8 ms·

Overall I think Broder acquits himself well, and his explanation about circling the Milford parking lot makes sense. Also, the Tesla engineer he was on the phon

by luigi 14y ago

Overall I think Broder acquits himself well, and his explanation about circling the Milford parking lot makes sense. Also, the Tesla engineer he was on the phone with at the time should have been able to tell Musk that happened (or Tesla should have just asked Broder to comment before posting the rebuttal). His action here is still hard to understand: > The Tesla personnel whom I consulted over the phone – Ms. Ra and Mr. Merendino –told me to leave it connected for an hour, and after that the lost range would be restored. I did not ignore their advice. So it sounds like he didn't speak to Tesla personnel after he charged at the weak station in Norwich for an hour. If I were him, I'd call them back and say, "Uh guys, it says it only has 32 miles left and I have 61 to go. Maybe I should give it another hour?"

jlgreco 14y ago
> His action here is still hard to understand: Yeah, I got the same impression, but that seems so insane I'm not sure it is right. I mean, surely he called them afterwards, right?
- deletes 14y ago
  I'm sure he didn't.
bitcartel 14y ago
Given the ambiguity of what the dash was reporting and what Tesla personnel were telling him, it looks like he put his trust in the humans. In that situation, where you've been led to believe the dash behaves like a wonky gauge, it's quite reasonable to not call back.
- taproot 14y ago
  Can't say I'd call starting out on a 61 mile journey with 32 miles of charge reasonable.
  - pseut 14y ago
    You might if your only task that day were to assess and report on the current state of charging that car.
    - taproot 14y ago
      Assess? That wasn't an assessment, that was FUD.
nbouscal 14y ago
Yeah, there are really two major problems with the story. First, that he drove off with 32 miles left. Even if they did say it was okay, a rational consumer would be pretty skeptical. This also creates the problem that the story depends on what was said in a telephone conversation that we don't have access to, so there's really no way to know who is telling the truth. The other problem is this quote: "If there was a public charging station nearby, no one made me aware of it." When I go on a road trip and I'm running out of gas, I don't wait for a call from someone to tell me where the gas station is. I stop and I find out where the gas station is, and then I drive straight to it and fill the car. Broder says that he was trying to simulate a real trip, but that just doesn't square with his behavior. Only filling to 72% is not what an ordinary consumer does on a long trip. You fill the tank, because like your mother always told you, "Better safe than sorry."
- smsm42 14y ago
  I know if I had my car say "32 miles" and I know I need to go 62 miles, I'd request explicit confirmation from the techs that it's OK. I've been with computers long enough to know supporting somebody remotely is very hard as the person on the other side assumes you can see what they see. Being on the user's side, then, requires you to explicitly state all relevant information, and ensure the supporter is aware of it, otherwise his mental picture of what's going on may be entirely wrong, and you may get very wrong advice.
- stcredzero 14y ago
  > Yeah, there are really two major problems with the story. First, that he drove off with 32 miles left. Even if they did say it was okay, a rational consumer would be pretty skeptical. And someone who had an axe to grind, or who might benefit from pictures of a Tesla being towed, might decide differently.
lawnchair_larry 14y ago
That stuck out for me and I think he is being dishonest with his delicate wording. They didn't clear him to go, as he suggests. They told him that it would be ready in an hour. He also explains that he drove past a station "because no one made him aware of it". That smells like wordplay too. He was probably aware of it, and any reasonable owner of the car would probably be aware of it, or be well equipped to look it up. The map of charging stations is quite easy to find. He surely had an internet capable phone for backup. Instead, he made an extra support call, and when they gave him bad advice, he took the opportunity to maliciously comply. After 12 support calls, if you want to cherry pick bad advice that seems inconsistent with your expectations, you can probably find something. I think Elon was wrong in some of his claims, but I think the review was still dishonest.
- femto 14y ago
  Maybe Tesla need to add an unobtrusive permanent display somewhere on the touch screen, showing the distance and direction to the nearest charging station? Touching the display would bring up detailed driving directions and start GPS navigation to the nearest station.
- sachinag 14y ago
  The Tesla in-car dash only shows Superchargers, not regular chargers.
- erichocean 14y ago
  They didn't clear him to go, as he suggests. They told him that it would be ready in an hour. This is exactly the point of contention, and presumably, there should be a call to Tesla after the hour of charging if Broder's version is correct, and not if Tesla's is. We'll see.
- stephengillie 14y ago
  Maybe a driver should be responsible enough to be aware of his vehicle's range, and able to locate refueling stations? This is like saying "I ran out of gas because I couldn't find a gas station" when you're a block away from one. It's ridiculous and, in this 21st century, not an excuse.
codex 14y ago
He called early that morning complaining about the drop in mileage overnight. He was told the mileage drop was a glitch and to recondition the battery. When he called again, he was told to recondition the battery again--this time though a quick charge at Norwich. How many times should he call Tesla about the same problem, when he was told twice that the mileage was erroneously low? He had already attempted to recondition the battery--twice, which should be sufficient. In his mind, he now he has even more juice in his tank. He has even more of a buffer than he did pre-charge. So he gets on with the review. Of course, he does call again when it is clear that the conditioning + driving has not restored the needed juice--but by that time it is too late.
- lttlrck 14y ago
  I sure hope Tesla has a Genius Bar in the pipeline.
adastra 14y ago
I agree, that's the key to the whole thing right there. It says to me that, if I had to guess, I'd bet he didn't call them and headed out despite the range being short, because he knew he was about to be stranded and have a tantalizing story. And when asked, he could always say he followed their recommendations to the letter. Also, the amount of weasel words he manages to use on a lot of his other explanations doesn't exactly help his credibility...
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]
bathat 14y ago
>Overall I think Broder acquits himself well, and his explanation about circling the Milford parking lot makes sense. No, it doesn't. Remember, the original article was a review of the Supercharger network. Whether or not the Superchargers are hard to find is a very important detail. The decision to buy a Model S very likely hinges on whether one can use the Supercharger network. Finding the station is almost as important as whether or not the stations exist at all. So, given that, why would he omit this particular detail from the original review? Broder wrote three pages in his original article, and wasted a lot of space writing about the bitter cold inside the cabin. Are you seriously suggesting that such a talented writer (and I do believe he is that) was not able to find space in his review for this very important detail? It strikes me that the simplest, and most logical, explanation is that Broder was not actually looking for the station a the time he was allegedly "driving in circles." Rather, it seems like an excuse cooked up after the fact, to explain behavior that, should it go unexplained, would be quite damning.

