As was foretold, we've added advertisements to the forums! If you have questions, or if you encounter any bugs, please visit this thread: https://forums.penny-arcade.com/discussion/240191/forum-advertisement-faq-and-reports-thread/
Options

[PA Comic] Friday, February 15, 2013 - Blackbox

GethGeth LegionPerseus VeilRegistered User, Moderator, Penny Arcade Staff, Vanilla Staff vanilla
edited February 2013 in The Penny Arcade Hub
«13

Posts

  • Options
    KalTorakKalTorak One way or another, they all end up in the Undercity.Registered User regular
    Context: Tesla tears down NYT Model S review with car’s own logs
    Tesla has torn into the New York Times review of its Model S electric car, using systems logs showing charge and recharge status, driving style, cabin settings and more to undermine claims the EV is unreliable. In a detailed run-down of the stats gathered by the Model S’ onboard computer – something Tesla says it always does “carefully” on media drives, after UK car show Top Gear made similar reliability claims about a previous model, in a case which ended up in the courtroom - Tesla CEO Elon Musk argues that NYT reviewer John Broder was prejudiced against electric cars from the start, and did as much as possible to portray the Model S as unfit for the road.
    ...
    Broder is even accused of trying to artificially run down the Model S’ battery by more than it would typically, driving “in circles for over half a mile in a tiny, 100-space parking lot” in front of one of Tesla’s Supercharger power stations, in what Musk suggests is an attempt to fully drain the car. Tesla also points out the sheer number of charging points – both its own, and those run by other companies – along the length of Broder’s drive, as a counterpoint to the number of times the reviewer actually stopped to rejuice.

  • Options
    Ryan A. ElliottRyan A. Elliott Registered User regular
    edited February 2013
    And then this with a very different story from two other reporters from CNN.

    EDIT: My bad wrong link

    http://www.examiner.com/article/cnn-journalists-prove-john-broder-wrong-by-driving-tesla-model-s-over-same-route

    It's the Examiner so...yeah.

    Ryan A. Elliott on
  • Options
    ferio252ferio252 Registered User new member
    I'd just go straight to the source of the article =)

    http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/15/autos/tesla-model-s/

  • Options
    FandeathisFandeathis Registered User regular
    edited February 2013
    Yeah, how about I drop $87,500 on a car that needs to be recharged every 300 miles? And that's the best one. The $52,500 version can only go 160 miles. If you can blow $87,000 on a car, you have a lot of choices better than the Tesla.

    Fandeathis on
    You fuck wit' Die Antwoord, you fuck wit' da army.
  • Options
    ferio252ferio252 Registered User new member
    ^ Like 3 Nissan Leaf's ???

  • Options
    Ryan A. ElliottRyan A. Elliott Registered User regular
    ferio252 wrote: »
    I'd just go straight to the source of the article =)

    http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/15/autos/tesla-model-s/

    ...goddammit.

  • Options
    SlaignSlaign Registered User regular
    Fandeathis wrote: »
    Yeah, how about I drop $87,500 on a car that needs to be recharged every 300 miles? And that's the best one. The $52,500 version can only go 160 miles. If you can blow $87,000 on a car, you have a lot of choices better than the Tesla.

    I suppose that depends on what you are trying to accomplish. It depends on the cost of charging the car versus the cost of gas. It depends on how highly you value progress toward green tech.

    Regardless, the story in question is not about the value of the car for what it is. That is for the market to decide. The story at hand is about a journalist allegedly manipulating facts to create a hit piece on a companies product. This is unethical on multiple levels. It's a person in a position of trust abusing that trust and lying. It's a person slandering a product and negatively tainting it's image. It's a person misleading consumers so they cannot make an informed decision with honest facts. I've even heard this piece may to be to blame for a dip in stock prices for Tesla.

    Then there is the secondary moral question, the fact that this hit piece was directed at a technology intended to better our world. The reporter allegedly has ties to oil companies and a history of anti-green bias.

    The actual value of the car isn't the point. Whether you think a Tesla vehicle is a poor investment or not, if the allegations against this reporter is true than what he did is unethical and he should be fired.

