Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

isthisnamestupid t1_ivm2nqv wrote

You can have verified power steering for $8

367

Nintoo t1_ivm9kkm wrote

I closed this thread right as I read this comment and had come come back to give an upvote. So good

8

josefx t1_ivno6mm wrote

Verified power steering will be available for all buyers by the end of 2019.

2

baselganglia t1_ivmd8wq wrote

#"A firmware release that updated calibration values"

Ok, so a software update, over the air.

Lol

293

jeremy71504 t1_ivmntwh wrote

A lot of recalls now a days are just updates. 70% of our cars today at Toyota are just updates.

71

psalm_69 t1_ivmtl6j wrote

Except you don't even have to bring it in for service. I'll bet most of not all of the Tesla's in question were updated before this announcement even hit the news.

40

SeaweedSorcerer t1_ivn02eg wrote

Another article on this said an absurd percent of cars (97% I think) were already updated before the article was written. Such a non-issue of headline writers taking advantage of government technical wording for clicks.

26

vanhalenbr t1_ivn4h3r wrote

As software engineer this is scary, because I know well how easy is to have bugs. Sometime it’s not even the programmer but the tool that the programmer is using like the compiler.

Some essentials like steering would be better without software interaction.

16

ukezi t1_ivo0z5l wrote

That is already not the case in semi-modern cars. However the complexity of software with Tesla and their insistence to have everything running on the main computer is something I don't like.

11

BladeX16 t1_ivo2czt wrote

That’s one thing Tesla gets right …. My Chrysler needs an update and guess what .. I need to go waste a few hours at the dealer to have them upload the new software during a scheduled visit. Dealer appointments are backlogged for over a month and a half as well.

7

nuttertools t1_ivqbnd2 wrote

Conversely Chrysler engineers don’t have to worry about pushing a button and breaking every car. Cars are moving from industrial class to consumer and the ride is interesting.

3

BladeX16 t1_ivqfszs wrote

I wonder what kind of controls Tesla has in place to prevent rogue engineers or hackers doing nefarious things like that …

1

nuttertools t1_ivqjv9l wrote

In software development that’s usually very easy to control. If that happens it’s not just incompetence, probably negligence.
Regressions from intentional changes though….good luck. No matter the size and term of the various beta groups you’ll hit cases. Hopefully not in most of your customer base but that’s the danger of frequent updates, much more likely.

1

NewPresWhoDis t1_ivmo0sf wrote

Except all the Tesla engineers are still reviewing PRs on Twitter.

16

BLSmith2112 t1_ivnt5m0 wrote

Shocked this isn’t downvoted -30000 votes for being accurate.

3

GoldWallpaper t1_ivqfmww wrote

No car should accept OTA updates, because no car should be linked that deeply to the internet without some sort of user intervention. It's a fucking security nightmare in waiting.

Jesus, what has /r/technology become?

/guy who knows stuff and actually works in tech

2

baselganglia t1_ivqkncu wrote

Misleading comment. You have to accept the OTA as a user.

3

ReformedPC t1_ivn5smf wrote

That's pretty scary knowing an update could get you into an accident

−5

HanaBothWays t1_ivm3fyf wrote

Remember that these days Tesla is a Securities Act violation and bundle of workplace harrassment lawsuits that occasionally produces cars of dubious quality.

80

nolongerbanned99 t1_ivmenr7 wrote

Well said friend. I’ll raise you one. Also under criminal investigation for the misleadingly named ‘autopilot’ ending the lives of its owners.

22

pacific_beach t1_ivmg40o wrote

3x DOJ investigations, NHTSA, CA DMV, SEC, basically every alphabet agency is moving in.

16

nolongerbanned99 t1_ivmgxcl wrote

That’s good to hear. For the younger folks, no matter how wealthy you are, there are consequences for flouting the law and ignoring rules. Yiu might be able to get away with recklessness for a while, but eventually things catch up with you.

