Biggest one day stock drop due to auto Fire in Seattle Suburb

[ocnblu]

Mr. Elon Musk: the real world sucks when you're an arrogant dreamer.

I am fairly certain that if I ran over a trailer hitch in my VW, I'd do some damage... but it would be fixable.

[Intrepidation]

Mr. Elon Musk: the real world sucks when you're an arrogant dreamer.

I am fairly certain that if I ran over a trailer hitch in my VW, I'd do some damage... but it would be fixable.

Depends on where it hit.

The owner of the Model S involved in this incident has released a statement through Tesla's blog:

I felt a firm “thud” as the hitch struck the bottom of the car, and it felt as though it even lifted the car up in the air. My assistant later found a gouge in the tarmac where the item scraped into the road.

http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/model-s-owner-tennessee

This accident and the incident in Seattle involved an inflexible piece of metal debris that impales the car. It's the answer to "What happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object?" - the immovable object rips a hole in the medium bearing the unstoppable force, which then carries on its way (albeit with warning lights in the dash telling the driver to pull over).

The amount of force between the hitch and the underside of the car is equivalent to the car falling on it from a distance of about 150 feet. That is, in both cases the force is a result of the momentum carried by the mass of the car, which in both cases is traveling about 70mph when it encounters the hitch. The size and shape of the tow hitch seem to be important factors in these freak accidents: it's short enough to strike the car at a relatively high angle of attack, but long enough to be pinned between the car and the roadway, while the ball hitch helps it to tumble like a football or catch onto another part of the car and be flipped up to where it can make contact with both the car and the roadway at an unfortunate angle.

[ocnblu]

The physics are the same, but a normal car would have survived the same hit. The Tesla blog story is nothing but spin. Clearly. You can see that, right?

[Intrepidation]

There are over 150,000 car fires annually. You know that, right? That means that Teslas are on track to contribute to a whopping 0.00002% of said fires.

OH T3H NOES

THE END IS NEIGH! REPENT! REPENT!

[ocnblu]

Why must you and booyah resort to speaking in tongues? This is different and you know it.

[Drew Dowdell]

Why is it different?

[Robert Hall]

It does sound like the Tesla in particular is succeptable to damage to its battery pack from 'road debris'. Is the floor under the battery pack made of thin plastic or cardboard? Sounds like it needs armor in that area or cast iron.

[David]

In looking at the tesla web site for spec's, they talk about using high impact plastics as covers. I wonder if this is what is covering the battery and why an impact tends to cause the battery fire.

They state 6" of ground clearance, but I saw two over the weekend and both seemed to be much lower.

[Drew Dowdell]

At worst the Tesla might need an additional shield on the battery pack. But I still maintain that both accidents have been rather freakish. In the first one a metal spike had practically impaled the battery pack. I know where the tank is on my cars and if that happened, there would be a substantial risk of fire.

[KevinW]

They state 6" of ground clearance, but I saw two over the weekend and both seemed to be much lower.

The lower appearance may be due to the lack of visible light under the vehicle due to the flat floor. In most cases, that specification represents the minimum ground clearance, measured at a specific area of the undercarriage, like a subframe crossmember. A large, flat area with 6" of clearance would seem to be much more susceptible to damage from road debris. There's a reason the Volt battery is centrally mounted, protected by 3 layers of steel, and sits more than 6" from the ground.

[SAmadei]

At worst the Tesla might need an additional shield on the battery pack. But I still maintain that both accidents have been rather freakish. In the first one a metal spike had practically impaled the battery pack. I know where the tank is on my cars and if that happened, there would be a substantial risk of fire.

No it wouldn't. If you tore open your tank, it would quickly empty and you would roll on. Gasoline does not catch fire easily as a liquid and your exhaust pipe aft of the catalytic is not hot enough to ignite it. Most gasoline fires are a result of high pressure lines (thanks FI) leaking and spraying gas on hot engine components and electrical. A small number are caused by very high speed rear end impacts where the tank is compromised and metal grinding sparks ignite the fuel spray.

Here's why electrical fires are different:

1) When the battery is compromised, shorted or overheated, its going to burn. The materials inside are nastier than gasoline and its going to burn hot and complete, leaving the car a cinder. Most electrical fires and non-traumatic gasoline fires can be put out if they are discovered in time.

2) The battery is located under the passenger area. Sure, so are gasoline tanks, but gasoline tanks are rarely where the fire starts, unless the vehicle has been in a major accident. In a normal car, a fire is likely to occur in front of the driver. Smoke and flames in a drivers face will get their attention. When a battery pack is igniting, the smoke and flames are not as visible to the driver... and once stopped, the passengers may have to escape while flames are coming around the sides of the car. The thing that strikes me about the latest Tesla fire is how quick it happened and while its great that the computer shut the car down, it did not warn the driver that the car might be on fire.

