Comment by vkou | Hacker News Reader

Comment by vkou | Hacker News Reader

> “You have literally teenagers doing break and oil changes on $100,000 cars and the customer hops in these cars and drives 85 miles an hour on the highway. We’re trusting these repairs to people that don’t have a ton of experience.”

Considering that a break (sic) and oil change is a simple DIY task, it's no surprise that we trust teenagers with no experience to do it. I trust myself to do it, and I'm not a gearhead.

> But Tesla has done a great job of marketing the Teslas as a complicated piece of machinery that needs certified technicians to do repairs. Many basic repairs are impossible to do on its cars because of software locks. “Tesla, first and foremost, is a software company,” Benoit said.

How does this square with the oft-touted claim that other automakers are dragging their feet on getting rid of ICEs, because fixing them is a huge profit center for them? Are electric vehicles actually easier to maintain and fix, or not? And if they are, why does Tesla charge so much for these repairs?

As an end-user, I don't really care about whether or not a car-in-the-shop fix is a ten-hour job, or a five-minute one. What I care about is how much it costs me.

>a break and oil change is a simple DIY task

Agree, the argument is that many tasks on Teslas should be simple DIY tasks but Tesla has engineered away access so that they are no longer simple DIY tasks. As you quoted FTA: "Many basic repairs are impossible to do on its cars because of software locks"

See what some Tesla owners reported for bills for bills for brake replacements, which should be cheap and DIY-able, about $8500[1]

[1] https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/ouch-first-huge-repa...

Sounds like typical Tesla engineering. Everyone knows that seized brakes are expensive, but constructing brakes in such a way that they will seize because of underuse is something that only Tesla would do.

Buy a Nissan Leaf.

My Kia managed to do that. But hey it cost half of Tesla so I shouldn't expect Tesla quality. Actually using them hard sometimes is something that can be learned.

Tesla did not design its brakes those are from a third party.

Like the touchscreen that couldn't handle the temperatures in the passenger cabin when the vehicle was parked in the summer sun. Once again, Tesla's engineers chose a part that was wildly unsuitable for its use case.

All major auto manufacturers sub-contract parts of their cars to third parties. It doesn't matter who designed it, what matters is who slaps their logo on it, and ships it to the end user.

I, as a customer, don't have a business relationship with that subcontractor. I do have a business relationship with the manufacturer. They own the profits, and they own the problems. If the subcontractors they choose produce crap, it is reflected in ratings of their products.

No, but they either chose those brakes knowing this, or requested things were designed this way.

Tesla didn't just go to AutoZone and pick up some brake calipers and pads. Tesla sent a specification to that third party, and they probably should have specified that the brake pistons don't seize in the calipers if the duty cycle is quite light.

It is worth noting that the linked $8500 repair anecdote took place over 5 years ago. Are there more recent examples, or did the situation improve?

> why does Tesla charge so much for these repairs?

Because...they can?

King Gilette immortalized the business model of selling low-margin razors and high margin blades. Tesla is trying the car equivalent?

> Because...they can?

Why can Tesla do it, but Ford, Toyota, Honda can't? I'm sure the latter would love to regularly charge twenty grand for a five-grand fix. What's the difference?

They do charge for a bunch of small fixes. Maybe not 25k worth, but repairs are a good profit center for dealerships. Dealerships are not fond of electric vehicles because they don't need much in the way of repairs.

The brands you mentioned also have a reputation for reliable cars that are cheap to repair.

Maybe if the comparison is done against the likes of Audi, BMW, Mercedes, Ferrari and so on, it would paint a different picture.

Because Tesla has cultivated a reputation and consumer base where being high maintenance is ok and not particularly bad for the brand.

Toyota could do it too. And for a decade their blindly rabid fanboys would probably still be screeching about how they're the most reliable, facts be damned. and it would probably work quite well. And then when consumers wise up to the fact that they're being sold something on a premise and getting something else it would all come crashing down because high maintenance cars are not consistent with their brand image.

I can think of 6 different Toyota dealerships all within 40 miles of me. In addition, there are innumerable independent mechanics also competing for those service dollars. The invisible hand of the market responds accordingly.

I think the feet-dragging comes more from the dealer network than from automakers themselves. Ford, GM and the like will still make plenty of money from offering parts for their EVs. Dealers however continue to show distaste in EV sales. Part of that may be the reduced service needs (no oil changes, transmission rebuilds, engine maintenance, etc.) that will lower their income, part may be from the sales side. That's been Tesla's argument all along for selling and servicing direct, and I think anyone that's tried to buy an EV from a Chevy dealer might agree.

I don't really want to take advice from a guy that can't tell the difference between break and brake when it comes down to a ticking time bomb of energy that can literally burn down your house when it charges poorly. IC cars can do this too but thankfully it's a lot more rare generally when they are just off.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com