  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    Elon Musk needs to listen to his PR people and shut the hell up. The data support Border's story enough to make the car look pretty bad.

    "Well, if he had just turned off the heat and driven 15 mph below the limit, then our $100,000 high-performance luxury sports sedan totally would have been fine."

    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    darleysamdarleysam On my way to UKRegistered User regular
    Elon Musk needs to listen to his PR people and shut the hell up. The data support Border's story enough to make the car look pretty bad.

    "Well, if he had just turned off the heat and driven 15 mph below the limit, then our $100,000 high-performance luxury sports sedan totally would have been fine."

    Like the bit where the battery was empty and he drove around in circles in a desperate bid to deplete it? The guy had a clear agenda against them and I think it's hilarious that they've been able to systematically rip his article to pieces with actual evidence. The way Top Gear screwed them over was also bad, so I'm glad they've started doing this.

    forumsig.png
  • Options
    CambiataCambiata Commander Shepard The likes of which even GAWD has never seenRegistered User regular
    Do... do people really masterbate into softserve?

    "If you divide the whole world into just enemies and friends, you'll end up destroying everything" --Nausicaa of the Valley of Wind
  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    darleysam wrote: »
    Elon Musk needs to listen to his PR people and shut the hell up. The data support Border's story enough to make the car look pretty bad.

    "Well, if he had just turned off the heat and driven 15 mph below the limit, then our $100,000 high-performance luxury sports sedan totally would have been fine."

    Like the bit where the battery was empty and he drove around in circles in a desperate bid to deplete it? The guy had a clear agenda against them and I think it's hilarious that they've been able to systematically rip his article to pieces with actual evidence. The way Top Gear screwed them over was also bad, so I'm glad they've started doing this.

    People should read the article. If Broder "drove around in circles in a desperate bid to deplete it", why didn't it make it into the article? Why did he stop? Why did he try at all, instead of just lying and saying it did? Broder driving around the service plaza looking for the charging station at night makes a lot more sense than doing donuts for no reason, to create an effect that he didn't report happening.

    The only actual relevant discrepancy between the data and the review is Broder saying he set the cruise control to 55 and the data showing him travelling at 60. Which is hardly damning in itself, can be explained by the fact the the car was delivered with 19in wheels instead of the stock 21s.

    Elon Musk's baby got a bad review and he took it personally. Now he's hurting his brand is likely to get sued to boot.

    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    TubeTube Registered User admin
    A lot of the counter evidence doesn't really stand up

  • Options
    Maz-Maz- 飛べ Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Do... do people really masterbate into softserve?

    It's the perfect crime.

    Add me on Switch: 7795-5541-4699
  • Options
    Alpha268Alpha268 Registered User regular
    edited February 2013
    Fandeathis wrote: »
    Yeah, how about I drop $87,500 on a car that needs to be recharged every 300 miles? And that's the best one. The $52,500 version can only go 160 miles. If you can blow $87,000 on a car, you have a lot of choices better than the Tesla.

    Torque. The Tesla has the most amazing acceleration ever. Pedal to the metal and its like a rolercoaster.

    Alpha268 on
  • Options
    KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    I don't have a horse in this race but it is delightful to watch the whole spectacle unfold.

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • Options
    warhawkwarhawk Registered User regular
    darleysam wrote: »
    Elon Musk needs to listen to his PR people and shut the hell up. The data support Border's story enough to make the car look pretty bad.

    "Well, if he had just turned off the heat and driven 15 mph below the limit, then our $100,000 high-performance luxury sports sedan totally would have been fine."

    Like the bit where the battery was empty and he drove around in circles in a desperate bid to deplete it? The guy had a clear agenda against them and I think it's hilarious that they've been able to systematically rip his article to pieces with actual evidence. The way Top Gear screwed them over was also bad, so I'm glad they've started doing this.

    People should read the article. If Broder "drove around in circles in a desperate bid to deplete it", why didn't it make it into the article? Why did he stop? Why did he try at all, instead of just lying and saying it did? Broder driving around the service plaza looking for the charging station at night makes a lot more sense than doing donuts for no reason, to create an effect that he didn't report happening.

