesla/SpaceX/etc., or any articles critical of Musk, his ideas, unrealistic promises and timelines, or the working conditions at his companies.

Tesla-specific discussion can be posted here as well as our sister community /c/RealTesla.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Oh, cool, so that’s what’s supposed to happen in a collision? I’ll totally buy one.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] FlyingSquid 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Do other car companies' cars that lack defects tend to have this sort of fire situation?

[–] partial_accumen 8 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (4 children)

Do other car companies’ cars that lack defects tend to have this sort of fire situation?

If you can point to any car company that produces a car lacking defects at all, I'm very interested to see it. With regard to EV fires vs cars that have ICE the numbers are very telling:

"Data from the National Transportation Safety Board showed that EVs were involved in approximately 25 fires for every 100,000 sold. Comparatively, approximately 1,530 gasoline-powered vehicles and 3,475 hybrid vehicles were involved in fires for every 100,000 sold." source

60 times greater fire chance for pure ICE car than EV. 139 times greater fire chance for hybrid than EV. So if you are desiring to own a car with a much much higher likelihood it will catch on fire make sure it has an ICE engine and a gas tank.

[–] peopleproblems 4 points 5 months ago (2 children)

Now that is a better statistic. However, I would want to go one step further - every 100,000 vehicle miles.

[–] partial_accumen 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

In looking for other information I did run across this quote. Its in an article from Forbes, so take it with a grain of salt, but the quote isn't from the author but from Tesla corporate. It doesn't offer a complete picture, but its the closest to your question I've run across so far so I thought I'd share it:

“Tesla has reported that between 2012 and 2021 there was approximately one Tesla vehicle fire for every 210 million miles travelled. This includes fires that did not originate in the vehicle, like arson, structure fires etc. According to the National Fire Protection Association, the national average in the U.S. was one fire per 19 million miles travelled. This suggests Tesla’s EVs are 11 times less likely to catch fire than the average car,” Edmondson said." source

[–] peopleproblems 1 points 5 months ago

Dang yo, that's exactly the number I was looking for. Thank you!

[–] partial_accumen 1 points 5 months ago

I'd be interested in that number too, but I don't know how you can go about finding it.

[–] FlyingSquid 3 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Talk to Tesla. They claim this has nothing to do with defects. It's not about likelihood, it's about their claim that it's not their issue.

[–] partial_accumen 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Why do I need to talk to Tesla? BEVs (Tesla or any other brand) have far far fewer car fires than anything with an ICE engine. Its proven by statistics. You started this conversation asking about car fires. Isn't that the topic you wanted to cover?

[–] FlyingSquid 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

They claim this has nothing to do with defects.

[–] partial_accumen 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

You're moving the goalposts on the conversation then. If I read the article properly, the "defects" comment in the suit was related to the crash, and not the fire, where the deceased driver and the surviving passenger both had Blood Alcohol Levels way above the legal limit. That wasn't related to the fire.

Are you conceding on your original point and agreeing that BEVs are far far less likely to catch on fire than cars with an ICE engine and gas tank?

[–] FlyingSquid 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I never made such a point, so I have nothing to concede.

[–] partial_accumen 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

"I keep being told we shouldn’t talk about Teslas catching fire because it’s not a big problem and also other cars catch fire." -FlyingSquid link

Care to explain what you meant by your opening post then?

[–] FlyingSquid 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I am not sure how to make what I said more clear. But I think you’ve proven my point.

[–] partial_accumen 1 points 5 months ago (1 children)

How wonderfully evasive of you!

  • The reading is pretty clear to me that you're implying that Tesla (and presumably EVs in general) catch fire more than non Tesla (or again, other EVs).
  • That is clearly proven wrong
  • You ignore your previous point and move the goalposts to your "defect" angle
  • When called on you moving the goalposts you claim the original reading of the original point is wrong
  • When called to clarify your original point, you refuse to explain it, and even claim to have no other way your claimed unknown point could be communicated
  • You claim victory with nothing to support it

Should you ever want to change careers, you have a strong talent for doublespeak and propaganda. Pick up some Russian or Mandarin language skills, update your Linkedin, and you'll be well on your way to a new career!

Now with my own snark aside, I need to say this. You're not an idiot. I know this. I've read many posts of yours where you accurately and passionately defend your position, even extending your the language of your arguments to make yourself understood by your audience. This current thread is out of character for you, and from what I've seen elsewhere, you're better than this.

I'm going to chalk this one up to you having a bad day and end the conversation here. I hope your day gets better, friend.

[–] FlyingSquid 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (1 children)

As long as it's pretty clear to you, that must be it.

And as I told someone else on another thread, there's no such thing as a good day.

By the way, I don't remember claiming victory. You'll have to point out when I did that and what I claimed victory over since I can't remember the last time I had a victory in my life and, while it likely won't brighten my day since that's not a thing that happens, you never know.

[–] partial_accumen 2 points 5 months ago

And as I told someone else on another thread, there’s no such thing as a good day.

You're alive and breathing. I'm glad you're here. Your loved ones and family care deeply for you. Apart from all other challenges in life, that's a good day.

[–] lemming741 2 points 5 months ago

The average ICE is 4 times older than the average EV- more than 12 vs less than 4

[–] Malfeasant 1 points 5 months ago

139 times greater fire chance for hybrid than EV.

I feel like that's mostly thanks to Kia & Hyundai...