Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

With Burning Teslas In the News Ford Recalls Almost 140,000 Escapes

samzenpus posted about 8 months ago | from the burning-rubber-and-money dept.

Transportation 293

An anonymous reader writes "Tesla received a lot of attention over the Model S fires recently, but they're not the only car company having issues with spontaneous combustion. Ford has issued a recall on almost 140,000 Ford Escapes for potential engine fires. With little media attention on the recall, Musk might have a point about the unfair treatment Tesla gets in the news."

cancel ×

293 comments

"Spontaneous"? (4, Insightful)

Michael Woodhams (112247) | about 8 months ago | (#45546033)

I do not think it means what you think it means.

Re:"Spontaneous"? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546145)

I had a colleague once whose Ford truck was happily parked at work, until it suddenly combusted for no apparent reason. Building evacuted, fire trucks galore, clouds of toxic smoke. Thank you Ford.

In all the cases I read of with Tesla, some outside event caused damage before the fire ensued. They are being targeted by the incumbents.

Re:"Spontaneous"? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546325)

The Ford was smoking crack.

Eat A Dick (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546375)

Yo mama was SO FUCKING STUPID, she fucked yo daddy!

Happily parked? (-1, Flamebait)

Runaway1956 (1322357) | about 8 months ago | (#45546859)

Yeah, it was happily parked, until I walked past, and laid a thermite grenade on the hood.

Your credibility (wait, AC and credibility?) takes a hit, when you claim that a parked vehicle burst into flames. I have seen a lot of vehicles on fire, but never a parked vehicle that just suddenly decided to warm itself up. I'll bet you didn't see the fire marshall's report, which probably made mention of an electronic device that was left turned on, or some other logical explanation.

Re:"Spontaneous"? (4, Insightful)

Crudely_Indecent (739699) | about 8 months ago | (#45546621)

If a car catches fire when it's not in an accident, and it wasn't intentionally set ablaze - I would call that spontaneous.

Re:"Spontaneous"? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546877)

Right, and the Tesla fires have resulted from impacts (accidents) with large metal objects that punctures the battery pack from below.

Nee Jerk Or Musk Is Toast (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546039)

Could be that Tesla supplies Ford!

If so, then Ford sees a BIG PROBLEm.

We know Musk is an a card carrying idiot and now Ford sees its Tesla parts supply chain the same.

Ditto.

PS Musk's "empire" is burning all around him. He'll soon file for unemployment "grub steak."

Tou da lu my lov

Well, when you're in the news... (5, Insightful)

Nefarious Wheel (628136) | about 8 months ago | (#45546041)

You can always tell a pioneer by the arrows in his back.

Re:Well, when you're in the news... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546429)

Can you express that in terms of an anti-semetic troll comment?

Re:Well, when you're in the news... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546841)

No but have you noticed the cities where black people go rioting and "kill Whitey" (NY, LA, all of Florida) also happen to be places where jews tend to congregate?

Re:Well, when you're in the news... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546847)

The Jews are working to prevent an innovative white man from threatening their stranglehold over the world economy. In this case Elon Musk who immigrated to the US from South Africa which was largely free of Jewish control until the Judeo-Communist takeover in 1994.

Re:Well, when you're in the news... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546567)

You can always tell a pioneer by the arrows in his back.

... and a coward by the yellow of his belly.

Re:Well, when you're in the news... (4, Funny)

lgw (121541) | about 8 months ago | (#45546799)

I'm sure the headline will be reprinted as "In the news: 140,000 Escape Burning Teslas, Ford Recalls". And I hear those SpaceX rockets catch fire every time they're launched!

Explanation from Elon Musk (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546049)

You're shifting it wrong!

Re:Explanation from Elon Musk (0)

mojo-raisin (223411) | about 8 months ago | (#45546141)

No shifting required to make these Fords burn... the joys of spontaneously combusting gasoline-based vehicles.