    The only actual relevant discrepancy between the data and the review is Broder saying he set the cruise control to 55 and the data showing him travelling at 60. Which is hardly damning in itself, can be explained by the fact the the car was delivered with 19in wheels instead of the stock 21s.

    Elon Musk's baby got a bad review and he took it personally. Now he's hurting his brand is likely to get sued to boot.



    Really, did you read the CNN article quoted above, where they drove the same route with very different results?

    Did you read Mr. Musk's blog here, where he talks about the data recorder they put in the car and how the data shows that Broder did his best to make the test drive fit his agenda that he clearly had going into this article. I imagine Telsa's PR people are fine with what he is doing, and Tesla's corporate attorneys are salivating at the thought of a lawsuit, because there is enough clear evidence out there that Tesla would destroy the NYT and Broder in court.

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

  • Options
    warhawkwarhawk Registered User regular
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

  • Options
    DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    The Tesla probably sucks.

    That said, the NY Times reporter lied in his story. He should be fired. The NY Times already has a history of major "made-up" stories, and the reporter should be bounced with a call of, "Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out."

    What is this I don't even.
  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    LucascraftLucascraft Registered User regular
    So Tesla is a type of car now? Man, I've been confused for a while thinking this was about the 80s rock band.

  • Options
    DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    I don't even care whether the Tesla is a good car. I care that the reporter lied about his test conditions in a way that appears to have been deliberate.

    What is this I don't even.
  • Options
    theResetButtontheResetButton Registered User regular
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    People in here aren't saying the Tesla is awesome. What is being said is that Broder was given specific instructions (like charge the car to 100% at such-and-such location) and ignored those instructions in order to make the test drive fit into his predetermined narrative.

    Keep honking: I'm also honking.
  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    I don't even care whether the Tesla is a good car. I care that the reporter lied about his test conditions in a way that appears to have been deliberate.

    Where does he lie?

    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    Jademonkey79Jademonkey79 Registered User regular
    He doesn't lie so much as he purposely acts like an idiot to try and change the outcome. Like not topping off the power when the car advises him to do so, because he wanted to "simulate a normal driver's experience". Because really, I just put a $1 worth of gas in my car before a long trip because waiting is so hard.

    "We’re surrounded. That simplifies our problem of getting to these people and killing them."
  • Options
    theResetButtontheResetButton Registered User regular
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    I don't even care whether the Tesla is a good car. I care that the reporter lied about his test conditions in a way that appears to have been deliberate.

    Where does he lie?

    He omits critical facts from his piece that affected the car's performance. If you don't think that's lying because he didn't specifically tell an untruth, I think you're splitting hairs over what constitutes lying.

    Keep honking: I'm also honking.
  • Options
    Skull2185Skull2185 Registered User regular
    Cambiata wrote: »
    Do... do people really masterbate into softserve?

    Look, we've all been there.

    You order the frosty, and drive off. You begin to hear the sweet mistress' siren call from the cup holder. You steal a few glances at the cup, a few seductive drops of condensation are already running down the side. A bead of sweat runs down the side of your head, your face begins to feel warm and flushed. You stop at a red light, and look at the frosty again. It's all glistening wet and cold, drawing you into the honey pot. "I need to be in that!" you think to yourself, but you can't... you're in traffic. Eventually you dip two fingers through the lid, and almost lose it right then and there. Finally you just pull into the nearest parking lot and go to town on the thing. Goddamn sexy ass frosties...

    I mean... we've all been there, right?

    >.>
    <.<

    .........


    ME EITHER!

    *Skull2185 has logged off*

    Everyone has a price. Throw enough gold around and someone will risk disintegration.
  • Options
    marsiliesmarsilies Registered User regular
    Where does he lie?


    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/10/automobiles/stalled-on-the-ev-highway.html
    After making arrangements to recharge at the Norwich station, I located the proper adapter in the trunk, plugged in and walked to the only warm place nearby... Tesla’s experts said that pumping in a little energy would help restore the power lost overnight as a result of the cold weather, and after an hour they cleared me to resume the trip to Milford.

