It's been going for a long, long time. To mention just a few:
Too many people die due to not wearing seatbelt = seatbelt laws.
Ford Explorers roll over because of low tire pressure = mandated TPMS
sensors in ALL car tires.
Insurance companies paying out because so many cars are stollen = $$$ key
via EV wrote:
I gave myself an idea. Fill the battery boxes with a fluid. If the fluid is
leaking after a wreck, the battery boxes have been compromised, so the car
shouldn't be driven.
That's not a bad idea. Batteries also need heating and cooling. Fluids
are a good way to add or remove
Klaus via EV wrote:
It's been going for a long, long time. To mention just a few: [snip]...
It's just a game of cat and mouse.
A great summary, Klaus. And the cat has all the teeth and claws (money,
lawyers and lobbyists).
You'll notice that car companies have gotten a lot smarter in
Hi Lee and All,
Of course there is a solution, a complete electronics transplant.
It's not like we haven't been doing that for
decades now.
Though what do you replace Tesla's with? ACPropulsion has a nice electronics
suite with 150kw charger? Maybe Siemens? Maybe some no
Back when cpu cycles were expensive, automakers mostly used the minimum
amount of processor power necessary to control emissions and air bags. As
memory and cpus got to where they cost pennies, they realized that they
could control a lot more with them. They could make the dome light fade in
Sadly, due to my exposure to OEM representatives (auto makers), I can
safely say that they will cut every penny out where they can. For
example, I was talking to one standards representative (I won't say the
company name, as it is pretty much the same everywhere), and they could
not support
On Oct 5, 2014, at 9:21 PM, Peter C. Thompson via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
[T]hey could not support TLS on their computers and would not upgrade the
computer until there was a strong need. The computer would be dealing with
billing for the power used to charge the vehicle!!!
Then it
Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive!
(video)
...
The energy content of gasoline is 32.4MJ/L, and 1MJ=0.28kWh; so, a 10 (US)
gallon tank of ordinary gasoline contains 343kWh of energy, and yet every other
auto manufacturer has
Stockton via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
To: Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive!
(video)
...
The energy content of gasoline is 32.4MJ/L, and 1MJ=0.28kWh; so, a 10 (US)
gallon tank of ordinary gasoline contains
Careful, the mothership is watching you from space!
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 1, 2014, at 1:55 PM, EVDL Administrator via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
wrote:
On 1 Oct 2014 at 11:01, Rick Beebe via EV wrote:
If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car.
Control freaks.
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 6:04 PM, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
wrote:
I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to
tinker with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors
and actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer
This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with.
But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you
are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to
take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage CAR which you OWN.
If you want
-worry-about-your-chevy-volt-erupting-into-flames-more-than-other-cars/
Hardly surprising why Tesla are keeping their distance.
Russ
On Thu, 2/10/14, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla
Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you
wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it
off in the first place. My argument is thus (and obviously) that they had
no business disabling the car in the first place. It was not their car. I
may be have been in the wrong in this case.
Peri
-- Original Message --
From: Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
To: Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu
Cc: Electric Vehicle Discussion List ev@lists.evdl.org
Sent: 02-Oct-14 6:42:01 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged
Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled. It may have disabled
itself for safety reasons. It was a pile of junk you bought it. You have think
you have rebuilt a car from that junk and now you want the systems activated
without showing that the system is in any state where that can
On Oct 2, 2014, at 6:42 AM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
Heh, you realize who deactivated it in the first place, right? I mean, you
wouldn't have to activate it were it not for the fact that they turned it
off in the first place.
Exactly.
Nice car you've got there that we've
On Oct 2, 2014, at 7:14 AM, Haritech (Gmail) via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
Trouble is you didn't own the car when it was disabled.
Then the sale was fraudulent, whether intentionally so or otherwise. The buyer
thought he was buying a salvageable car, not a pile of scrap metal.
But,
I agree. The seller didn't understand what he was buying. That's really the end
of the story.
He didn't buy it from Tesla so it's not Teslas jobs to ensure the scrap was re
manufacturable into a car. It is Teslas role/right to ensure their name and
brand is protected.