Media Bias? (0, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546051)

Nope. Its been brought up hundreds of times before on /, and I've been assured by liberals that any bias I hear in the media is my own imagination, except Fox News. Since Fox isn't the only ones doing Tesla fire stories I can assure you that there is no bias in this and the Ford story must be a non-story.

Is it possible to get a +5 flamebait?

Re:Media Bias? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546133)

Is it possible to get a +5 flamebait?

Yes, one Flamebait mod plus five Underrated mods.

The peril of new technology (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546063)

Of course Tesla is getting lots of press, it's because electric cars are new. People (especially Americans) do not like change, they assume that the old way is the best way. With every new technology, you'll have those old bastards still crying about how their gas engines never did this (Even though they do, and on a much larger scale).

The same press will plague the driverless car. Once one or two accidents happen the media will be in an uproar and so will the populace.

Re:The peril of new technology (5, Interesting)

haruchai (17472) | about 8 months ago | (#45546091)

Electric cars are new AGAIN and they are very much the "old way"

Re:The peril of new technology (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546675)

My favorite exhibit at the Vienna Museum of Technology always was the Porsche-Lohner Wagen [technischesmuseum.at] . It's an all electric car built in 1900.

Re:The peril of new technology (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546129)

People (especially Americans) do not like change

People (regardless of their nation of birth) do not put full faith and trust in every new thing. Electric cars still haven't proven they will work economically and safely over a standard 5 to 10 year car lifetime, and until they do it will be risky to buy them.

People who can afford the risk should buy them if they want to, but for the rest of us a healthy skepticism is warranted.

Re:The peril of new technology (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 8 months ago | (#45546289)

5 to 10 years? What junker cars are you buying?

Re:The peril of new technology (1)

dalias (1978986) | about 8 months ago | (#45546855)

Indeed. I would consider the standard lifetime for a car to be 25-30 years.

Re:The peril of new technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546959)

A burning Ford?

Re:The peril of new technology (4, Insightful)

mjwx (966435) | about 8 months ago | (#45546223)

Of course Tesla is getting lots of press,

Tesla's failures are getting a lot of press because Musk wanted Tesla's successes to get a lot of press.

Musk cant have it both ways, Live by the sword, die by the sword.

Ford on the other hand, well we almost expect recalls from them.

Re:The peril of new technology (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546385)

Exactly this.

It's like when some celebrity who has been exploiting the press for years for everything they want out there gets busted taking drugs, with a lady of ill repute or snorting coke and gets upset about an invasion of privacy.

Tesla is the Britney Spears of the automobile world.

Re:The peril of new technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546479)

Yeah, it's like with Segways.

Segway accidents got quite a bit of press while bicycle accidents barely get on local news.

Fortunately Segway didn't have a legion of fanbois that went crazy whenever you pointed out any deficiency with a Segway.

Re:The peril of new technology (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546377)

I'm not sure how you got an Insightful. This story is about a massive recall over spontaneous combustion of gasoline engine vehicles. The Tesla has had exactly ZERO of these types of events.

Re:The peril of new technology (0)

kelemvor4 (1980226) | about 8 months ago | (#45546397)

Of course Tesla is getting lots of press, it's because electric cars are new. People (especially Americans) do not like change, they assume that the old way is the best way. With every new technology, you'll have those old bastards still crying about how their gas engines never did this (Even though they do, and on a much larger scale).

The same press will plague the driverless car. Once one or two accidents happen the media will be in an uproar and so will the populace.

Sometimes, the old way really is better. I don't think so in this case, but that opinion often has merit in the day of "change for the sake of change."

No, that was not meant as a political reference...

Re:The peril of new technology (0)

0123456 (636235) | about 8 months ago | (#45546401)

Of course Tesla is getting lots of press, it's because electric cars are new.

No, electric cars will soon be two hundred years old. They predate the internal combustion engine by decades.

People (especially Americans) do not like change, they assume that the old way is the best way.

So why did these EVIL CHANGE-HATING AMERICANS dump their electric cars so fast when the internal combustion engine came along in the 19th century?