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive
    The final leg of his trip was 61 miles and yet he disconnected the charge cable when the range display stated 32 miles. He did so expressly against the advice of Tesla personnel and in obvious violation of common sense.

    This seems to be one major point of contention. The charts show that at Norwich, he only charged it up to 28%, and it only showed 32 miles left. He even confirms this in the article when he states "the displayed range never reached the number of miles remaining to Milford..."

    So either he's lying about Tesla experts clearing him to leave Norwich with only 28% charge and 32 miles estimated, or Tesla is.

  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    People in here aren't saying the Tesla is awesome. What is being said is that Broder was given specific instructions (like charge the car to 100% at such-and-such location) and ignored those instructions in order to make the test drive fit into his predetermined narrative.

    He describes what he did, and what the results were, and makes conclusions on the basis of those actual results.

    He charged the car to a 242 mile range, and it just barely made it 200 miles, showing zero when it reached his destination.

    He charged it to 185 miles for a 160 mile round-trip, and the car only made it about 110 miles before needing to be recharged.

    He recharged for an hour and tried to make it the rest of the way, on the advice of Tesla, and the car ran out of juice.

    That's what he described, and that's what the car's data shows. He was also hardly driving like a maniac the whole time, also according to the data.

    You can claim that if he had done differently, then the results would have been different. That's almost certainly true!

    You can claim that he didn't act reasonably. Which is true if trusting what the car and tesla were telling him was unreasonable.

    But neither of those is the claim. The claim is that the story is a fabrication. Which Musk's data does not show, at all.

    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    I don't even care whether the Tesla is a good car. I care that the reporter lied about his test conditions in a way that appears to have been deliberate.

    Where does he lie?
    I began following Tesla’s range-maximization guidelines, which meant dispensing with such battery-draining amenities as warming the cabin and keeping up with traffic. I turned the climate control to low — the temperature was still in the 30s — and planted myself in the far right lane with the cruise control set at 54 miles per hour (the speed limit is 65).
    As the State of Charge log shows, the Model S battery never ran out of energy at any time, including when Broder called the flatbed truck.
    Cruise control was never set to 54 mph as claimed in the article, nor did he limp along at 45 mph. Broder in fact drove at speeds from 65 mph to 81 mph for a majority of the trip and at an average cabin temperature setting of 72 F.
    At the point in time that he claims to have turned the temperature down, he in fact turned the temperature up to 74 F.

    What is this I don't even.
  • Options
    marsiliesmarsilies Registered User regular
    The only actual relevant discrepancy between the data and the review is Broder saying he set the cruise control to 55 and the data showing him travelling at 60. Which is hardly damning in itself, can be explained by the fact the the car was delivered with 19in wheels instead of the stock 21s.
    This doesn't make sense. I'm assuming Broder was getting his speed info from the spedometer built into the car, which is what the cruise control and the Tesla data would be using as well. If there was a difference between the measured speed and the actual speed, due to different tires, then they all should have been off by the same amount. There's no reason to think that he'd set the cruise control to 55, and somehow Tesla's data would show the speed as anything other than 55.

  • Options
    theResetButtontheResetButton Registered User regular
    edited February 2013
    *rearranges the letters in "Tiger Burning" and drops his pen in shock as they spell out "John Broder"*

    *hopes everyone else thinks of that I AM LORD VOLDEMORT scene when they read this, too*

    theResetButton on
    Keep honking: I'm also honking.
  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    edited February 2013
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    Darkewolfe wrote: »
    warhawk wrote: »
    People seem to be missing the point, again, a writer from the NYT is caught blatantly trying to bend a story to fit his worldview. The problem is, after a Tesla had a bad experience with Top Gear (they found a script laying around saying how the test went BEFORE the test was done), they started installing data recorders in the cars so they could show what journalist actually do with one of their cars as opposed to what their saying. John Broder has a history of bashing electric cars in his article, Tesla motors had no idea the car was to be given to him to test. Fortunately, after the Top Gear experience, they had a data recorder that shows what happened versus what he said. Honestly, the only problem I see from Tesla's end was in expecting the NYT to show any journalistic integrity.