Lawrence
On Oct 2,
I think that, by this point, we all agree on that point: the buyer did not
receive what he thought he had received. I believe that the company that
sold the salvage car likely did not realize the true situation either. I
would think that the sell would fall into questionable legality given the
: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair
drive! (video)
I think that, by this point, we all agree on that point: the buyer did
not
receive what he thought he had received. I believe that the company
that
sold the salvage car likely did not realize the true situation either.
I
would think
This is a great discussion! I am OK with Tesla's approach, I own just
enough stock to care that they don't go bankrupt from liability issues. I
think the are just being prudent. That makes me happy.
I also think that salvaged Teslas are far less valuable than the guy who
bought one paid and
If a Tesla is to be sold as Salvageable, then prior to listing for sale it
should be inspected by Tesla and results provided in the sale listing. Without
the inspection and doc it should only be listable as unrepairable.
On October 2, 2014 10:04:14 AM CDT, Collin Kidder via EV
On Oct 2, 2014, at 8:09 AM, Peri Hartman via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
Yes, but again, it depends on what the buyer signed. For example, with
software, the licensing agreements usually state that you do not own the
software but only have the right to use it which can be terminated under
@lists.evdl.org
Sent: 02-Oct-14 8:35:46 AM
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair
drive! (video)
On Oct 2, 2014, at 8:09 AM, Peri Hartman via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
wrote:
Yes, but again, it depends on what the buyer signed. For example,
with software, the licensing
Collin Kidder via EV wrote:
If you purchase something (and you do get a title when you buy a car)
then it is yours. What you do with it is no longer the company's
problem.
I agree with Collin. He bought it; it's his to do with as he likes.
Tesla can choose to help (by supplying parts,
Robert Bruninga via EV wrote:
This is laughable. Sure the car is yours to do anything you want with.
But when you want to go ask Tesla to activate it, then guess what, you
are ASKING for help from someone who has a very valid reason not to want to
take the risk to HELP you with YOUR salvage
Russ Sciville via EV wrote:
I can understand why Tesla are a bit twitchy about people re-building accident
damaged cars as the main cell pack under the floor could be damaged.
No, it's not surprising. But *all* car companies have had the same
worries since time immemorial. For that matter,
prefer to do it over the air if the accident was minor.
On Thu, 2/10/14, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
Subject: Re: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair drive!
(video)
To: Robert Bruninga bruni...@usna.edu
Cc
It is a good thing when a vehicle like a Tesla disables itself in an accident.
Even my conversion does that. I have an inertial switch to disconnect the
traction pack in the event of an accident.
Now, in my case, I just need to reset that sensor. I'm sure Tesla has
something much more
On 10/02/2014 01:15 PM, Lee Hart via EV wrote:
Except that consumers have rights that the courts have long upheld.
1. Businesses must sell to consumers on a non-discriminatory basis.
They can't blacklist certain people.
No but I suppose they CAN refuse to sell some parts to anybody which
is
Mike Nickerson wrote:
It is a good thing when a vehicle like a Tesla disables itself in an
accident. Even my conversion does that. I have an inertial switch to
disconnect the traction pack in the event of an accident.
Now, in my case, I just need to reset that sensor. I'm sure Tesla has
How did a car titled as salvage(junk) get changed to salvageable in this
discussion?
David Kerzel
___
UNSUBSCRIBE: http://www.evdl.org/help/index.html#usub
http://lists.evdl.org/listinfo.cgi/ev-evdl.org
For EV drag racing discussion, please use NEDRA
It is very common. People buy cars with a salvage title and fix them. Then
they have the car inspected. I believe that the local PD does it in
Michigan. You call the police and have them come out. They make sure that
it has the things it is supposed to (tail lights, turn signals, etc) and
that you
On Oct 2, 2014, at 10:20 AM, Lee Hart via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
But, the whole point of transferring a title is to officially change
ownership. It it mighty hard to get any kind of damages from an original
owner unless one can show that there was fraud or misrepresentation.
And, in
On Oct 2, 2014, at 12:15 PM, Collin Kidder via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
It is very common. People buy cars with a salvage title and fix them.
Exactly -- the car basically becomes a kit and / or homemade car...very much
like the overwhelming majority of EVs owned by the people reading these
A copy of the form was attached to the original news item I read about
this so I have read it. It doesn't say Tesla can take his car but it
does say that before they would reactivate the car he had to take it to
Tesla to be inspected at his expense (other sources say that Tesla says
they won't
On 1 Oct 2014 at 11:01, Rick Beebe via EV wrote:
If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car.