11

_willymydilly t1_ivmcdh8 wrote

It is cool that they can fix recalls like this with a simple over the air update. It’s funny how much attention tesla always gets for things like this.

77

Spirited-Doughnut520 t1_ivmg2ed wrote

It’s funny how many recalls they have versus other manufacturers. I never once had to get a “software update” for my Toyotas, OTA or at the dealer

23

Rodiruk t1_ivmjv3x wrote

Lucky you. I can tell you it happens to the other manufacturers as well, from first hand experience. Except when it does, you gotta take the car to a dealership instead of just doing it at home.

26

rasvial t1_ivmwxy6 wrote

You're missing the point- why is their software shipped out so eagerly requiring recalls? It's great it's a software fix, but how many miles were affected Tesla's driving around with that?

−5

Rodiruk t1_ivmx8i2 wrote

No, you're missing the point.

The point is, this stuff happens to ALL companies. This is not exclusive to Tesla. Yet we only see posts about Tesla on this site.

I literally have a power steering column recall with my car that is not a Tesla. But since it's not a Tesla, you don't hear about it.

My wife's car has an issue with the transmission where you weren't really in park even when you put it in park.

I also have a bug with the dash requiring a software update. But I gotta bring it in to the dealer to get it updated.

9

rasvial t1_ivmxg18 wrote

You're on a tech subreddit. What would you expect?

−8

Rodiruk t1_ivmxlie wrote

Ah so other cars have no firmware or software in them, got it.

11

rasvial t1_ivmxrsj wrote

Calm down, replying doesn't require a downvote.

Pull the stats on software related recalls then? It's one thing having a wonky volume knob, another losing steering. Software related recalls (or even headaches) come up on here all the time- I recall a lot around bmw seats for example.

−7

Rodiruk t1_ivmy1t3 wrote

I don't need to pull stats. You pull them. What I said is I have first hand experience that this happens across the board. I mentioned no stats.

4

AyBruhBee t1_ivmyhig wrote

Theres recalls out there now that dont even have a fix ready. Recalls are such a common thing im pretty sure this guy has never owned a car or checked for recalls and thinks they only happen if theyre on the front page of reddit

1

Rodiruk t1_ivmz131 wrote

One of my favorite recalls was for my 06 mustang. I had issues filling up the gas tank. When filling up, it would kick off when the tank was only half full. There was a design issue with the gas tank.

Fords recommendation was: Use a different pump

2

E_Snap t1_ivmxxp2 wrote

I’d expect moderators to be able to recognize the difference between hatesturbation and legitimate criticism and moderate accordingly.

1

rasvial t1_ivmy2n9 wrote

It's neither.. it's an article? Why would that mean "hate"

1

E_Snap t1_ivmziq0 wrote

I’m talking about the comments, not the article

1

I_Can_Comment_ t1_ivmi8cq wrote

I bet Toyota has a billion more cars and products on the street than Tesla

29

jetstobrazil t1_ivmpef2 wrote

Seriously, Tesla produces, what… 4 vehicles? Toyota has been making cars for 75 years and has 14 current models.

9

Cyathem t1_ivnmy89 wrote

You don't understand "rates", do you?

Recalls : New cars sold

Tesla = 55%

Toyota = 191%

6

ukezi t1_ivo1eg0 wrote

They compare total vehicles for that brand sold and recalled in the time frame.

There are a lot of Toyota on the road recalls happen not only for new cars. I think a lot of the recalled Toyota were some before the time frame and that is increasing the numbers.

On the other hand there were basically no Tesla before 2011.

6

Cyathem t1_ivoa5hf wrote

>On the other hand there were basically no Tesla before 2011.

This doesn't change the rate. Toyota was selling cars for longer but also recalling then for longer. Tesla wasn't able to recall cars during that period, but they didn't sell cars either. It's not relevant to interpreting the results.