Re:The peril of new technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546605)

ICE cars in the 19th century were better then 19th century EVs! EVs in the 20th century are better then 20th century EVs OR ICE cars!

Re:The peril of new technology (2, Insightful)

lxs (131946) | about 8 months ago | (#45546727)

Because nine out of ten rednecks prefer loud machines that billow toxic smoke over electrickery. It reminds them of grandpa's still.

Re:The peril of new technology (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546453)

s/Americans/American oil companies

Fire vs. Potential Fire (3, Insightful)

sheehaje (240093) | about 8 months ago | (#45546075)

Maybe the media scrutiny is that Tesla's actually caught fire, and Ford is proactively recalling because there is a potential fire?

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (4, Informative)

haruchai (17472) | about 8 months ago | (#45546121)

A quarter-million ICE vehicles catch fire every year in America alone so Ford and the rest need to be a LOT more proactive.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546255)

Wrong, bitch. Tesla's the one that needs to be more proactive:

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-11-21/musk-claim-of-fewer-tesla-fires-questioned-in-mit-report.html [bloomberg.com]

Because only 4 percent of vehicle fires are caused by collisions, Tesla's Model S sedan, with a rechargeable lithium-ion battery, is statistically more likely to catch fire in those incidents than cars with gasoline tanks, wrote Kevin Bullis, senior editor for energy for MIT Technology Review.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (0)

haruchai (17472) | about 8 months ago | (#45546321)

Dickwad AC, Tesla's fires have not been caused by collisions but by intrusions from below. Most of the ICEs that catch fire every year are not able to be software-adjusted for greater ground clearance ( as the cost of greater drag ) and all fare much, much, much more poorly in an actual collision than a Model S.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546477)

Tesla's fires have not been caused by collisions but by intrusions from below

TIL hitting a trailer hitch on the highway is an "intrusion from below". Also Tesla's fire risk is so low because there haven't been any fires, just "excess heat discharges".

Guess what, in reality instead of euphemism fantasy land, Tesla Model S's collision fire risk based on the data is ten times more than 10 year old gas cars. Deal with it.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (1)

gl4ss (559668) | about 8 months ago | (#45546301)

most collisions go without fires...
I still think the tesla pack is situated poorly.

of course the fords have a wholly another reason for combusting(failed quality assurance/production, which is something you can "fix" by recall maintenance, so there is something to be proactive about).

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (5, Informative)

mojo-raisin (223411) | about 8 months ago | (#45546125)

Ford is retro-actively recalling their cars after a few dozen caught fire spontaneously. Spontaneous combustion has yet to be achieved by a Tesla.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (1)

Barlo_Mung_42 (411228) | about 8 months ago | (#45546503)

"Yet to be achieved"?

I don't even think it's a goal.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (4, Funny)

lxs (131946) | about 8 months ago | (#45546745)

It isn't? Tesla needs to get their priorities straight!

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (0)

Shavano (2541114) | about 8 months ago | (#45546151)

Not quite. From the quoted article, "There have been 12 reported fires but no injuries in the bigger recall of 139,917 Ford Escape vehicles."

But it does show a huge difference between Tesla and the management of a car company that's been in the business a long time. Ford will recall and repair 139,917 cars because of 12 fires. Tesla downplays battery fires.

Elon Musk should be looking at Ford management and asking himself what they know about making and selling cars that he doesn't.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (5, Informative)

mojo-raisin (223411) | about 8 months ago | (#45546197)

You seem to be lacking in the ability to make distinction. So I'll break it down. Real. Simple.

Ford. Whole car burn for no reason.

Tesla. Front trunk burn after high speed collision.

Ford. Bad safety.

Tesla. Good safety.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546207)

Weren't all the tesla fires due to damage from debris or crashes?

I am yet to hear of a spontaneous fire from a tesla.

Telsa did a remote recall (3)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 8 months ago | (#45546217)

Ford will recall and repair 139,917 cars because of 12 fires. Tesla downplays battery fires.