    Read Mr. Musk's blog entry hear

    http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/most-peculiar-test-drive

    This, plus CNN's recreation of the test with vastly different results, creates a fairly clear picture that this journalist went into the story with an agenda, and did his level best to try to create facts to fit it.

    Hardly. The only criticism the review makes is that the range estimates, both from Tesla and from the car itself, are unreliable (at least in cold weather). The data Musk released supports that claim 100%. If there was no review, and you just used the data to look at the trip, you would come to exactly the same conclusions that the review did.

    And Musk's counterclaim, that the range estimates are fine so long as you drive the car like it was a vespa scooter, is probably not the pitch he wants to make when trying to sell a $100,000 high-performance luxury car.



    I don't even care whether the Tesla is a good car. I care that the reporter lied about his test conditions in a way that appears to have been deliberate.

    Where does he lie?
    I began following Tesla’s range-maximization guidelines, which meant dispensing with such battery-draining amenities as warming the cabin and keeping up with traffic. I turned the climate control to low — the temperature was still in the 30s — and planted myself in the far right lane with the cruise control set at 54 miles per hour (the speed limit is 65).
    As the State of Charge log shows, the Model S battery never ran out of energy at any time, including when Broder called the flatbed truck.
    Cruise control was never set to 54 mph as claimed in the article, nor did he limp along at 45 mph. Broder in fact drove at speeds from 65 mph to 81 mph for a majority of the trip and at an average cabin temperature setting of 72 F.
    At the point in time that he claims to have turned the temperature down, he in fact turned the temperature up to 74 F.

    Whether it ever ran out of energy is irrelevant as it's range went to zero (twice) and the car shut off (once). The tow truck driver confirmed that they couldn't get the car started even to disengage the parking brake.
    The 5mph cruise control discrepancy is actually a discrepancy, but not much of one. Maybe it can be explained, maybe it can't.
    The data shows that he did set the temperature control to low during the leg of the trip he described. The "he turned it up instead" is deliberately misleading (as a lot of Musk's response is, including "he drove most of the trip between 65 and 81mph, and the "tiny, 100 space parking lot" bit). He adjusted the temperature several times during the trip. For roughly 100 miles, during the period he described, it was set to low.

    Tiger Burning on
    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    RiusRius Globex CEO Nobody ever says ItalyRegistered User regular
    When given the option between believing the guy with personal anecdotes and believing the guy with hard data that contradicts those anecdotes, I am shockingly going to believe the guy with hard data.

  • Options
    Tiger BurningTiger Burning Dig if you will, the pictureRegistered User, SolidSaints Tube regular
    Rius wrote: »
    When given the option between believing the guy with personal anecdotes and believing the guy with hard data that contradicts those anecdotes, I am shockingly going to believe the guy with hard data.

    That's the point. The data doesn't contradict Broder (except for the cruise control thing). The data doesn't support Musk's claims.

    Ain't no particular sign I'm more compatible with
  • Options
    marsiliesmarsilies Registered User regular
    edited February 2013
    Here's an interview with the tow truck driver, Rick Ibsen:
    http://jalopnik.com/tow-truck-driver-at-center-of-tesla-controversy-unaware-202391288
    When he arrived, the Model S was stuck in park and its electric parking brake was on, making it very hard to get onto the flatbed. There was a way to jump the car's 12-volt battery, but that wasn't working, he said.

    Now, the car's touch screen center console was working, and Ibsen was on the phone with a Tesla employee in California who was walking him through a process to get the brake off, but he wasn't getting the messages or menus on the screen that the employee said he was supposed to.

    "We put the jumper box on to get the 12 volt battery working, but he said if it was completely dead it wouldn't work," Ibsen said. He said the Tesla employee was helpful but understandably frustrated.

    Here's an article that interviewed the tow truck company, and also has this little tidbit:
    http://jalopnik.com/towing-company-the-nyt-tesla-model-s-was-dead-when-it-196100064
    A source who has seen the data logs explains how it's possible how Broder and Musk could both be truthful but sort of wrong. The high-voltage battery in the pack, allegedly, had enough power to move the car a much greater distance than needed to move the car onto a flatbed, maybe as far as five miles, but the 12V battery that powers the accessories and gets its juice from the high voltage battery shut down when Broder pulled into the service station.