1

ukezi t1_ivoat61 wrote

Ok. Scenario: you sell lots of cars. From say 2000 to 2010 you have an airbag in the cars that in 2012 is shown to have a problem. So you do a recall in 2012. As you just recalled 10 years of production you obviously recalled more cars then you sold in 2012.

That is a problem that a company that basically didn't sell cars before the reference time frame can't have.

3

Cyathem t1_ivp60h0 wrote

We'd have to see the average age of the products that were recalled. In my mind, recalls usually happen pretty soon after a model is released. It doesn't take 10 years for something to need to be recalled. I think it usually shows up in the first two years. I'd have to check though.

The average time between release and recall should decrease, if over-the-air software updates are being considered recalls. Those will only get more common.

1

Konini t1_ivnp6mr wrote

The percentages look bullshit to me. They explain this as number of recalls in a given year divided by new registrations, which I’m assuming are registrations of the given make. However, those numbers are not related.

Firstly, newly registered cars most likely will be different models than those affected by recalls. The ratio mixes two different sets of data. At least from what I’ve seen new models are rarely subject to recalls, and the article definitely does not give any evidence to substantiate it’s approach.

Secondly, we get no context of the new registration trends. A brand losing market share will be appearing worse in the statistics than a brand gaining. It looks pretty clear to me why Volvo and Mitsubishi have such high percentages, with this approach.

A more valid statistic but much harder to assess accurately would be the total number of cars a given brand has on the market at the time of the recall.

A possible alternative approach could be to divide the number of recalls for a specific model year by the total number of units produced in a given model year and average them out across whole manufacturer gamut.

Either way the statistics the article presented do not look very trustworthy and seem to favour new and rising brands.

3

taisui t1_ivmlrd2 wrote

My Lexus can't even update the GPS navi map without paying hundreds the dealership, and my Subaru had went thru 2 firmware updates I had to do at the dealership.

15

Thaflash_la t1_ivmuu1z wrote

Yup, my Toyota recall had me bringing the car in for a few days.

5

TheSnoz t1_ivmry73 wrote

All manufacturers have recalls, most aren't urgent and are often done when you bring it in for a logbook service.

2

Dlemor t1_ivmvdis wrote

I have Prius C 2012. No updates.

2

mammaryglands t1_ivmtjpq wrote

That's because your old ass Toyota has ancient and inefficient technology. Toyota release software updates all the time

1

sevenofnineftw t1_ivn0al7 wrote

A lot of OEMs just update ECUs at the dealership when you bring it in for maintenance and don’t tell you because it’s so minor - updated tuning values for the transmission controller or something

1

hammeredtrout1 t1_ivmmrd7 wrote

Yeah you’re spreading misinformation. This is not true

−1

Shasve t1_ivnpjn2 wrote

This is purely anecdotal and in your experience. I don’t think they experience significantly more recalls than other auto manufacturers

−1

Dlemor t1_ivmv9n4 wrote

For me, a recall is a massive repair bill for the manufacturer. Clearly, a online update doesn’t qualify as ‘recall”

12

E_Snap t1_ivmxqdb wrote

It is a recall in the sense that if the car fails to automatically update to this software version, it needs to be taken off the road and serviced immediately.

11

Appliancesurgeon t1_ivna8o5 wrote

Seriously. I’ve never owned a vehicle that hasn’t had at least one recall.

1

b_a_t_m_4_n t1_ivm3l2b wrote

Cool, doing exactly what every other manufacturer does when a potential issue is discovered.

37

vegemouse t1_ivm7z4q wrote

Doing exactly what they’re legally obliged to do. Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don’t happen to other makes at the same frequency as Teslas. Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.

18

RunescapeAficionado t1_ivmd6de wrote

Not to defend Tesla or anything but ice cars have had plenty of problems...

21

th1341 t1_ivmeb83 wrote

Not to mention the fact it takes a lost lawsuit half the time for many other manufacturers to issue a recall. At least these are voluntary.

