Tesla is synonymous with false advertesing and hype.
this post was submitted on 04 Aug 2023
499 points (97.2% liked)
Technology
60935 readers
6545 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
all 39 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
You misspelled Elon Mush
It seems like Teslas get way less range when it's cold, especially the ones without heat pumps. This is no surprise whatsoever but it's not well covered by EPA range estimates because combustion engines get free heat. So it's not something people are used to thinking about.
Seems like where Tesla f'd up is by making a team to lie about it instead of just telling people, "yeah that's what happens." As usual it's the cover-up that worse than the crime. Tesla will probably win the case but will look stupid. Should have just been honest about it.
The latest podcast season of Land of the giants is about Tesla, I‘m finding that quite interesting so far: first episode
Oh boy does GM with Chevrolet bolt have a huge lawsuit incoming then.
The only one that was even somewhat realistic was the shitty Nissan leaf with it's 128 mile range for awhile lol, from experience.
I'm sure Tesla gets decent enough range but I can't attest to that. I can attest to the bolt and leaf though.
This is such a nothingburger.
class action
It’s literally 3 people in California
The trio claims their cars fell well short of their estimated ranges
Teslas are tested to the EPA test cycles, same as every other car in the US. They’ve been audited multiple times, and always passed.
The lawsuit follows a Reuters report that Tesla began modifying EV ranges about a decade ago.
Ah yes, an unverified report from a single unnamed source with 10-year-old knowledge.
Its cars would supposedly show inflated figures when fully charged, and would only start showing accurate numbers under a 50 percent charge. … It's not certain that Tesla still uses these purported exaggerations.
If the “investigative” reporter wanted to test this, they could literally just go and find a new Tesla and see what its fully-charged range says. Trivially simple. But it would show the EPA range which goes against their story, so they don’t mention it.
To head off complaints, the automaker is said to have created a "Diversion Team" that would persuade users to drop range-related support calls.
In tech (and Tesla is a tech company) it’s called L1 support. Try calling your ISP and getting them to send out a technician, and they’re going to make you do a bunch of other tests on your end first. It’s annoying, but it turns out most complaints can be solved over the phone (because most complaints come from people who are terrible with technology).
Predictable Musk apologist.
Tesla is the only company with such incorrect range estimates. There is now tons of evidence, such as internal communication, indicating that this was intentional lying. If they win, the payout will be to all affected, not just to those filing suit.
He’s right about the range calculation on the sticker though. It’s governed through SAE J1634, IIRC. The difference between EU and US is which test cycle they use, IIRC.
I’m not familiar with older J1634 so I’m not sure if it’s significantly different or not.
The other thing is, how is the end of test criterion determined for Tesla? The way the document is written leaves manufacturers with some wiggle room (IIRC). It could really be that the SAE paper should be revised to run with everything on.
The real time driving range is pretty damning though. I’m not sure if there’s any RDE testing required for BEV in the states. It would be really interesting to see if this sparks that.
It’s not right though. Tesla was uniquely inaccurate. This Ars Technica article I read a few days ago goes into more detail. No other manufacturer has such inaccurate range estimates. In fact, most exceed their estimates.
Certain manufacturers may have standard operating practices of keeping the AC running, or how close to the trace line they drive — there is a tolerance for some error.
If Tesla STICKER ranges are unrealistic, they are likely abusing the general EPA phrasing of “using good engineering judgment” that usually accompanies emissions legislation to push their ranges higher.
The other part of the ars technica concerns the actual estimates when driving the car. Above 50%, they are not providing accurate estimates.
Given recent events at the company formerly known as Twitter, though, do you really expect different from Musk?
Yes exactly. One could do mental gymnastics to try to defend this, but the balance of evidence and past decisions by Musk makes it obvious that this is far from innocent. This is theft by misrepresentation.
All I’m saying is that unless Tesla is advised by a certification witness to change their test method, they are unlikely to do so and it will be hard to argue that their sticker ranges aren’t lawful.
The software case on the other hand is misleading at best. I would characterize that as fraud, but I’m not a lawyer
I’m not a lawyer either, so your guess is as good as mine. From where I’m sitting, it seems to me that there is ample evidence, including internal communication and the activities of the “diversion” team, that this was NOT an engineering decision. When the problem was revealed, there was no attempt to correct it. I personally don’t see how this is so hard to argue when it is so blatant.
Can you point out where anyone mentioned his name before you brought it into the discussion?