    When Broder decided to turn the car off, which was a mistake, the parking brake (operated by the 12V battery) was rendered unusable. If Broder was told not to turn the car off, it's his mistake. If Tesla told him to do it, or didn't inform him he shouldn't do it, then it's their mistake.


    A big problem with Broder's article is that he appears to have been inexact in some of his statements. He did turn down the climate control at some points during the drive, yes. However, he writes "At 68 miles since recharging [At Delaware]...I began following Tesla’s range-maximization guidelines, which meant dispensing with such battery-draining amenities as warming the cabin and keeping up with traffic. " Now, it does look like he set the cruise control at this point, but he didn't turn down the cabin temp until nearly 80 miles later. His phrasing made it seem like he turned down the temp at that 182-mile mark when he turned on cruise control, which he didn't. The same is with the cruise control speeds, which Borden reported as being 5mph slower than the Tesla data shows (54 vs 60, and 45 vs 50). For a cynical mind, it could seem like Borden was exaggerating in order to put the Tesla in a worse light.

    At the 2nd Supercharger, he left without a full charge. On the one hand, when he stopped charging the estimated miles were enough for the remainder of the trip (at least until the cold snap sapped away some energy). On the other hand, he didn't charge it for as long as he said he did, or as long as Telsa claims they wanted him to, and had he let it charge to full here, he likely wouldn't have encountered the problems he had later.

    Then there's this:
    I reached the Delaware charging dock with the battery still having roughly half its energy remaining. I went off for lunch at the service plaza, checking occasionally on the car’s progress. After 49 minutes, the display read “charge complete,” and the estimated available driving distance was 242 miles.
    The Tesla data confirms that it was about half charged when he reached Delaware, and that the car estimated about 242 miles after he finished charging. However, Tesla's data shows that he stopped charging at 90%. Again, it's unclear if this was a problem with the way the Tesla was showing data to Broder, or with Broder deliberately providing misleading info.

    marsilies on
  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    This is an excellent strip

  • Options
    KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    Well there is still the claim broder says the person he talked assured him it was cool not to leave it plugged it vs musk saying nope they said otherwise.

    Also the other test by CNN which basically canceled broder's experience out.

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
  • Options
    JasconiusJasconius sword criminal mad onlineRegistered User regular
    edited February 2013
    Also from reading Broder's rebuttal I think that Broder is being stylistically obtuse for the sake of reviewing the car from the point of view of "the typical consumer"

    There's a lot of "I did exactly what Tesla told me to do" even when he acknowledged it defies common sense or even conflicts with other Tesla instructions.

    Which is at least a justifiable thing for someone who is doing a consumer report of a car to do.

    Tesla's comments on the the review amount to "well if he had just done what he is supposed to do", whereas Broder's argument is "I did what Tesla TOLD me to do"

    I say advantage Broder, here. Unless Tesla feels like releasing audio tapes of the customer service calls.

    Jasconius on
  • Options
    DarkewolfeDarkewolfe Registered User regular
    Yeah. The car is not getting a good story out of this no matter what. People will leave with the impression that the car is shaky and may or may not be reliable, which just isn't what you want no matter what.

    The biggest question for people I thinkWhat the data does or doesn't say hasn't been very clearly covered so far is whether any reporting/data was faked altogether, in a way that suggests the NY Times reporter had it out for this car. I’d like to see some verification and examination of the data Broder has, which he hasn’t played openly yet, to see whether Broder is weasel wording his way out, or whether the reporter was malicious in his misleading statements.

    Overall, I’m not impressed with anyone, the car or the NY Times.

    What is this I don't even.
  • Options
    KageraKagera Imitating the worst people. Since 2004Registered User regular
    Also when the hard data comes from the CEO of a company who has every reason to fudge data I don't tend to implicitly trust that data.

    Also apparently musk had a run in with top gear uk prior to this?

    My neck, my back, my FUPA and my crack.
Sign In or Register to comment.