Edmunds’ scientists apparently made Tesla very angry when the car maker failed a simple test of real-world range:
Some electric vehicles dramatically exceeded the EPA’s range estimates, while others fell short. Most notably, all five Tesla vehicles we tested missed those estimates.
Edmunds said they received an unpleasant response from Tesla as the car maker demanded a retest using special considerations and adjustments (that a zero range doesn’t actually mean zero and should be tested as a completely opaque not-zero amount).
Needless to say, Tesla was not happy with our test results, and we received a phone call. Tesla’s engineers disputed our figures.
Tesla cars, now overtly described by their engineers as based on lies (zero doesn’t mean zero) then failed the tests again.
Even allowing for the additional miles recorded after an indicated zero, only two of the six Teslas we tested would hit their EPA figures in our real-world conditions.
If that debate outcome wasn’t bad enough already (with Tesla arguing that it lies in an attempt to prove that it doesn’t lie)…
Edmunds on September 7 gave an honest and clear negative review of the Tesla “yoke” option for steering control:
…it actually feels dangerous… don’t let anybody tell you this is a good idea, I can’t believe it’s legal.
To be clear, this is a qualified review by a man with experience in a F1 car with a yoke.
He’s an expert telling us the Tesla yoke is a terrible idea, and he ends up guessing it was made only for “Twitter” noise/marketing instead of benefiting actual retail drivers.
Race cars in loops obviously aren’t turned more than slight rotation (it would be disaster at high speeds to turn too far) yet any real world driver has constant arcs over 180 degrees. The F1 has direct steering, whereas indirect steer is more functional for real-world driving.
It kind of begs the question why Tesla didn’t launch their latest attempt to stoke its base with some other fraudulent innovation like installing a “tiller” to steer it like a boat.
Come on Tesla, where’s your tiller upgrade option?
As predicted by the reviewer, despite his very careful explanations and evidence, virulent information warfare tactics over Twitter were unleashed in a stream of personal attacks with attempts to kill him as messenger.
Consumer Reports then echoed Edmunds’ findings:
Tesla’s New Steering Yoke Shows Little Benefit and Potential Safety Pitfalls
It reminds me of a disastrous flaw in Ford Mustang engineering where they built a rear beam suspension (linked instead of independent) useful only in drag racing, which ended up throwing a lot of owners into a very dangerous spin and crash.
Ford tends to make some pretty big mistakes, yet you don’t see any evidence today of the company organizing social media into highly-targeted warfare against safety advocates.
Edmunds also criticized Tesla’s engineering safety generally in the “Plaid” model calling the car a “marketing exercise to draw attention to an aging car”. And that seems true.
Tesla social media activists then pushed out a petulant “joke” about a new special safety acceleration mode being 60mph in 15 seconds, which honestly doesn’t sound like a bad idea.
Tesla is basically engaging in these information warfare tactics, engaging from a position of insecurity, to have a fan base inflame tension and disruption that discredits experts and science.
To clarify where that “joke” image comes from, JeffTutorials is an obvious Tesla disinformation account:
It all reads to me as very similar to that time Edison created an electric chair to kill people and tried to have it called “Westinghoused” (to denigrate a man far superior to him in every way).
How very odd to think that Tesla, a brilliant man who worked for the generous Westinghouse after suffering from Edison’s abusive and inhumane cheats… has his name completely hijacked by a business being run like a modern-day Edison scam.