Ford has to physically implement a fix for the cars in question.

Telsa, in theory, has reduced the risk via software patch that makes the car rider higher at speed (to the annoyance of some owners).

Personally I think Telsa should also probably figure out some kind of better under-armor, but it's not like they have done nothing at all.

I think they *should* have done nothing (1)

Chirs (87576) | about 8 months ago | (#45546701)

The patch to make the car ride higher is going to mess with the handling and is probably mostly just a publicity stunt. I'd be happier if they hadn't done anything at all and just continued saying 'the car is safe, only the engine bay was damaged by the fire'.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (3, Insightful)

PNutts (199112) | about 8 months ago | (#45546229)

Not quite. From the quoted article, "There have been 12 reported fires but no injuries in the bigger recall of 139,917 Ford Escape vehicles."

But it does show a huge difference between Tesla and the management of a car company that's been in the business a long time. Ford will recall and repair 139,917 cars because of 12 fires. Tesla downplays battery fires.

Elon Musk should be looking at Ford management and asking himself what they know about making and selling cars that he doesn't.

Correct. Ford will sell 12 more cars and Telsa only three.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (1)

sjames (1099) | about 8 months ago | (#45546263)

Perhaps it's because the Teslas were in accidents before they caught fire but the Fords caught fire during normal operating conditions.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (4, Insightful)

pitchpipe (708843) | about 8 months ago | (#45546363)

Elon Musk should be looking at Ford management and asking himself what they know about making and selling cars that he doesn't.

Translation: why isn't he burning gas like every other god fearin' 'Murican?

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (1)

tlambert (566799) | about 8 months ago | (#45546987)

Elon Musk should be looking at Ford management and asking himself what they know about making and selling cars that he doesn't.

That's a brilliant Idea! They could introduce a "Tesla Pinto", and have the cars actually explode and kill people, just like Ford: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ford_Pinto#Fuel_tank_defect [wikipedia.org]

And then they could ask for a bailout from the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) like Ford Credit did (and on which they still owe money to the Fed): http://useconomy.about.com/od/criticalssues/a/auto_bailout.htm [about.com] ...on second thought, perhaps Ford is not the best role model after all.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (4, Interesting)

steelfood (895457) | about 8 months ago | (#45546351)

Sorry, but no. Car companies don't just do recalls. Like all other companies, they first calculate the cost of potential lawsuits vs. the cost of a recall. Then if the cost of the potential lawsuits outweigh the cost of a recall, they'll do the recall.

The only way to calculate potential cost of a lawsuit is to firstly experience the event out in the field. Then, the only the lawsuit is more expensive than the recall is if the event is linked to a characteristic of the product's design or construction. Then it becomes recall-able. If a fire happens one or a few times due to the car meeting a very specific, user-created condition, then it's not worth a recall. If it has a chance of happening under normal operating circumstances (fender benders and other common accidents are considered normal), it's more likely worth a recall.

There is no "proactive" recall. Proactive means the action is taken prior to any event, as a preventative measure. Recalls only happen after an event has occurred, prior to it becoming widespread (for full disclosure, I could have worded that last bit differently to de-emphasize the event having happened sporadically already and emphasize the prior-ness, but I wanted to make a point).

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (3, Insightful)

Pr0xY (526811) | about 8 months ago | (#45546527)

The article points out that there have actually been 12 fires in the Ford Escapes being recalled

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546613)

Nah, it's because tesla is new technology. If self driving cars ever arrive the first crash leading to death will be all over the news, regardless of hundred crashes that happened to human drivers the same day. It's news because it's new.

Re:Fire vs. Potential Fire (3, Informative)

tlambert (566799) | about 8 months ago | (#45546871)

Maybe the media scrutiny is that Tesla's actually caught fire, and Ford is proactively recalling because there is a potential fire?

Actually, if you read the article, you will see that both sets of vehicles are having approximately one fire per 10,000...

"There have been 12 reported fires but no injuries in the bigger recall of 139,917 Ford Escape vehicles."

