I have a 2017 Model X that I bought new. The EV part is great, its everything else that sucks. Since I've had it, I've taken it for service for the following:

o Arrived w/o Tow pkg (Tesla "forgot" it, was installed via service center appt)

o falcon wing doors improperly adjusted, leading to wind noise and water intrusion

o Loud wind noise and fogging passenger side windows: Due to improperly installed "triangle" window on passenger door

o Worn half shafts caused shudder under acceleration, replaced at ~20k miles

o fogging drivers side A pillar camera after rain, leading to "navigate on autopilot unavailable"

o Drove in "low" mode to preserve half shafts, caused excessive tire wear. Wore inner rear tires down to a puncture around 30k miles. Replaced tires and had car re-aligned to run in "low" mode.

o Half shafts replaced again at 38k miles

o Upper control arms shot around 39k miles, car out of warranty, and Tesla wants $1k to fix.

All in all, I'm thinking to get a different car since I need a car that works. I don't want a non-Tesla EV since the charging options for non-Tesla EVs suck. I'm currently looking at PHEVs.

All these seem like mechanical or assembly issues other auto manufacturers have already figured out. Very rarely hear these days about control arms failing with traditional automakers vehicles.

I've surmised for a while that it's simply impossible, sans magic, for Tesla to have supposedly surpassed other car manufacturers when those other car manufacturers have decades of experience honing their designs for reliability and quality.

I've said many times that my Kia has better quality feel than any Tesla I've been in.

What Kia do you own?

Optima SXL

If I was in the market for a new electric car, I'd definitely be considering the Kia EV6. Which supports the point I've made before that I seriously doubt Tesla can compete with other manufacturers' ability to spin up reliable and quality new models.

I sold my 2020 Model X because of the half shafts (wtf are those) issue. It’s a complete design flaw and it’ll never stop degrading and requiring a new repair. Even had that confirmed by the service center. Newest Model X design supposedly fixes that. Maybe Tesla will get sued over it idk. With the pandemic the prices for used Tesla’s is through the stratosphere and although I sold too early I drove the MX for 9 months before selling it for what I paid for it. Had unlimited free Supercharging too… :/

My advice: get out while you can and the prices are so high.

We are working from home so just drive a Model 3. Waiting on a Model Y and will sell the 3. Great cars though.

Half-shafts exist on (almost) every vehicle. They’re also called CV-Axles, essentially they allow independent suspension travel with wheels, traditional axles are stiff and carry wheel movement to the opposite side.

I have a ‘99 Isuzu Rodeo that I spent a weekend replacing a half-shaft two years ago.

What modern cars don’t have half-shafts? You get wheels hanging in the air and no traction with full-shafts.

Sorry, I didn't mean to suggest they aren't a critical component, just had no idea what they are/were. I'm more of a "does this thing turn on? Cool" kind of car guy.

Model X is just a badly designed car, it needs to be taken out to the back and shot.

But I feel it just earns them too much money from the people trying to show off the dancing falcon doors to scrap it.

They need the Model X, because the squat, flat 'sedan' body style of all their other cars seems very out of date these days. They do it for air resistance I think, but most people want a much more upright car.

> the squat, flat 'sedan' body style of all their other cars seems very out of date these days

In the non american world, where "trucks" are not a daily commuter, a sedan is not out of date. Nor is a hatchback, nor is a ferrari. The family wagon, truck and hybrid truck/suv have been an out of date style for the last 50 years in the developed world.

SUVs have not been around for 50 years …

But they have!

The Ford Bronco was introduced in 1965. The Jeep Cherokee arrived in 1974. I remember seeing a lot of them as a kid, though if I had to pinpoint the start of the SUV craze, it would probably be closer to 1990 when the Ford Explorer first came to market.

Sure they have. Chevy Blazer and Ford Bronco came out in the late 60s.

Wow, you’re right! I had no idea. Thanks. 1965 Ford Bronco: https://images.app.goo.gl/P4seF3jQfQfs69oL9

the person you are replying to never said otherwise

"SUV" is a marketting term that came into common use in the 80's in America.

There is no commonly agreed-upon definition of an SUV, and usage of the term varies between countries. Thus, it is "a loose term that traditionally covers a broad range of vehicles with four-wheel drive."

As such I am happy to claim, given there is no formal definition of what is and what isnt an SUV; that they dont exist at all, if only wishing made it so.

If one wants to claim they do indeed exist - there are plenty of examples from the 1940s and 1950's. “Sport utility vehicle” appeared for the first time in 1974 in the brochure of the first-generation Cherokee. So by the measure of marketing material, they have not been around 50 years, they have been around 47 years.

What do you mean by out of date then? They're the best selling form-factor in many countries aren't they?

