134
"We would just like to stress that this isn't typical."
this post was submitted on 28 Jun 2024
134 points (94.7% liked)
Enough Musk Spam
2204 readers
366 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
The front fell off.
How is it not typical?
Well, it's not supposed to burst into flames upon hitting a tree, for a start.
Dude’s BAC was reported as 0.26 in a toxicology report. Autopilot makes mistakes, but you’re supposed to be sober enough to correct them.
As for the car bursting into flames when it was allegedly only going 41 mph, that is surprising.
2.6‰ for us Europeans btw, America uses %
0.26‰ would only be slightly drunk with minor impairments, with that BAC you should be able to correct most "autopilot" mistakes
That’s not how it works. .26 BAC is .26 g/100mL so it’s the exact same in Europe. A BAC of 2.6 is not possible as you’d die before ever getting to 1 . Also ‰ is literally just for one thousandths percentages.
In my European mind, a BAC of 0.26 refers to a BAC of 0.26‰ which is fairly low, due to the lack of units.
But it referred to a BAC of 2.6‰, which is extremely high.
.26 is very high in American units when .08 is legal limit in a lot of places! So whatever the higher option is, most likely for non American units.
I'm pretty sure they're correct. 0.26 per cent is 2.6 per mille (thousand).
Ahh, so the bursting into flames is a feature, not a bug.
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.
You can absolutely talk about it, but recognize that non-EVs catch fire more often that EVs. So if you have a problem with EVs catching fire, you should REALLY have a problem with every other car first.
Do other car companies' cars that lack defects tend to have this sort of fire situation?
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.
Now that is a better statistic. However, I would want to go one step further - every 100,000 vehicle miles.
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
Dang yo, that's exactly the number I was looking for. Thank you!
I'd be interested in that number too, but I don't know how you can go about finding it.
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.
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?
They claim this has nothing to do with defects.
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?
I never made such a point, so I have nothing to concede.
"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?
I am not sure how to make what I said more clear. But I think you’ve proven my point.
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.
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.
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.
The average ICE is 4 times older than the average EV- more than 12 vs less than 4
139 times greater fire chance for hybrid than EV.
I feel like that's mostly thanks to Kia & Hyundai...
How old is the EV fleet compared to the broader vehicle fleet? Literally some of the oldest "mass-market" EVs are barely older than the average car. I've never had a fire in any newer car, but I've had a couple of close calls in old shitboxes with rat gnawed wiring or an oil/fuel leak onto the exhaust headers.
I don't have those numbers. I'd be happy to look at them if you find them though.
Can't say what the average EV age is, but I know for a fact it's far younger than the overall fleet average. Overall fleet average in the USA is 12.5 years, while the Leaf and Model S, some of the oldest "mass market" EVs didn't begin sales until 2011 and 2012, respectively. The Model 3 and Y didn't begin sales until 2017 and 2019. The average EV is much, much younger than the overall fleet, and only make up about 1% of the total US fleet.
Gas cars sometimes burst into flames when they crash into trees. Why is this news?
Lithon-ion batteries commonly used in electric vehicles. and are known to burst into flames when confronted with any force. Their are safety measures in EV'S. But sometimes these safety measures aren't enough. Chances are that Tesla model 3 wasn't defective.
Self driving fucking when, I just want to sleep in my car while it takes me places
That is called public transport, my friend. You can sleep all you like on a bus or train.
That's not true, I missed my stop a couple of times because I slept
I thought this article was going to be about my neighbor who's kid died in a Tesla that hit a tree and exploded into a raging fire.
Wtf Tesla?
Operating as intended.
It wasn’t defective. Catching on fire is just normal behaviour for a Tesla.
It was a successful test of the drive termination system.