3) DF likes to stroke that 150K car fires item, but keep in mind that a lot of those fires occur during the 6 million car accidents that happen (running over debris is not really a "traffic accident") and a lot of those car fires occur in cars that are old as well. You would expect a few hundred thousand miles might cause a few shorts and fuel leaks. In general, new cars don't just catch fire (not counting ones with suspected flaws like the Fieros or Ferraris). These are NEW Teslas... and Volts... and Fiskers catching fire. What happens in 100K miles? 200K? When the battery chemistry goes wonky or the chafed, mouse chewed wires finally short out the battery? Plus, in the case of cars like the Volt or Prius, you have the double whammy of ALSO carting around a high pressure gasoline system, in addition to the possible battery and electrical gremlins.

So there is a difference. I'm not saying its reason to ban electric cars from the road... but I'll say this... Don't get too attached to your Tesla, because if it does catch fire, nothing will save it.

[Drew Dowdell]

What Volts caught fire? The only one I know of is the one that went through crash testing and then was left on its roof for 3 days, unattended, and the battery juice ran out of a cracked battery....

[Robert Hall]

The other Volt fire IIRC was in someone's garage, but I think that was due to a homemade electric car that was parked beside it.

[ocnblu]

The gas tank on a normal car is far back on the undercarriage and there are plenty of parts ahead of it that hang lower to catch debris and take the hit before it hits the tank... many of which are thick, pliable, non-brittle plastic (that cannot spark if ruptured) that can take a hell of a beating before rupturing.

This particular Tesla weakness, part of a list as you all know, is a serious one. One never knows when there is going to be unavoidable debris on the highways... and this car gets immolated by road debris! Not safe... no matter what Elon Musk says or how it is spun on the Tesla blog.

At least three fires that we know of with Tesla... all those Fiskers lost to fire in Sandy due to high water... even the Volt fire due to a leaking battery. Electric cars pose a threat that has not been adequately addressed. And I am not sorry to say so.

Edited November 12, 2013 by ocnblu

[FAPTurbo]

Until the NHTSA and engineering associations say electric cars pose a threat, they don't.

Entire thread =

[ocnblu]

yeahright

[David]

It is interesting to see how the Toxic settlement ponds from making batteries are never discussed. We have so many around the world and there was the big one disaster in Germany where the pond broke and destroyed the town, farming lands, etc.

Electric is not as clean / Green as the marketing spin makes it out to be. Just like Ethonal does not clean up the air like the marketing message nor do they ever talk about the destruction of the waterways, erosion and blue babies from the growing of excess GMO corn for Ethanol production. Goerge W Bush signing the Ethonal laws in 2006 was one of the biggest green mistakes ever and Obama just continues the lie.

So where is the talk about the toxic waste product from battery production?

[Drew Dowdell]

Corn ethanol is bad..... but not all ethanol is bad.

[SAmadei]

Someone here considered the fires a non-issue because the NHTSA was not investigating? Yeah, that's changed now: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/20/business/us-safety-agency-opens-inquiry-into-tesla-fires.html

[FAPTurbo]

Someone here considered the fires a non-issue because the NHTSA was not investigating? Yeah, that's changed now: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/20/business/us-safety-agency-opens-inquiry-into-tesla-fires.html

And guess who asked for it?

http://mobile.theverge.com/2013/11/19/5121706/tesla-elon-musk-responds-to-model-s-fires-begins-nhtsa-investigation

[Drew Dowdell]

Someone here considered the fires a non-issue because the NHTSA was not investigating? Yeah, that's changed now: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/11/20/business/us-safety-agency-opens-inquiry-into-tesla-fires.html

And guess who asked for it?

http://mobile.theverge.com/2013/11/19/5121706/tesla-elon-musk-responds-to-model-s-fires-begins-nhtsa-investigation

eh... NHTSA is claiming that they didn't open the investigation at Tesla's request.

[David]

The CEO knows how to Spin for Marketing Positive press. He believes this investigation will clear his company proving it to be the safest car out there. Personally, they should investigate the toxic waste of the electrical system and batteries as I do not see much options for cleaning up the toxic sludge from production of these all electric auto's. Many a settlement pond of letting the toxin sit for future time to be addressed.

[FAPTurbo]

Because fracking and extracting oil from tar sands is any better.

[Potluck]

True, they build 10's of thousands of auto's compared to Tesla's numbers.

then it is even more disturbing that honda let so many more vehicles out of the factory with a dangerous flaw, no?

[Intrepidation]

The CEO knows how to Spin for Marketing Positive press. He believes this investigation will clear his company proving it to be the safest car out there. Personally, they should investigate the toxic waste of the electrical system and batteries as I do not see much options for cleaning up the toxic sludge from production of these all electric auto's. Many a settlement pond of letting the toxin sit for future time to be addressed.

Because CNG is extracted using sunshine and farts. Hypocrisy much?

[David]

You can call me what ever makes you happy. CNG has it's faults, nothing is perfect, but it is a logical safe step away from petrol to a better energy source eventually for auto's. Everyone to use your statement blushes over how clean EV's / pure electric auto's are without touching on it's BLACK side.

Yes in the early days Fracking had problems. Like any science, they figured out how to correct the issues and make it fairly safe for use as an energy source. Electrical also has these same issues such as the toxic settlement ponds from Battery production. Yet it is almost impossible to get anyone to accept and acknowledge the down side of the battery movement especially the destruction of the salt fields in Chile to extract the Lithium.

