this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
467 points (93.3% liked)

Technology

60070 readers
5498 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] noneabove1182@sh.itjust.works 23 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (4 children)

100%, this number is skewed by the fact that tesla will basically "recall" for any minor issue because it's a simple software update, I imagine a lot of companies try to avoid recalls as aggressively and for as long as possible because it's a significantly bigger burden on them

I say this as someone who drives a Tesla but is still extremely judgemental of Tesla

[–] anlumo@feddit.de 15 points 1 year ago

As everyone who watched Fight Club knows, it’s a simple calculation. If the costs of the recall exceed the cost for the expected lawsuits, they don’t do it.

An OTA update has essentially zero cost, so it’s even easier.

[–] n33rg@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (2 children)

Agreed. The concept of judging vehicle quality by number of recalls is severely flawed for this very reason. My Subaru Impreza has had a number of recalls for a variety of trivial things, but I’ve had only one actual issue with it in 65k miles and have spent relatively little on maintenance. Comparing that to the Audi A4 I had before this car which required maybe one recall in similar mileage but I was constantly fixing major items from leaks, broken drive related components, etc.

Neither had any motor related issues so far, aside from burning oil in the Audi. But by number of recalls? That Audi was great! But they also had a number of lawsuits filed in attempt to get them to actually recall the multitude of problems. The one that it actually had was the result of them losing such a suit, but so many years later it really didn’t matter.

So yeah, terrible metric to track. At this point, I’d rather see that the company has a dozen recalls on their vehicles than zero.

Edit: I should clarify. That being said, I do believe Toyota actually makes a solid car the first time. Boring, but quality is a huge focus for them. I’m still hesitant to trust recall counts though and I don’t think I’d trust Mercedes number as a valid quality metric.

[–] noneabove1182@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 year ago

that last edit you added is probably the worst part, because it takes away from how solid Toyota and others are because it ruins the entire metric, Toyota is likely crushing it, and entirely possible Tesla is actually really really bad, but without the RIGHT metrics we can't actually draw any good conclusions, it's not just bad for tesla but for the whole market

[–] CmdrShepard@lemmy.one 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It should also be pointed out that the numbers in the articles are just projections covering the next 30 years.

I don't know their methodology but I'm curious if they just took the current age and recall number and multiplied it out to 30 years. I don't think this would be a fair assessment because a car would likely have all the kinks worked out long before it hits 30. Furthermore, I find it odd they projected out 30 years when the average age of a car on the road is 12.5 years.