Thin-skinned whiner (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546093)

I've never known a CEO to be so thin-skinned as Musk. Whether it's a rocket with a failed engine or a battery that goes dead, civil, honest doubt about his products is consistently painted a dishonest, malicious slander.

His brand-new, untested cars caught fire. It was in the news because it was a new thing.

No one is out to get him, and if the machines are as safe as he is making them out to be then that will be proven with time. For now, him and his fanatical followers need to relax.

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (5, Insightful)

mojo-raisin (223411) | about 8 months ago | (#45546115)

One would almost think Musk had poured every dime he owned into Tesla and was in a bitter battle against an entrenched and corrupt industry. ... oh wait.

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 8 months ago | (#45546299)

Except he hasn't poured all of his money into it. Not by a long shot. And that's before you factor in his huge US government loan.

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546337)

You mean the one he repaid, early? Nice try. Shill.

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (4, Informative)

AaronW (33736) | about 8 months ago | (#45546419)

Actually at one point he did:

"Musk said he put everything he had left into the company, even borrowing money from friends. Tesla went on to close the investment round on the last hour of the last possible day. If the fundraise hadn’t come through, the company would have gone bankrupt a few days later."

http://thenextweb.com/entrepreneur/2013/10/31/elon-musk-failure-fear/ [thenextweb.com]

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546435)

No one is out to get him, and if the machines are as safe as he is making them out to be then that will be proven with time. For now, him and his fanatical followers need to relax.

The Ford recall is due to an improperly installed fuel line, which can split and cause a fire without warning. So far there are 12 confirmed reports of this, that does NOT include any fires which happened as a result of a collision.
The Tesla fires were ALL the result of a collision, there were only a couple of them, and no incidents of fire without a collision.

Yes, plenty of people are out to get him- the Competition is running scared. I'm by no means a "fanatical follower"... it'll be quite a while before I ever drive a pussy-mobile myself. But I'm no fan of bullshit reporting, and that's about all I'm seeing.

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546619)

The economics of a Tesla EV look very good!

Re:Thin-skinned whiner (3, Insightful)

SvnLyrBrto (62138) | about 8 months ago | (#45546705)

When institutions no less esteemed than the BBC and the New York Times have done "reviews" of Tesla that were somewhere between contrived and falsified (Depending on how polite you care to be.) to make the cars look as bad as possible, I think one can forgive Musk for getting a bit defensive and even coming out swinging when under attack.

Yes, they *are* out to get him (Or at least TSLA.).

Better Outcome (4, Funny)

SuperKendall (25149) | about 8 months ago | (#45546105)

With little media attention on the recall, Musk might have a point about the unfair treatment Tesla gets in the news.

Well you haven't factored in that with a name like "Escape", you know the outcome of any fires will be fine. No such assurance strapping yourself into something named after a guy who lit 200 lightbulbs from a power source 26 miles away [badassoftheweek.com] .

Re:Better Outcome (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546615)

Speaking of the name, have you noticed all of Ford's SUVs start with "Ex" except "Escape"?

Perhaps someone with an accent named it? :)

An anonymous reader writes (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546109)

More like, "A paid Tesla shill writes."

Re:An anonymous reader writes (1)

mojo-raisin (223411) | about 8 months ago | (#45546159)

More like, "A neanderthal ICE lover gets angry at progress."

Re:An anonymous reader writes (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546193)

You got me.

I love internal combustion engines and hate electric cars

my blood boils at the thought of internal combustion engines being displaced as the standard power plant for consumer vehicles

I really give a shit about this stuff

I have no job and jerk off to photos of Etienne Lenoir in my basement

my live revolves around my love for the internal combustion engine

Re:An anonymous reader writes (1)

Desler (1608317) | about 8 months ago | (#45546327)

Right, because no one can possibly disagree with anything Elon says or does without having to be a neanderthal. Get over yourself. Musk is not some martyred messiah.

Re:An anonymous reader writes (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546445)

Get over yourself. Musk is not some martyred messiah.