And it's not a US thing - the Germans, French, and British are also more and more switching their focus to the SUV form-factor.

> They're the best selling form-factor in many countries aren't they?

Even allowing for the massive definition creep that basically every car where the bonnet / windscreen angle is shallow being an SUV. No - around 30% would be my best guess.

I think for definition what people really care about in practice, even if they don't know it, is it a car they have to crouch down into, or can they simply sit into it. Most people don't like those flat cars that you stoop down into anymore.

I think Ford, that massive iconic US car brand, have discontinued all sedans in the US now, since they're so unpopular.

they said "truck/suv", not "suv"

pretty sure members of ((the set "truck") + (the set "suv")) have existed for more than 50 years, because that union includes trucks

Hmm, I must had misunderstood then, my bad. When they said trucks and SUVs have been out of style for 50 years … that to me implied that they were around 50 years ago (how can something that doesn’t exist go out of style? :))

It seems the root of the misunderstanding is interpreting the slash (/) as "and", when it really means "and/or", in this case, or

> suv have been an out of date style for the last 50 years

I guess people just want to sit high. SUVs waste a lot of vertical space on a raised floor. Really bad for driving dynamics, but hey, you sit high.

Yeah, I'm going to be looking for a new car in 2-3 years probably, but I have absolutely zero interest in SUVs and crossovers, so the market is looking more and more dire every year.

If I need an electric (most likely), and unless my finances improve sharply to include luxury models, I will probably be able to count my options on one hand.

Clearly you don’t understand what disruption means. For Tesla it means rediscovering and reinventing everything about making reliable automobiles profitably, because those old legacy companies just can’t innovate. And it means keeping the sails full with lots of hot air and hype. Tesla has futuristic robot factories, don’t you know? What other manufacturer innovated with a huge touchscreen glued to the dash?

Please say more about the "charging options for non-Tesla EVs suck." Is that all about superchargers or is there more to it?

I don’t have an electric car but my parents have an electric non-Tesla one, and say that firstly you have to sign up to accounts with loads of different companies just to use them, and then secondly it’s really common to arrive at one and it just doesn’t work or there is only a few and charge points which are full.

Teslas currently have the advantage of the extra supercharge network, although in the Uk that is being opened to other electric cars which will level the playing field.

My impression, from watching many videos similar to this: https://youtu.be/jGjUQuXozYc, is that fast charging in the USA is incredibly flaky for non-Tesla vehicles. Chargers don't work at all, chargers don't accept payment, chargers don't handshake with cars, chargers complain of faults and don't finish charging the car, chargers don't deliver advertised charging power/speed.

I've done about 20k miles in road trips in my Tesla, and I think I've plugged in to 1 charger that didn't work at all. I've suffered degraded speed at other chargers, primarily due to them being older chargers that share capacity between 2 chargers (so my speed was halved when somebody else plugged in to the mated charger).

The worst problem I've had with Tesla chargers is the locations. Sometimes finding them is hard (the one near Dulles in Reston took me forever to find for example), sometimes getting to them is hard (chargers in malls are a nightmare around the holidays).

Here's an example of my crappy charging experience.

I live in a large town, population about 60K, and the ChargePoint app shows these options near me right now. This includes ALL charging networks, but only J1772 plugs that fit my car:

16 "public" ports are in the area:

- 4 are actually inside an apartment complex

- 2 are at Whole Foods, but I know 1 has been broken for years.

- 2 are BEHIND car dealerships. That's not really public.

- 3 are at someone's house?

- 2 are at the gym, but 1 has been broken for years.

- 2 are at a high school. I don't spend time there.

- 1 is at the library, and it's always occupied or broken.

If I expand the search to other places I shop:

- 2 ports are at the mall, but 1 of them is broken, and because they're close to the entrance, they're often ICEd.

Thankfully, I drive a PHEV so I can charge at home overnight, and burn gas for long distances. To date, 75% of this car's miles were electric.

If you have a non-Tesla EV you’re really reliant on finding some wall to plug in to. If you are just driving around town, cool you’re good to go and you just go home. If you’re taking a trip for a few hours then you need to charge and that’s where you run into trouble. With Tesla there’s all the Superchargers so that few hour trip is fine with a quick 20 minute charge. For other EVs it’s a few hours at best.

This will be a solved problem in the future though. Just growing pains.

> For other EVs it’s a few hours at best.

Absolutely not true. This is one of those things Tesla diehards keep repeating as if it was 2015 still. You have commercial super-chargers widely available already that can charge a car 80% in 20 minutes: https://youtu.be/ZgeZikh88Wc?t=776

I’ll check that out but as an EV owner over the course of a few years even the Supercharger network isn’t widespread enough. So I’m not ready to buy that there is an alternative that’s as good as that network already. This looks more like the “see you can drive from LA to NYC” road-trip stuff from the early Tesla days.