Because I can see the other comments here: Elon musk should be charged for fraud, Tesla is way overrated, Elons an idiot. You can believe all of this and still point out things a company does well

7

bit_pusher t1_ivmgedt wrote

>Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don’t happen to other makes at the same frequency as Teslas.

GM recalled half a million cars earliest this year for defective seatbelts. Please provide data that shows Teslas are experiencing safety recalls at a hire rate than other manufacturers.

​

>Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.

Chevy recalled 69000 Volts due to a risk of catching fire when they were charged to 100%.

These are problems that every manufacturer has.

20

whatyouwant5 t1_ivmm6bj wrote

They recalled the Bolt. They also bought my car back at full price (including taxes) minus a small mileage fee.

5

wildrussy t1_ivmdcc0 wrote

>Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don’t happen to other makes at the same frequency as Teslas. Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.

Gonna need a source for this. How many recalls per year does Tesla have, and how many do other car companies have on average?

And gasoline vehicles (i.e. the majority) are vastly more likely to catch fire than EVs are. This is according to accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. Tesla makes up a plurality of the EV portion of this data, and for every vehicle fire their cars undergo, the "average" vehicle catches fire over 61 times (1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles).

Curious to know where on earth you're getting the idea that these cars get recalled more or "spontaneously explode" more than other cars do, except perhaps your own perception of media coverage?

To put it more plainly: just because a vehicle fire or recall from a "normal" car company doesn't show up on your newsfeed doesn't mean they don't happen. They just happen without media coverage.

17

piray003 t1_ivmeqog wrote

>Gonna need a source for this.

"Trust me bro."

1

pacific_beach t1_ivmgbxz wrote

Clearly you've never looked at fire frequency data. Tesla's are 50%+ more likely to burn than their contemporary ICE counterparts.

−5

wildrussy t1_ivmh1ot wrote

But... I just cited the fire frequency data? Conducted by a third party (a government institution)

Do you have anything to actually support this claim?

9

wildrussy t1_ivmhqbt wrote

Right off the bat: this is already a cherry picked data set. You chose exclusively non-crash fires (a tiny minority of vehicle fires).

I question why we chose to focus on this tiny subset of vehicle fires. Is it, perhaps, because that's the dataset that EVs (and Teslas) underperform in?

When we focus on this subset, Teslas catch fire 50% more than ICE vehicles. When we widen our subset to all vehicle fires, ICE vehicles catch fire 6000% more than Teslas.

Strange.

10

pacific_beach t1_ivmnd0c wrote

It's not cherry picked, it's the only dataset that exists in the US (as far as I know)

The reason why the dataset is good is because it includes vehicle miles driven and is limited to the contemporary model years for tesla. Apples to apples.

0

wildrussy t1_ivmpcxx wrote

I agree that per mile driven is an important metric, and Teslas benefit from being newer than an average ICE vehicle.

But that's still far inferior to using every vehicle fire (in the dataset I cited above), due to how tiny this subset is. If you only pick non-crash fires, batteries will be disfavored heavily.

3

pacific_beach t1_ivmpsje wrote

They're comparing CONTEMPORARY model-year vehicles that spontaneously combust (not in an accident) and adjust for miles driven. Tesla's ignite more than ICE. This is not difficult.

1

wildrussy t1_ivmt3bd wrote

>They're comparing CONTEMPORARY model-year vehicles

Heard ya loud and clear the first time, my guy. I just pointed out that yes, Tesla benefits from having newer models. The idea that comparing by same model year has merit isn't lost on me.

>spontaneously combust (not in an accident)

Tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny tiny minority of vehicle fires. You selected the exact subset where EVs perform worse.

>Tesla's ignite more than ICE. This is not difficult.

Good lord. Here, maybe if I adopt your methods and capitalize the letters:

ONLY if you SELECT a TINY subset of the data do Teslas ignite more than ICE vehicles. This is an EGREGIOUS mischaracterization of their ACTUAL RELATIVE SAFETIES.

