Tesla Model S Hits 300k Miles with less than $11k maintenance costs
tesloop.com
tesloop.com
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaeldunne/2016/10/31/my-firs...
https://www.fool.com/investing/2017/03/07/repairing-my-tesla...
http://www.autonews.com/article/20161113/RETAIL05/311149995/...
http://insideevs.com/need-your-tesla-model-s-or-x-serviced-b...
http://autoweek.com/article/tesla/tesla-growing-pains-owners...
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1107894_waits-for-tesla-...
Oh, and forget doing your own maintenance or buying parts to do so. No such luck - Unlike a real car manufacturer, Tesla won't sell them to you.
Want a real electric car with real support? Buy a Chevy Bolt, maybe?
Edit: look up how many people GM killed with their ignition switch recall (124). I'm not putting my wife and daughter in a legacy automaker vehicle just because those cars get fixed faster
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_ignition_swit...
http://money.cnn.com/2017/05/25/autos/safest-and-deadliest-c...
Your list provided is composed primarily of poor fuel mileage SUVs.
EXCEPT the tires. A surprisingly under-reported (hopefully because it may have been resolved) issue with EVs is they can wreck tires in a hurry. IIRC, I had to replace "65,000 mile" tires in 17,000 miles because they were near bald. That glorious incredible acceleration EV owners so enjoy when taking off from stoplights? the enormous torque tears that rubber up fast. Fortunately there are now tires built specifically for EVs and their intense strains, but I've not seen reports on how they're doing and expect they're relatively much more costly per-mile than tires for ICE vehicles.
Doing so diminishes the possibility for an open discussion.
Edit: thank you for updating your post. Your understandable frustration is still clear but now the discussion is much easier.
Particularly the type of things big companies who move slowly do best.
You may find that unreasonable, but I believe this is a perspective that drives many poorly thought out regulatory laws which punish experimentation and companies which fail to execute with an (unreasonable) expectation of perfection. Another perspective is that these are growing pains of an immature company that many people took a (known) risk betting on, particularly people from a high-income bracket who could afford their early models.
Tesla should certainly be held responsible for their failures so they fix them - not fixing them would be what is unreasonable in my books.
There is a popular business concept called 'crossing the chasm' [1] that applies well here. Jumping from startup -> mainstream company is a significant leap which many companies fail to do. Tesla has not yet crossed this market gap and their ability to consistently provide support services such as these, rather than simply an innovative new product that people want, will likely be their primary challenge in the future.
[1] https://www.wikiwand.com/en/Crossing_the_Chasm
Edit: I see you've made an edit on the subtext predicting downvotes from Tesla fanboys which I believe was the sentiment OP was referring to
I said that I (personally) will punish them financially by not buying their products until I can be sure they can provide the level of service that I require.
Tesla's ability to solve this problem will likely be their greatest challenge going forward. They've proven repeatedly that they can get their product and marketing right to get customers. But there's far more to a long-term large scale automobile company than that.
I believe the most rational perspective is trying to look at companies in the context of the development stage they are in. Tesla is a bit unique as they went public fast and made big promises, where they come off as a mature company... when they really aren't.
There's no way to phrase "wait 1+ month for needed, at times limiting, service on a $100,000+ vehicle" as being acceptable in any shape or form, not even "oh well, I guess you're just not an ideal early adopter". Especially as Tesla was claiming their disconnect from the dealership model was a good thing (which I agree upon).
That's basically saying "most of you are unreasonable," which is a pretty dickish way to start a conversation.
http://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/10340/tesla-releases-new-...
As far as the Bolt is concerned, it's a nice commuter EV, but not nearly as great as a Tesla for road trips due to the fact that charging is much slower, harder to find, and more expensive.
Production runs of the Chevy Bolt are reported to be limited in size because they lose a lot per car. This does not sound like a vehicle which will ever be produced in quantity that mechanics will learn how to do a good job of maintaining.
I'd prefer to take my chances with Tesla than to take my chances with a niche discontinued product.
http://www.automobilemag.com/news/tesla-loses-397-million-fi...
[1] https://seekingalpha.com/article/3972238-tesla-manages-make-...
[2] https://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/03/27/how-tesla-...
You heard it here first guys... the #1 selling electric vehicle in the US last month [0] is not popular enough to risk buying it.
Chevy's investing heavily in expanding production [1], in preparation to shut it down and discontinue it.
Everyone stay away...
0. http://insideevs.com/monthly-plug-in-sales-scorecard/
1. http://insideevs.com/chevrolet-bolt-production-to-double-aft...
Let me add I am disappointed Bolt sales are so low. I want to see EV's entirely replace ICE's, and that will happen faster if there are more different popular brands and models for buyers to choose from.
Well, they are also sold out in most places.
Bolt sales would be higher if they were actually in stock and available to purchase in every state.