Things will expand for sure and I’m happy about it, but this looks like marketing to me.

You own and drive an EV I take it? What’s your experience been like?

From that video, I assume you're in the UK.

In the USA, it is still 2015 basically. Everything I've seen on charging non-Tesla EVs in the USA makes it seem like its a total dumpster fire. One of the YT's I watch has experiences like this all the time: https://youtu.be/jGjUQuXozYc?t=862

These folks had issues charging their Porsche Taycan on their road trip in 2021. Also it looks like charging on a road trip looks like a Tour de Walmart for the most part.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TTieOdnDhX8

No worse than the Tour de Meijer I've been on with the Supercharging network lol.

At least Meijer has a small bourbon selection so I can try and find a bottle of Buffalo Trace from time to time.

This sounds awful. Are things any better with more recent model years? IDK when the X came out, but a 2017 was probably pretty early, right?

I am interested in an itemized total cost of ownership. This sounds like a pretty incredible experience for an electric car. I don't think I paid more than $140 in synthetic oil and filter changes since I purchased my gas only Toyota new 50,000 miles ago and that's my only expense so far besides gas.

Cost per mile on a Toyota, including fuel, regular maintenance, insurance, depreciation, etc is most certainly much lower than Tesla.

What I am curious about is if fuel prices flatten or become cheaper, will people still keep flicking to electric vehicles?

It's bizarre that the car is out of warranty already at only four years. Have they driven it 100k miles or something?

Most cars in the US have 3-4yr "bumper-to-bumper" warranty and 5-6yr for powertrain. Tesla has 8yr only for battery/drive unit. Warranty for the rest of the car runs out at 4yr or 50k miles (plan to replace S door handles [although less so] & air suspension for S/X). Luckily 3/Y don't have air suspension or fancy doors/handles.

It has 39K miles on it. The warranty for the "misc" stuff that breaks is 4 years, 50K miles. I'm just past the 4 year mark.

I don't see it as a comment on the energy source or even drivetrain.

From the article:

> The issue, Consumer Reports’ Fisher told CNBC, is that the company has the tendency to “add so much tech that is not necessary.” And while this makes for a product that varies wildly from year to year, it is part of the Tesla brand that enthusiasts adore.

From the linked Reuters article:

> Electric vehicle drive systems, or powertrains, are not the main source of problems, Fisher said. The issues reported by owners are with other features.

> Manufacturers "are using EVs as a technological test bed," Fisher said. "Those are the things that go wrong."

The quoted Reuters piece references reliability, not instability.

"Electric SUVs as a vehicle category is the absolute bottom in terms of reliability," Consumer Reports director of vehicle testing Jake Fisher said Thursday during a presentation to the Detroit Automotive Press Association.

https://www.reuters.com/markets/asia/tesla-electric-suvs-get...

There's no reference at all to instability in the article.

I suspect a transcription error on the part of SFGate and Joshua Bote.

I think it's poor word choice from the author, not a transcription error. The article refers to 'stability' a second time at the end of article as well:

As a result, it makes sense that even though Tesla and Lincoln are the lowest-ranked in terms of reliability, they continue to fare well among its buyers and rank high on its customer satisfaction index — proof that buyers may value brand loyalty and innovation over stability.

I believe 'stability' here refers to "an overall pattern of reliability", and not describing road handling. If the author wanted to use another word, perhaps 'dependability' would better than 'stability'.

The Reuters article mentions this:

> Electric vehicle drive systems, or powertrains, are not the main source of problems, Fisher said. The issues reported by owners are with other features.

> Manufacturers "are using EVs as a technological test bed," Fisher said. "Those are the things that go wrong."

That's instability leading to poor reliability.

I can see that. I still don't think it's a good word choice.

If it's about the predictability of a given vehicle's projected maintenance requirements, use unreliability.

If it's about the excessive technology leading to unreliability, maybe discuss complexity.

And if it's about a quality record of the manufacturer which changes markedly over time, discuss variability or inconsistency.

But I'd expect instability in discussion of vehicle-related matters to refer to road-handling, steering, or the like. If that's the case, then discuss uneven handling. And if it's not the case, then avoid confusion (or unjustified criticism) that might be caused.

If you've got to argue for or justify the language in a mass publication, it's poor language.

I think you're right about stability being a poor term here. The term as applied in this case is actually an implicit analogy.

A "stable marriage", for example, is conceptually stable in the same way a plane or car is physically stable.

To then take that analogous usage form and re-apply it back to where the actual, original meaning makes more sense, is indeed confusing.

They have a higher center of gravity? /s