The difference isn't minor. It's not even close. There's a SIXTY FOLD difference between the two. This is largely due to the enormous reservoir of explosive liquid they carry around with them.

ICE vehicles ignite more than Teslas. This is not difficult.

5

pacific_beach t1_ivn47bc wrote

You have no data and a lot of worthless paragraphs.

0

wildrussy t1_ivn5nes wrote

>And gasoline vehicles (i.e. the majority) are vastly more likely to catch fire than EVs are. This is according to accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. Tesla makes up a plurality of the EV portion of this data, and for every vehicle fire their cars undergo, the "average" vehicle catches fire over 61 times (1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles).

>You have no data

???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????

2

pacific_beach t1_ivn6jl5 wrote

Post the data you fucking idiot

0

wildrussy t1_ivnaehr wrote

You have to be one of the pettiest human beings I've ever met. If you wanted a link, you could've just asked for a link. Much as I'd like to tell you to shove it:

The oft-cited study is this one, compiled by insurance analysts and published to their website (and, ostensibly, independently verified).

The fire data itself is, again, from the NTSB, with sales data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics. It's all public and you're free to do a little legwork yourself, if you care to.

I'm not going to run the database searches for you, especially not after being called a "fucking idiot". You can take the study at face value, go verify it with the NTSB data yourself, or shut up about it.

Or I suppose you could keep spreading falsehoods and insulting people for pointing out you're wrong. I guess that's up to you at this point, isn't it?

2

Kirahei t1_ivmgrwb wrote

There are definitely recalls where traditional cars are in danger of exploding, I highly recommend people look into National Highway Traffic Safety Administration you can type in your VIN # and see all active recalls on your vehicle.

Source: worked for a car manufacturer and my job was to call people who’s cars were affected by recalls that were potentially deadly.

The amount of people who couldn’t be bothered to speak to me was insane, seriously even if you don’t want to talk to someone on the phone, go to the website to see if you have active recalls.

12

mandogvan t1_ivmci79 wrote

Actually gasoline cars explode at a significantly higher rate then BEVs.

As far as frequent Tesla recalls: If you counted the number of recalls where you have to physically bring the car in to the mechanic, it is less than average ICE cars. Like this issue, most of these “recalls” are addressed by an over the air software update

9

pacific_beach t1_ivmgg0n wrote

This is 100% false.

−2

mandogvan t1_ivmgnhv wrote

https://www.autoweek.com/news/a38225037/how-much-you-should-worry-about-ev-fires/

> Researchers from insurance deal site Auto Insurance EZ compiled sales and accident data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics and the National Transportation Safety Board. The site found that hybrid vehicles had the most fires per 100,000 sales at 3474.5. There were 1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles.

6

vegemouse t1_ivmcqdj wrote

Teslas explode at a significantly higher rate than other EVs. I’m not dunking on EVs, i’m dunking on Teslas.

−3

mandogvan t1_ivmdybn wrote

> There were 1529.9 fires per 100k for gas vehicles and just 25.1 fires per 100k sales for electric vehicles.

I’ve been driving gas cars all my life. EVs are even safer than gas cars when it comes to fires.

I’m not saying your wrong about teslas compared to other EVs. But even so, this is statistically negligible. Gas cars are almost 2 orders of magnitude more dangerous and I ain’t worrying about them either.

4

pacific_beach t1_ivmgs66 wrote

−5

mandogvan t1_ivmhtra wrote

There are many on those charts with greater frequency of fires than teslas.

And to reiterate: ALL of this is negligible. A ram pickup is more than 2x more likely to catch on fire than a Tesla model X (according to your source). And I’m not afraid of driving a ram.

6

wildrussy t1_ivmjtqr wrote

Adding onto this: this only counts non-crash fires (a tiny, cherry-picked subset of vehicle fires).

1

pacific_beach t1_ivmmguy wrote

A RAM pickup is a small subset of FIAT models while 2 of 2 tesla vehicles that were eligible for this report are substantially higher than ICE to catch on fire.

