We were easy marks.

  • flipht@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    11 months ago

    Both things aren’t great. Both neither excuses the other.

    They shouldn’t lie about their battery range. Full stop.

    They shouldn’t overstuff the car with unnecessary and environmentally costly batteries, but as stated above, there’s some market force here as well.

    These two things really have nothing to do with each other. They’re independent situations that exist whether the other does or not.

    • ch00f@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      They shouldn’t lie about their battery range. Full stop.

      Agreed, but the article isn’t really making the case that they‘re even doing that.

      The linked articles: https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a43657072/evs-fall-short-epa-estimates-sae-article/

      https://apnews.com/article/technology-electric-vehicles-21622a87f9dbbc5e29c05bc414442142

      https://www.autonews.com/mobility-report/heatwave-reduces-range-some-evs-31

      Are not about Tesla.

      Even the article about getting fined in Korea is about them failing to advertise cold weather impact on performance, which again affects all EVs.

      They go on to complain about how a software update reduced battery range. If you look into that update, it’s simply adding a diagnostic that detects a very real battery fault. People have taken apart packs with the BMS_u029 error and found dead cells that could catastrophically fail. It’s effectively a dead pack, and on a 10 year old car, I t’s unfortunate, but bound to happen to some people.

      And the other software killing range issue was a single event where Tesla accidentally unlocked extra range on a battery that the user didn’t pay for. The software update “fixed the glitch,” but they ended up unfixing it for free anyway.

      This article is a biased hit piece that fails to even address what its headline lays out.