Tesla's service centers are all corporate-owned, so unlike traditional dealership model, all the startup and operating costs are born by the company, so I'd expect the initial rollout to be slower, subject to cash on hand and general priorities (invest in battery production? or ramping up model 3 production? wider supercharger availability? or service center coverage?)
There's a silver lining though - it's pretty clear the service centers are not Tesla's money-makers and the company is not in the business of devising devious ways to screw you out of more money via expensive maintenance service and various scheduled repairs.
It's fairly new tech that's being made in small quantities. You'll face the same sorts of problems if you buy a Porsche. The Bugatti Veryon is recommended to have tire changes done by shipping it back to the factory.
Tesla is not ready for the mass market. It is not yet made in mass market numbers. Buying a Tesla today, and expecting to not suffer the consequences of being an early adopter, is silly. Maybe don't do that?
I should probably disclose that I actually own a bunch of Tesla stock. I'm happy with where the company is headed but they still aren't ready to be a mass marketing automobile supplier. That's probably just a few more years away, however.
Except that's not an option for most people, because their taxes are used to subsidize Tesla. If you're a working American you've already bought a part share in a Tesla, you just don't get to drive one.
For your $0.003 contribution to those subsidies, you get cleaner air and maybe less global warming. New tech has obstacles to overcome. Qualified service technicians will be here eventually, hopefully.
Yep, definitely. And it should do so on the dime of investors and early adopters, not the public.
Look, you've paid a trivial percentage of a penny to subsidize them. You want me to PayPal you a dime? I don't mind. I already pay an enormous amount in taxes. I'll send you a dime. That should cover your costs for the rest of your earning years.
I feel like the rebates should only apply to EVs under 30k.
And maybe be a percentage off the price of the base model, since there is no reason the taxpayer should have subsidized my EV by 10k when I spent 7k on features that are completely optional.
I don't think subsidizing 90k EVs is going to bring EVs to the mainstream. The people spending 4k on FSD while AP2 struggled to catch-up with AP1 are usually not people who would have balked at a 100k Model S.
Subsidizing a 30k Nissan Leaf on the other hand, which can be a 15k used car in a few years helps get the people buying in the segments with the most cars being sold into EVs and normalizing the idea. I think EVs will really take off when people connotate EV with entry level mid-size sedans instead of top end luxury sedans.
I hope my taxes encouraged you to upgrade to ludicrous mode. That would make me happy.
To put it another way, I also don't mind if someone buys a candy bar with their EBT/SNAP card. Of all the tax dollars we spend, this pretty much falls into the couch-change category.
Well, if it were up to me? I'd stop it entirely. Pare Govt. back to 'core business': courts, embassies, Police, Defense (actual defense, not invading foreign countries on a whim), that sort of thing.
There's a grey area around public funding of defense-related technologies; it's hard for several reasons, especially the tendency towards such systems becoming incredibly corrupt.
I was a libertarian before the rise of Rand and the usurpation of the moniker. We used to be the crazy left, actually. I prefer to think of it as pragmatism.
If you want to put it on a bumper sticker, I basically want to ensure as much individual freedom as I can, while ensuring protections of the commons. As an avid hunter, fisherman, and gardener, I certainly consider the environment to be a part of the commons - and don't mind subsidizing things to improve it.
It's pragmatism and an awareness that humans are not rational actors who operate with complete information.
Note: I am not asserting that I am correct and you must change your views. I'm expanding to show why I believe as I do. I also don't mind taxes. I actually pay more than I use, but I am paying for the system that enabled that.
But Acuras tend to be less reliable than Hondas
Infinities tend to be less reliable than Nissans
and so on.
Basically, fewer moving parts means better reliability in general. In addition, lower level cars are much cheaper to repair for various reasons.
Want a car that will run forever on the cheap? You're probably driving it.
The first one was rear ended by a Suzuki Vitara, which wrote off the car, in case anyone was curious why I have had two.
I would guess a Honda Civic actually has way more $ in R&D spent on developing it than a new Ferrari, or even a relatively common luxury like a Porsche. Someone correct me if that's wrong.
Congratulations you've managed to buy two of the most unreliable brands before buying your Tesla. Both are generally known as tremendously unreliable cars (with the exception of BMW 3-series). The Range Rover in particular being known as one of those "buy two of them, one for the shop one for the garage" brands. BMW owners hide behind pre-purchased repairs being covered for 5 years via soon to be well worn warranty repairs.
If you care at all about reliability here's the rules:
- Do you want mechanical problems? Buy American, French or British/Indian brands
- Do you want Electrical problems? Buy German or Northern European brands
- Do you want none of the above? Buy consumer Japanese brands and avoid the Luxury brands except for Lexus. Korean cars are a close second.
- Do you want all of the above? buy a Jeep or an Italian car.
If only there was some place potential buyers could search for car reliability information.
And to tigershark, Ferrari and Lamborghini are both notoriously unreliable. It's just the price you pay to have good performance. If you make things more reliable, it tends to mean more metal and bigger bearings, which makes it heavier and reduces handling.