Control freaks.
Maybe other folks are fine with this. More power to you, no pun intended.
But blast it, I already have enough things in my life that spy on me and/or
restrict my
: [EVDL] EValert: !Don't buy a salvaged Tesla EV to repair
drive! (video)
On 1 Oct 2014 at 11:01, Rick Beebe via EV wrote:
If they're happy with the inspection they'll reactive the car.
Control freaks.
Maybe other folks are fine with this. More power to you, no pun
intended.
But blast it, I
On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Cor van de Water via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
As it looks now, they are only refusing to enable the car out of concern
for their brand image...
Ironically enough, they may well be doing their brand image more harm with
their current actions than if they were to
disagree. Sounds like to me they are perfectly willing to work with the
guy. But the guy is unwilling to work with them...
bob
On Wed, Oct 1, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Ben Goren via EV ev@lists.evdl.org wrote:
On Oct 1, 2014, at 2:23 PM, Cor van de Water via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
wrote:
As it looks
I am afraid I side with Tesla on this. As much as I like to be able to tinker
with 'my stuff' here we have a very complex system with many sensors and
actuators that are all controlled by the onboard computer systems. The car has
been repaired by (apparently) someone with no training on
Even my 2000 Volvo V70 XC has parts like the throttle body that are flashed to
the VIN of the car. Makes it impossible to use used parts. Pretty much forces
you to the dealer also.
Mike
On October 1, 2014 4:04:24 PM MDT, Lawrence Harris via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
wrote:
I am afraid I side
I agree completely. However, there was a passing mention in the original
post about Otmar's Stretchla. I would think Otmar would have no problem
signing such a document.
So what's up, Otmar? Has your drive line upgrade hit a snag?
Chris
On Sep 28, 2014 8:33 PM, Robert Bruninga via EV
On 28 Sep 2014 at 20:32, Robert Bruninga via EV wrote:
If the guy wants to hack a tesla, then simply sign the form. Done.
Simply sign the form? It isn't that simple.
On 28 Sep 2014 at 2:12, brucedp5 via EV wrote:
... he says the company wanted him to sign liability waiver that allows
the
Tesla's response:
Safety is Tesla’s top priority and it is a principle on which we refuse to
compromise under any circumstance. Mr. Rutman purchased a vehicle on the
salvage market that had been substantially damaged in a serious accident.
We have strong concerns about this car being safe for
'I am blacklisted by Tesla all across the country'
*** Buyer beware - Caveat emptor ***
% Tesla running 'GM-liability-scared' a petty-parts case of the
'Sue Me, Sue You Blues' The media stink caused Tesla react
*** Otmar was Tesla-tortured before this %
To my ears, this has a faint but uncomfortable echo of GM's policies with
the EV1: you may have leased the EV, but WE control its fate.
Tesla's policies here echo where many other corporations are headed, and not
just in EVs or even just in automobiles. It's no longer enough for you to
buy
Given the path Tesla has taken with software - I can't see how they manage
off the grid salvage units. If they interact with such - what liability do
they take on?
A solution is maybe an open source OS for the car, something that runs it,
but it takes Tesla off the hook - which is obviously how
Does this problem relate to Tesla’s battles with states that require
independent dealers? Surely an independent Tesla dealer would just sell him
the parts.
n
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
On 28 Sep 2014 at 11:19, Nathan Loofbourrow via EV wrote:
Surely an independent Tesla dealer would just sell him
the parts.
Is there a law that requires that they do so? Otherwise, Tesla could fix
that problem by requiring dealers to sign agreements not to sell parts to
anyone other than
On Sep 28, 2014, at 11:34 AM, EVDL Administrator via EV ev@lists.evdl.org
wrote:
Surely an independent Tesla dealer would just sell him
the parts.
Is there a law that requires that they do so?
That's getting into questions of anti-trust and safety and environmental
regulations and similar
This is a no brainer.
The value of the Tesla brand is extremely high. The negative value and
media feeding frenzie of a hacker-induced fire, crash, or ANYTHING that
would spoil the brand name is simply not worth the risk. I don't blame
Tesla.
If the guy wants to hack a tesla, then simply sign
53 matches
Mail list logo