So to you your quote DodgeFan:

[Robert Hall]

You can call me what ever makes you happy. CNG has it's faults, nothing is perfect, but it is a logical safe step away from petrol to a better energy source eventually for auto's. Everyone to use your statement blushes over how clean EV's / pure electric auto's are without touching on it's BLACK side.

Yes in the early days Fracking had problems. Like any science, they figured out how to correct the issues and make it fairly safe for use as an energy source.

Fracking is still a huge problem and very controversial.

[David]

Most Fracking complaints come from data of the 80's and 90's and I covered this in the alternative energy forum. In fact the Hypocrisy is how many people including the idiot Beatle wife in NY spreads false information about Fracking and yet use Natural Gas to stay warm, power, cooking, etc. Many farms have been saved especially in NY and Pennsylvania due to having NG wells. People have been able to hold onto land that has been in the family for generations rather than pack it up due to the inability to make a living off farming.

The few areas that have had problems are again from old wells in the early days before they solved the problems of protecting the under ground water and sealing off the water supplies from the natural gas supplies.

But then some people just seem to be afraid of anything that moves society forward.

[Intrepidation]

But then some people just seem to be afraid of anything that moves society forward.

Like electric cars perhaps. I find the irony hilarious.

[Robert Hall]

Most Fracking complaints come from data of the 80's and 90's and I covered this in the alternative energy forum. In fact the Hypocrisy is how many people including the idiot Beatle wife in NY spreads false information about Fracking and yet use Natural Gas to stay warm, power, cooking, etc. Many farms have been saved especially in NY and Pennsylvania due to having NG wells. People have been able to hold onto land that has been in the family for generations rather than pack it up due to the inability to make a living off farming.

Sounds like you've been reading the propaganda put out by the corrupt energy companies. I've read of a ton of fracking complaints from the last 10 years....20 years ago very few had even heard of it.

Nothing wrong with normal NG wells, though..my folks have used it in Ohio for 40 years (have a well on the property).

[David]

Actually, I have been reading and researching both the claims from the environmentalist and from the power companies and from people who have actually had fracking wells on their land. I admit there are those that have had bad problems with Fracked wells, but there are more successful and especially in the last 13 years fracked well's than the leaking destructive issues of before then. I still stand by NG and especially CNG. Safe and much cleaner alternative to go to from Petrol.

But then some people just seem to be afraid of anything that moves society forward.

Like electric cars perhaps. I find the irony hilarious.

Not afraid of electric cars at all, just they are not ready for mass transit and cannot handle cross country driving. They are just a luxury golf cart for inner city commuting.

[Drew Dowdell]

A 200 mile inner city?

[David]

A 200 mile inner city?

Yes Tesla is the only one to actually have a real Electric car in my mind, but the bulk of the mass people cannot afford it and so that leave the pathetic luxury golf cart Nissan Leaf, Spark EV and Focus or Fiesta ? ev auto's. I might be missing one or two others but excluding the beloved Tesla for the rich, Electric is not ready for mass driving. You cannot just drive to work and then get in after work and go on a road trip without planning on where you will spend hours charging before you move your next little amount of time.

Time is money and 80 miles, then a 8-12hr charge or level 2 4-6hr charge is NOT acceptable to the bulk of people today. People willing to accept this are a eccentric small group of the population.

[SAmadei]

Because CNG is extracted using sunshine and farts. Hypocrisy much?

Actually, in my case, that's pretty close. My local CNG is generated by the landfill... as the trash sits out under the sun and slowly farts.

Yes in the early days Fracking had problems. Like any science, they figured out how to correct the issues and make it fairly safe for use as an energy source. Electrical also has these same issues such as the toxic settlement ponds from Battery production. Yet it is almost impossible to get anyone to accept and acknowledge the down side of the battery movement especially the destruction of the salt fields in Chile to extract the Lithium.

And don't forget one of the rumored reasons we are mysteriously still in a war in Afghanistan... the greatest lithium deposit in the world... just waiting for us to strip mine it.

[ocnblu]

[ZL-1]

[David]

That was very funny Ocnblu.

So I wonder how much reduction in range the Tesla S will loose once they increase the ride height from the existing 3 inches to 6 inches or so the current chat online is indicating with the new software update that will double the ride height.

Some are saying as much as 20% reduction in range.

Thoughts?

[ocnblu]

I was thinking the same thing, Mr. dfelt. This whole thing is funny as hell to me. Elon Musk is doing everything EXCEPT addressing the real issue. That is the very definition of hubris. He needs to get over himself and fix his junk or fade away. Preferably fade away.

[SAmadei]

Wouldn't the Elon method of fixing this be a radar system that detects debris and raises the car to avoid it?

[David]

Considering the numbers of auto's I see driving around that are cigarette pack high off the ground like the Tesla and these Petrol models do not go BOOM. I think this double the ride height so it cannot strike trash on the road is not the smartest fix, but probably the fastest and easiest for them right now compared to building a safer battery cover.