Sure he is - poor guy, certainly couldn't have lived through that many people trying to crawl up his arse. Probably bled out pretty quickly, at least.

Re:An anonymous reader writes (2)

TooMuchToDo (882796) | about 8 months ago | (#45546913)

A messiah? Hardly. Just a hard working guy who shuttles cargo and satellites to space and is revolutionizing transportation.

What did you do today?

WWOT? fp! (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546153)

Is this the Elon Musk PR network? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546169)

Who cares if Elon Musk could have a talking point. Who would care if Musk made the point?

Unfair treatment? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546179)

Ford is doing a voluntary recall after 12 fires in just under 150,000 vehicles, or 0.008% of vehicles sold. Tesla is not doing a recall after 3 fires in @ 20,000 vehicles sold, or 0.015% of vehicles sold. Why is the different media attention any surprise?

Re:Unfair treatment? (4, Informative)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 8 months ago | (#45546291)

The Ford's being recalled catch fire while stationary after normal use.
The Tesla's catch fire after a high speed incident. Two hit big chunks of metal, the other was crashed.

Re:Unfair treatment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546441)

"The Ford's being recalled catch fire while stationary after normal use.
The Tesla's catch fire after a high speed incident. Two hit big chunks of metal, the other was crashed."

Which is irrelevant if we don't know how many of the Ford's hit chunks of metal. It's still a design fault if one vehicle is much more likely to catch fire in the same circumstances. The high speed ride height is likely to have contributed.

Intro to statistics (4, Insightful)

Firethorn (177587) | about 8 months ago | (#45546499)

In addition, there's a difference between a sample size of 150k and 20k. 12 out of 150k is a much more meaningful number than 3 out of 20k. In addition, Ford has developed a physical fix, while Tesla was able to impliment a fix via software update. If they chose to follow that up with a hardware fix, that has to be designed and implimented.

Given that the incidents in question were all after collisions that probably would have totaled most vehicle anyways, and were nice enough to wait long enough for the people to evacuate the car, I'm not sure it's as serious of an issue as 'spontaneously combusts while parked'.

Re:Intro to statistics (1)

Firethorn (177587) | about 8 months ago | (#45546519)

Oh yeah, and I'm reminded of 'Never buy the first year of a new/significantly revised model' my family taught me. I wish the best of luck to Tesla, but it's not only a new car, it's a new car by a new car company, using new technology. I'm shocked they're having as few problems as they are.

Other than it being out of my price range period, give me the model after the model X(the SUV/minivan crossover that's coming out next), after it's been out a couple years.

Re:Unfair treatment? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546617)

"The Ford's being recalled catch fire while stationary after normal use." Actually they can catch fire while moving as well. The problem is the engine overheating, cracking the heads and leaking oil. This isn't picky about the car moving or not.

"The Tesla's catch fire after a high speed incident. "
How many other cars hit or drove over the same objects?

The simple fact is that having a large surface area vulnerable to debris very close to the ground in a known impact zone was likely to have issues. I understand why they placed it where they did, but you have to accept the reality of the consequences of the design.

Re:Unfair treatment? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546449)

Ford is doing a voluntary recall after 12 fires in just under 150,000 vehicles, or 0.008% of vehicles sold. Tesla is not doing a recall after 3 fires in @ 20,000 vehicles sold, or 0.015% of vehicles sold. Why is the different media attention any surprise?

What, you think Ford is completely doing this recall out of the goodness of their hearts, or because they've been held up over this issue, and have serious fears of liability and regulatory enforcement since the fires in these cases are caused by a manufacturing defect, while Tesla can say...um, yeah, running over objects is slightly bad for our cars, goodness no, what kind of recall will possibly fix that? I suppose if they took back all the cars, then the drivers could never drive over anything, but that seems a bit excessive.

Or do you have some other fix you'd suggest?