Your claim that ICE catch on fire more often is total bullshit, tesla's are firebombs compared to aggregated ICE vehicles.

−1

MrChurro3164 t1_ivmtjli wrote

Can you explain your link? I’m looking at the ‘highest claim frequencies’ and the model S isn’t even on the list, and the X is behind the Jeep Renegade and just above the Jeep Cherokee and wrangler? (jfc I think Jeeps are the true firebombs here lol)

2

pacific_beach t1_ivmzsmg wrote

>Can you explain your link? I’m looking at the ‘highest claim frequencies’ and the model S isn’t even on the list, and the X is behind the Jeep Renegade and just above the Jeep Cherokee and wrangler? (jfc I think Jeeps are the true firebombs here lol)

Just search for tesla, you'll find them. And yes, don't buy a jeep (or tesla)

0

Dadarian t1_ivmghcn wrote

What is your source for this? And is this by volume or by rate?

1

Rodiruk t1_ivmihit wrote

"Recalls for serious and dangerous problems don't happen to other makes at the same frequency as Tesla's"

Well that's just wrong. I've had cars from many manufacturers and I've always gotten similar recall noticed on all of them.

3

LeonBlacksruckus t1_ivmekhi wrote

It's wild you can tell people like yourself didn't even read the article. They are fixing whatever this issue is with an over the air update pushed to the cars. Meaning no one even has to bring their car in to the shop.

Basically they updated the firmware (embedded software for hardware) and then realized that the update caused other issues so they are rolling it back to the previous version essentially.

2

b_a_t_m_4_n t1_ivm9ek6 wrote

My Kuga has just been recalled for potential engine fires.....

1

steadvii t1_ivmciib wrote

Right. There have never been issues with gasoline cars exploding.

1

bengringo2 t1_ivmeco3 wrote

>Other cars don’t usually spontaneously explode either.

I see you weren't alive for the Ford Pinto.

1

penemuel13 t1_ivmgl9x wrote

The Ford Pinto didn’t spontaneously explode; it exploded when rear-ended because of the placement of the gas tank. That’s pretty much the direct opposite of spontaneous.

1

phunkydroid t1_ivm85dg wrote

Not exactly the same, Tesla did it automatically through a software update that required no action from owners. The word "recall" is just a formality here.

9

pacific_beach t1_ivmgy3z wrote

Since when is having to acknowledge that your steering might fail a formality?

−3

Rodiruk t1_ivmjpoh wrote

That's not what they said, try reading that again.

8

pacific_beach t1_ivmlnkr wrote

"Potential Power Steering Failure"

done

−4

Rodiruk t1_ivmnt5j wrote

Failed twice in a row, impressive.

"The word "recall" is just a formality here."

"Since when is having to acknowledge that your steering might fail a formality?"

They didn't say that acknowledging an issue is a formality. They said the use of the word "recall" is the formality. In the classic sense, you would need to bring in your car somewhere to have a repair done, or even to update the firmware. This is not the case here. It was an over the air update.

7

phunkydroid t1_ivmhp8s wrote

Acknowledging the issue isn't. The word "recall" when nothing is being returned to the manufacturer in any way is. When other cars are recalled, they have to be brought in to a service center.

3

dinoroo t1_ivmbwss wrote

Yes but when GM did it for the Bolt or Rivian did it for their vehicles, people said EVs are unreliable.

3

The_ODB_ t1_ivorzeh wrote

Bolts were lighting themselves on fire.

1

i_wayyy_over_think t1_ivmfqiy wrote

fuck elon musk, just kidding it's just a voluntary over the air update affect a small percentage of their cars, and 97% of them were fixed before the recall was put out there.

I keep thinking Elon tweets dumb shit ( like the Pelosi conspiracy junk) and I've had enough, but then r/technology gets hold a new overblown fake outrage story of the day like this and feel like I've got to go back to defending.

35

thecreep t1_ivmj9cm wrote

We can totally call out people's success and failures at the same time. No need to take one side or the other.