[deleted]
Sounds similar to a certain someone else shoehorning him into a discussion where he wasn't previously mentioned.
[deleted]
Pretty sure we were having a discussion about technology here in the /c/technology community. If you'd rather obsess over the CEO of the company, I'm sure there are plenty of other communities for dedicated fans such as yourself.
[deleted]
Cool comment, man. I don't know why you feel the need to share your sexual fantasies with us.
One of my favorite things about Lemmy is that right-wing apologists and bootlickers get called out pretty consistently.
It’s literally 3 people in California
A class action always starts with a handful of plaintiffs. It must be established first that there is grounds for a class action. In other words, you have to demonstrate that this is part of a larger problem. The first step is that small group of people. They file suit, and then it's decided if the case should have class action status. Once the case is given class action status, all people that may have been effected are notified that they may qualify for the class action. In other words, literally 3 people in California are how a class action lawsuit gets started. If you knew anything about the legal process, you would know this.
Teslas are tested to the EPA test cycles, same as every other car in the US. They’ve been audited multiple times, and always passed.
Volkswagen vehicles were tested too. Turns out they had special programming to determine when they were being tested rather than normally driven.
This cost them close to $15 billion.
https://www.epa.gov/enforcement/volkswagen-clean-air-act-civil-settlement https://www.bbc.com/news/business-34324772
Ah yes, an unverified report from a single unnamed source with 10-year-old knowledge.
All "sources" are unnamed. Welcome to journalism 101. If they're named, they're not "a source." You just credit them. https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/tesla-batteries-range/ Fucking Deepthroat was a "source" and he took down Nixon. It wasn't until decades later that his actual identity was revealed. When a "source" is coming from someplace like Reuters you assume they're legit until shown otherwise.
Also, learn to read. The actual statement is that Tesla STARTED modifying these numbers about ten years ago, not that their information is ten years old.
If the “investigative” reporter wanted to test this, they could literally just go and find a new Tesla and see what its fully-charged range says. Trivially simple. But it would show the EPA range which goes against their story, so they don’t mention it.
What part of "still uses" do you not understand? Tesla can modify the software of the car on the fly. Were you not aware of that? All they have to do is send an update to change these things. Can't prove it? Well buddy, that's what a lawsuit is for. Now the onus is on Tesla to prove that they aren't doing illegal shit.
I don't know why you have "investigative" in scare quotes other than to show how ignorant you are.
In tech (and Tesla is a tech company) it’s called L1 support.
You have clearly not read anything about this team. It's not there to be first line support. It's there to convince people there aren't any issues with their cars, regardless of whether or not there is something wrong. I suggest you hang around some Tesla forums where people that have actually encountered this Diversion Team post.
They're there solely to keep Muskypants from feeling bad about himself and his shitty product.
But sure, go on blaming people buying Teslas for being "bad with technology" when the average Tesla owner is LITERALLY A FUCKING TECHBRO.
Bootlicking is a bad habit. Drop it like I dropped your mom last Saturday.
Thank you. Covered most of my thoughts, and I was too apathetic to even write up a response.
Let's also not forget that this issue applied to ICE vehicles as well for decades. The EPA city/highway MPG ratings were always way higher on paper than in practice until they reformulated their testing several years back to give more accurate numbers.
Do you have a source for the reformulation? I’m newer in industry and don’t remember a reformulation. I’d be interested to know more
EPA periodically updates its methodology to account for changes in vehicle technologies, driver behavior, and/or driving conditions. The 2008 changes were broad revisions to the entire methodology that lowered the fuel economy estimates for all vehicles. The updates for 2017 will reduce some fuel economy estimates by 1 mile per gallon (MPG) and a small number by 2 MPG.
Going to have to go with this one again.
"I sued Tesla, because I bought their car, I drove it and then I got stuck!"
[deleted]
A recall is a tacit admission that there is a problem, there is a fix, and it will be fixed at the manufacturer's expense.
Tesla has claimed there is no issue, instituted teams designed solely to minimize the number of complaints about this issue, done all they can to deny that there is a problem, and ultimately is being sued for failing to actually do their damn jobs.
If you don't understand the difference maybe you need to grow up a bit more before having an opinion.
[deleted]
Well that's fine. The good thing about those lyrics is you can just swap tesla for another company.
Volkswagen fucked with EPA tests and paid almost $15 billion for their efforts.
And yet you think Tesla, a company owned and operated by an absolute sociopath, is being totally honest with their range numbers.
Fucking lawl.