Re:Unfair treatment? (1)

squiggleslash (241428) | about 8 months ago | (#45546597)

Because Musk is a rebel, a man who says what he means and means what he says (except when he's making shit up, but, hey, don't we all), he's a .com success story and he's gonna turn this world upside down gosh darn it unlike those suits at Ford and Nissan and GM and stuff! LEAVE ELON ALLOOOONNEEEE!

Seriously, like I've said before, I hope he's successful at moving the automotive industry away from gasoline and over to to electric cars, but I don't think nerds should automatically assume he's a fount of all wisdom. The hyperloop thing in particular just left me cold and pissed off, an interesting technology promoted in bad faith in an attempt to derail a minor competitive threat, destroying the re-establishment of transportation alternatives in the process.

(And does anyone here remember just how terrible PayPal was before eBay took it over?)

I'm not saying the media hasn't always been fair to Musk and Tesla in particular. Some of the reviews, from the NYT and the BBC, were clearly not even attempting to paint a fair picture. But the fires thing? I'm not even sure it's fair to criticize press coverage, most of which has been about Tesla's newsworthy response. Indeed, the first I heard of the Model S fires was in news stories about Musk's tweets and blog entries on the subject.

Disclaimer: I own some TSLA shares.

Re:Unfair treatment? (2)

IICV (652597) | about 8 months ago | (#45546635)

Actually, it's 30 fires in under 150,000 vehicles - the 12 you're talking about are 12 that made it to consumer's hands. There were a total of 30 that caught fire due to this defect, but a lot of them were still owned by dealerships when it happened.

Re:Unfair treatment? (2)

Petfish (1254220) | about 8 months ago | (#45546717)

Something about Tesla makes Anonymous Coward very, very angry. That alone is a great recommendation.

Gas tanks blow up a lot, batteries blow up some. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546205)

Puncture either, problems ensue. 3 fires due to punctured battery don't exactly make a car "unsafe at any speed" like the Pinto, Mustang, etc.

Only Ford? (4, Informative)

BringsApples (3418089) | about 8 months ago | (#45546257)

Here's a list of manufacturers that had to do big recalls in 2013, found here: [nhtsa.gov]

-November 26: 139,917 Ford Escape vehicles from 2013, Recalled for potential oil leaks that may cause an engine fire.
-November 18: 707,176 Chrysler vehicles from 2003-2008, including RAM 2500 4X4 and RAM 1500 Mega Cab 4X4 models, Recalled for the left tie rod assembly, which may break, causing a loss of steering.
-November 18: 265,044 Chrysler RAM 2500 4X4 and 3500 4X4 vehicles from 2008-2012, Recalled for the left tie rod assembly, which may break, causing a loss of steering.
-November 4: 344,187 Honda Odysseys from 2007-2008, Recalled for software that may cause the sudden application of the brakes without the brake lights going on, increasing the risk of a crash.

Not all are due to fire, but all are potentially fatal, and much higher number of cars recalled.

Re:Only Ford? (5, Interesting)

viperidaenz (2515578) | about 8 months ago | (#45546307)

I like this one better

November 25: 14,909 Chevrolet Malibu vehicles from 2013, Recalled for the wiring harness under the front seats which may short circuit, potentially starting a fire.

Who cares if the engine catches fire, these ones catch the driver on fire.

Re:Only Ford? (1)

steelfood (895457) | about 8 months ago | (#45546731)

these ones catch the driver on fire.

That's a feature. It makes for a more personal driving experience.

How many fires: Tesla v. Escapes? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546349)

"Tesla received a lot of attention over the Model S fires recently, but they're not the only car company having issues with spontaneous combustion. Ford has issued a recall on almost 140,000 Ford Escapes for potential engine fires. With little media attention on the recall, Musk might have a point about the unfair treatment Tesla gets in the news."

How many of the Escapes have caught on fire, dumbass?

Re:How many fires: Tesla v. Escapes? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546471)

"Tesla received a lot of attention over the Model S fires recently, but they're not the only car company having issues with spontaneous combustion. Ford has issued a recall on almost 140,000 Ford Escapes for potential engine fires. With little media attention on the recall, Musk might have a point about the unfair treatment Tesla gets in the news."