24

Astrikal t1_ivo8ssp wrote

This is what Reddit has become. Bring every Elon Musk related new to the top and then every comment be like: “Elon bad”, “Elon baad”, “Baa!”.

6

TbonerT t1_ivpydj0 wrote

I spotted an anti-fanboy over at r/Space in an SLS post. It was a perfectly fine comment about how SpaceX is pushing rockets forward faster than SLS but he started it off with his opinion about Musk. No one fucking cares about how you feel about the guy and that has nothing to do with what everyone was talking about.

2

joey0314 t1_ivmhxgp wrote

Not really a recall although they do technically call it that, it was fixed with an over the air firmware update. But i guess if you include that in the title people wouldnt click the article.

14

matali t1_ivm8i0c wrote

Calling this a "recall" is misleading. At best it's a soft recall. It was a mandatory OTA software update that was pre-emptive resolved by Tesla with no impact on drivers.

11

anengineerandacat t1_ivmal5v wrote

A recall is a recall, just because it can be resolved by flashing the firmware doesn't change how it should be reported.

6

wildrussy t1_ivmeqyb wrote

OTA means over the air. They didn't "flash" the firmware like you'd expect from a traditional OEM, where you have to bring the car to the dealership to get your firmware updated. It happened overnight in the garage, without any customer needing to do anything.

"A recall is a recall" seems a little disingenuous; not all recalls are created equally, and some are handled faster/better than others.

The vehicles were not sent back, hence the name "recall" is a bit of a misnomer. That's just the regulatory term for making a safety improvement to the car. While technically correct, it will mislead many people.

The bad reporting on the company is an unfortunate, old, and tired pattern. Reddit's enthusiasm for it is a bit newer.

2

th1341 t1_ivmew1y wrote

This is always the most bullshit response to this kind of news. A recall isn’t defined by the fact you need to take the car into the dealership to be fixed. A recall is a safety issue. In this case the remedy is a software update.

1

SeaweedSorcerer t1_ivn1why wrote

It’s pretty clear there is a level of user action that is vastly different between these two cases. In one case the user performs no action and in another case the user returns their car to the dealership for the problem to be fixed, taking hours of their time.

2

th1341 t1_ivn36yg wrote

That has nothing at all to do with the term recall.

A recall is issued when a manufacturer or NHTSA determines that a vehicle, equipment, car seat, or tire creates an unreasonable safety risk or fails to meet minimum safety standards.

Tesla had a safety issue. It’s a recall

0

SeaweedSorcerer t1_ivn3bb7 wrote

That’s fine for technical rule lawyering but it’s not very useful for communication to consumers. It’ll quickly become the boy who cried wolf.

4

th1341 t1_ivn5lv4 wrote

Id support adding terminology to it. I’ve seen “OTA Recall”, “Soft Recall” but a recall is indeed a recall.

The downvotes because you people are so concerned about a company’s image that has done nothing but lie to you is hilarious

−1

R_Meyer1 t1_ivmcvha wrote

Soft recall is still a recall. Case closed!

0

Averen t1_ivmbun4 wrote

Don’t try logic, people here are sheep lol

−1

COLONELmab t1_ivmgao8 wrote

40,000 is a very small number of vehicles in a recall.

5

Dadarian t1_ivmji1x wrote

>Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2017-2021 Model S and Model X vehicles. The electronic power assist steering (EPAS) system may experience a loss of power steering assist when driving on rough roads or after hitting a pothole.
>
>Firmware release 2022.36 changed calibration values for the electronic power assist steering (EPAS) system. In rare cases on certain 2017-2021 Model S and Model X vehicles, the updated calibration values may result in reduced or lost power steering assist due to forces from external road dynamics (i.e., pot holes or bumps) being inadvertently classified as unexpected steering assist torque. Reduced or lost power steering assist does not affect steering control, but could require greater steering effort from the driver, particularly at low speeds.