Refences: http://www.reliabilityindex.com/manufacturer http://www.dashboard-light.com/reports/Mid-size.html
One of my friends just bought a car with an incredibly well known mechanical issue and got to complaining about it. When asked if he bothered to look up the reliability of that make/model he answered "no".
He has a smart phone, knows how to use Google and works in I.T. Zero excuses, zero sympathy. After pressing, turns out he liked it because it was red and a hatchback.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-culture/a10316276/what-you-n...
That might be a legitimate criticism of an economy priced car targeted at a very cost sensitive market, but a Tesla Model S is not that car.
I doubt a significant fraction of owners of recent model year $100k+ luxury cars are doing their own maintenance, or there are enough who want this to justify the business case for owner self maintainability.
I believe that a market for a cheap owner repairable EV exists or eventually will, though. Perhaps Tesla will offer something in that segment but if they don't other manufacturers will.
None of them has any interest in doing their own repairs, and never will.
>During the first 300,000 miles the total combined maintenance and fuel costs of the Tesla Model S were $10,492, with a total of 12 days in the shop. Had this been an Mercedes S class, the scheduled routine maintenance and fuel would have been $86,000 ($52,000 maintenance and $36,000* fuel) with 112 days of servicing, or for a Lincoln Town Car $70k,000 ($28,000 maintenance and $42,000 fuel) with around 100 days of servicing.
Not sure why they mention the fuel cost of these cars without citing the electricity cost of the Tesla. It does make the numbers bigger.
The article didn't break the fuel number out for the Tesla, but it does state it is included in the total.
> During the first 300,000 miles the total combined maintenance and fuel costs of the Tesla Model S were $10,492, with a total of 12 days in the shop. Of these costs, $6,900 was scheduled maintenance and $3500 was headlight damage due to driving through deep water.
I guess maybe they're including fuel costs in "scheduled maintenance"?
They cost more than any car I've ever owned.
Keep in mind that these are high-end luxury cars we're talking about. Folks don't buy a new Mercedes to get halogen headlights. They know it's expensive and are okay with that.
I took that to mean that the car exclusively refueled on Superchargers, so the fuel cost was $0. That is a legitimate apples-to-apples comparison to the ICE vehicles.
Alternatively you could use the electricity cost of recharging it at home, plus the cost of the occasional missed journeys that are out of range from not always being full. (Say, book their cost at what you'd pay for an Uber for those legs.)
(I don't know if charging a Tesla at home overnight is enough to get to 100% -- anyone know?)
For average person - yes, Tesloop, however, is Culver City - based, also known as home to the Culver City Supercharger, so there's a bit of a hometown advantage for them.
In fact, Tesla's recent penalty fee for hogging a supercharger spot long after the vehicle has finished charging is related to Tesla owners' complaints (on TMC, Twitter and Facebook groups) about Tesloop vehicles parked overnight in Culver City supercharger spots.
Electricity is not free, even if Tesla is subsidizing it.
Gas powered vehicles require many more (and more complex) parts, which inevitably need to be replaced throughout the lifespan of the car. There's a big incentive for services like lyft, uber, and future autonomous driving companies to move to electric vehicles because they have much fewer moving parts, and therefore are cheaper to maintain on a per-mile basis.
It's component deterioration from age that really gets you on a luxury car. Seat motors fail, wiring harnesses deteriorate, etc.
It's also worth mentioning that they didn't crash one. With enough road hours eventually it will happen. The vehicles that can be serviced by a normal shop will be cheaper to repair.
The lack of downtime is very impressive but if it's really that much cheaper than running a fleet of town cars then why do they need to twist the numbers?
Even if that's true the comparison to the maintenance and fuel coats of other similarly driven luxury vehicles is still valid.
They used subsidized electricity costs through Tesla charging network at 0$ cost.
That would be like saying MB giving 0$ gas if u fill up at their designated gas stations.
Tesla still comes out on top, but I have never heard of that lengthy repairs for MB. General maintenance a few hours, big issues a few days max.
U can take it to any MB dealership or authorized repair shop, or local shop. Courtesy pickup, drop off and or loaner vehicle. Don't even need special status.
There are costs to new general consumer for fuel on Tesla network, no unlimited free charging
For example, rear and side window motors tend to fail first because the mechanical components are used the least, become more full of dust, the rubber tracks harden, motors work harder and burn out.
The garage will help a lot but when a vehicle is on the road for 10-20yr issues specific to it's service that can't easily be foreseen or simulated in tested pop up.
So the fuel costs are only $92? (10,492 - 6,900 - 3,500)
That's ten 30k mile services and probably 20-30 oil changes on a gas car.
Wonder how exactly that happened, and what damage was caused to the car.
They're special and IIRC have a liner to reduce NVH because that's one of their selling points.
Between Nissan, the tire manufacturer, and contending the "factory spec" was defective by mis-design & thus at least partially covered under warranty, I managed to get the price way down.
Upshot, most of it.