"we achieved the highest quarterly operating margin among all volume OEMs, based on the latest available data, demonstrating that EVs can be more profitable than combustion engine vehicles."
https://drivetribe.com/p/tesla-is-jerry-rigging-its-cooling-...
So many things I've read about Tesla quality makes me think that they are just not well built vehicles. I know I didn't bother looking at them when I bought a new car last year.
(I have no skin in this game, just a thought from a pretty casual observer)
(own Teslas, all mostly well built, the newer the better)
My parents GM was a constant piece by of crap and would endlessly overheat and brake.
Your sentence is falling apart as well.
While it can be valuable to point out to ESL speakers/writers, in this case that's not a productive criticism.
In this case, Tesla obviously ran into an unexpected problem, and did not have a part to fasten this piece. They used various fasteners to secure it, and I'm not aware that anyone has had any problems with it, except that it seems strange.
At the time, Sandy Munro saw something similar in his tear-down, and didn't think it was a big deal. Obviously not a permanent part, but nothing to be worried about, either.
You might say "well agility is great, except in my self-driving car" but I would remind you that people said the same thing about security software, infrastructure, etc. and were wrong every time. My believe is cars will get safer and better built faster with them innovating than with the traditional model of annual incremental releases. As a Tesla owner, I can also comment that the car feels no less well built than any other car I've owned.
Is that really the case? I heard their motors are pretty good. But the batteries are mostly Philips and there is a lot of innovation happening thorughout the industry. The software is in parts miles ahead, but their latest UX dicisions are getting dumber and dumber.
> shown that agility and shipping quickly is a better practice than waiting for perfection.
I would argue there is a sweet spot, which Tesla is obviously missing.
> You might say "well agility is great, except in my self-driving car" but I would remind you that people said the same thing about security software, infrastructure, etc. and were wrong every time.
Except for example with the 737 MAX development or the whole "a package got deleted from npm and broke everything". There is a reason for LTS-versions and thorough testing, especially when lives are at stake. My best counterexample to your argument would be Teslas "Full-Self-Driving". It's next year for the last five years, totally insecure and unpredictable, killed people and isn't even better than what the competition has to offer.
I know I can slowly work out "Model Y, Long Range." But it's not intuitive and you kind of have to be a "Tesla insider" to get that far, or at least closely follow their options/trim levels.
It's a bit better than the "M3" I sometimes see thrown around, because an M3 is a BMW, through and through. The car is actually a Model 3, and there's no reason to abbreviate it further unless you're on a Tesla forum (in my opinion.)
I myself put my Tesla under a microscope trying to find every unsatisfactory item on the delivery day and I did see some uneven panels. But my wife also got a Subaru the same year and I put it under the same kind of scrutiny and it also had similar differences in paneling. Especially under the hood, either the design of parts wasn’t that great or they just put some non standard items to hold things together. It didn’t seem any better than a Tesla (or any cheaper).
Unless wood or zip ties are deficient for the applications they are in, they don't count as cutting corners in my book.
That was a temporary thing that happened for like a few weeks a long time ago.