Chronology

- On October 11, 2022, Tesla began broadly rolling out firmware release 2022.36 to the vehicle fleet, which included updated calibration values for the electronic power assist steering (EPAS) system to better detect unexpected steering assist torque.

- Beginning on October 18, 2022, Tesla identified an increasing rate of alerts related to the updated EPAS calibration values on certain 2017-2021 Model S and Model X vehicles.

- On October 19, 2022, Tesla began deploying firmware release 2022.36.5 to the vehicle fleet, which reverted the calibration values for the EPAS to pre-2022.36 values, while Engineering assessed potential root causes and evaluated the condition.

- From October 19, 2022, through October 24, 2022, Tesla investigated the alert occurrences and completed a risk assessment of the condition based on severity and rate of occurrence.

- On October 25, 2022, based on the risk assessment, Tesla made a determination to voluntarily recall the affected vehicles.

- As of November 1, 2022, Tesla identified 314 vehicle alerts for this condition among U.S. vehicles (received between October 11, 2022, and November 1, 2022) that are related to or may be related to this condition. Tesla is not aware of any injuries or deaths related to this condition.

https://static.nhtsa.gov/odi/rcl/2022/RCLRPT-22V818-6624.PDF

5

TieWebb t1_ivmolqv wrote

Spending all of his time on Twitter instead of power steering. smh

2

fulanomengano t1_ivn76zg wrote

Steering aggressively to the right like Musk?

2

surfzz318 t1_ivmnlu7 wrote

Every car company has recalls like it. Just means bring it into the shop and we will fix it. Nothing to see here, move along

1

DBDude t1_ivqb97b wrote

Not even that. This was fixed for almost all cars through a software update before this notice came out.

1

surfzz318 t1_ivqeir6 wrote

They are just searching for ways to hate Tesla. With out Tesla the electric card industry wouldn’t exist

1

Moremedialies t1_ivq0a9b wrote

This supposed recall is an over the air update….want to know about real recalls check out Ford on the NTSHA site. This Tesla over the air update was completed before the media even wrote about it, but somehow it is still media worthy…

1

laramite t1_ivni6g9 wrote

I believe Elon sold approx $4B worth of tesla stock recently. Not sure if it was before this news got out.

0

nametken t1_ivo47jc wrote

These plastic Tesla’s are gonna start to fall apart now that Musk attention span has drifted again.

0

Toddisan t1_ivmca9n wrote

What? No 8 bucks, no car. Quit Twitter.

−1

30yearsahero t1_ivmd10u wrote

Have they had their Twitter accounts blocked yet?

−2

Previousman755 t1_ivmdhhs wrote

Did they have low lines Of code?

−2

N3KIO t1_ivmdhtc wrote

I always buy older cars, less electronics in the car the better your off in my opinion, and they do not break so often, they last very long time if you take care of the car.

−3

COLONELmab t1_ivmg35k wrote

Well the electronics last a long time too. Just an example, a radio in 197x car is probably working just fine still today. The mechanical parts breakdown much faster. And also, much of the electronics are safety features. Example of that, old bell air vs new Malibu, same crash test. Old car driver dead, new car driver, bruised ankle possibly.

3

Axolotis t1_ivmas7i wrote

Let me get this straight. No manual steering AND no autopilot? So these highly prized vehicles can drive limited mileage only going directly forward and directly backwards (assuming reverse works)?

−6

th1341 t1_ivmeqd2 wrote

I know this is hyperbole. But you can steer without power steering..

5

LSTNYER t1_ivmebl8 wrote

Don’t forget you can make your horn fart!

3

Personal_Ad9690 t1_ivmdyis wrote

I said it before and I’ll say it again: every Tesla you see right now is an “older” Tesla. The new ones suck and everyone who ordered them was scammed by Elon Musk. It’s only going to get worse.

−10

Yung_Elon t1_ivmf0jv wrote

The elon hate has morphed into straight up delusion lol

7