How many of the Escapes have caught on fire, dumbass?

So far? Twelve.
NONE of the Tesla fires have been (as the summary claims) "spontaneous".

Re:How many fires: Tesla v. Escapes? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546513)

So far? Twelve.

Potentially? Statistically speaking... all of them.

Even a broken clock is right twice a day. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 8 months ago | (#45546425)

I am no fan of Musk or current electric cars but the fire/safety issue has been seriously overblown. More likely to catch fire in a 10 year old car by far, and as we have seen by the number of recalls posted above, many NEW vehicles have far more severe issues.

While I would not buy a current Tesla, it may be possible in the next few years to buy a hybrid that meets my needs and costs less than 25k.
And like it or not, EVERY manufacturer that is actually selling product in the electric or hybrid niches is helping to improve the products and lower the prices.
Tesla more than most.

Teslas are PROVEN to be very good cars as long as the mileage constraint doesn't impact you.
And you have enough money to help underwrite the R&D process for the rest of us.

Re:Even a broken clock is right twice a day. (1)

IICV (652597) | about 8 months ago | (#45546655)

While I would not buy a current Tesla, it may be possible in the next few years to buy a hybrid that meets my needs and costs less than 25k. ...

Teslas are PROVEN to be very good cars as long as the mileage constraint doesn't impact you.

... what the heck are you doing that you regularly need to travel more than 200 miles in a day?

Spontaneous combustion (4, Funny)

the_arrow (171557) | about 8 months ago | (#45546557)

Yes I want a car with a spontaneous combustion engine! It might not take me to my destination when I want it to, but it will be very exciting to drive.

Am I the only one who misread the headline as... (1)

flargleblarg (685368) | about 8 months ago | (#45546627)

Witch Burning Teslas In the News Ford Recalls Almost 140,000 Escapes

Teva-wearing-to-show-off-his-toes Ashton Kutcher: (1)

KrazyDave (2559307) | about 8 months ago | (#45546781)

Likes Tesla enough to feature one in an episode of 'Two And A Half men", so it must be fabulous to the knuckle-dragging, self-important, pseudo-intellectual, "Big Bang Theory"-watching sluggard hipsters who idolize and follow new-age 'messiahs" such as Obama and Musk.

And, here we go again? (1)

denmarkw00t (892627) | about 8 months ago | (#45546861)

I'm not sure. I don't quite bite. I've only seen most of the Tesla fire stories here...and most of them in defense of Tesla. However, I've seen plenty of stories about other car companies having plenty of problems everywhere. I don't think Tesla is being unfairly criticized, but I think the community that has arisen to defend them is extremely vocal...to the point that they actually make the stories about the fires more prevalent. Hell, one story here talked about how common car fires are in general, so why is this now news?

From my point of view: the people making the biggest fuss are the people who are decrying the "big fuss" around the fires. There's probably a term for this - feels, Streisandish...

astroturfing detected! (1)

db10 (740174) | about 8 months ago | (#45546919)

.... hating on electric cars is illogical... worse case scenario is that you choose not to buy one. Believe me, this topic gets the best astroturfing oil money can buy.

Poor Tesla - diddums (1, Insightful)

Dan Askme (2895283) | about 8 months ago | (#45546981)

"With little media attention on the recall, Musk might have a point about the unfair treatment Tesla gets in the news."

- Ford builds a combustion engine that relies on explosions to run.
- Tesla builds an engine which removes the need for engine combustion completely, yet, still creates an explosion and fire.

Tesla are getting the wrap they deserve. The whole idea of an electrical car is to remove the need for combustion/explosions altogether.
Whilst a engine should never "explode", a combustion engine technically is every time its running.

I really find Tesla has a childish attitude "Why do they always pick on us. Our battery life is great, your wrong, look at our internal 200 page report".
Maybe a different approach of "How can we resolve this? Lets make electric cars better" would work more in their favour?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...