by luigi 14y ago

jlgreco 14y ago

> His action here is still hard to understand: Yeah, I got the same impression, but that seems so insane I'm not sure it is right. I mean, surely he called them afterwards, right?

deletes 14y ago
I'm sure he didn't.

bitcartel 14y ago

Given the ambiguity of what the dash was reporting and what Tesla personnel were telling him, it looks like he put his trust in the humans. In that situation, where you've been led to believe the dash behaves like a wonky gauge, it's quite reasonable to not call back.

taproot 14y ago
Can't say I'd call starting out on a 61 mile journey with 32 miles of charge reasonable.
- pseut 14y ago
  You might if your only task that day were to assess and report on the current state of charging that car.
  - taproot 14y ago
    Assess? That wasn't an assessment, that was FUD.

nbouscal 14y ago

Yeah, there are really two major problems with the story. First, that he drove off with 32 miles left. Even if they did say it was okay, a rational consumer would be pretty skeptical. This also creates the problem that the story depends on what was said in a telephone conversation that we don't have access to, so there's really no way to know who is telling the truth. The other problem is this quote: "If there was a public charging station nearby, no one made me aware of it." When I go on a road trip and I'm running out of gas, I don't wait for a call from someone to tell me where the gas station is. I stop and I find out where the gas station is, and then I drive straight to it and fill the car. Broder says that he was trying to simulate a real trip, but that just doesn't square with his behavior. Only filling to 72% is not what an ordinary consumer does on a long trip. You fill the tank, because like your mother always told you, "Better safe than sorry."

smsm42 14y ago
I know if I had my car say "32 miles" and I know I need to go 62 miles, I'd request explicit confirmation from the techs that it's OK. I've been with computers long enough to know supporting somebody remotely is very hard as the person on the other side assumes you can see what they see. Being on the user's side, then, requires you to explicitly state all relevant information, and ensure the supporter is aware of it, otherwise his mental picture of what's going on may be entirely wrong, and you may get very wrong advice.
stcredzero 14y ago
> Yeah, there are really two major problems with the story. First, that he drove off with 32 miles left. Even if they did say it was okay, a rational consumer would be pretty skeptical. And someone who had an axe to grind, or who might benefit from pictures of a Tesla being towed, might decide differently.

lawnchair_larry 14y ago

That stuck out for me and I think he is being dishonest with his delicate wording. They didn't clear him to go, as he suggests. They told him that it would be ready in an hour. He also explains that he drove past a station "because no one made him aware of it". That smells like wordplay too. He was probably aware of it, and any reasonable owner of the car would probably be aware of it, or be well equipped to look it up. The map of charging stations is quite easy to find. He surely had an internet capable phone for backup. Instead, he made an extra support call, and when they gave him bad advice, he took the opportunity to maliciously comply. After 12 support calls, if you want to cherry pick bad advice that seems inconsistent with your expectations, you can probably find something. I think Elon was wrong in some of his claims, but I think the review was still dishonest.

femto 14y ago
Maybe Tesla need to add an unobtrusive permanent display somewhere on the touch screen, showing the distance and direction to the nearest charging station? Touching the display would bring up detailed driving directions and start GPS navigation to the nearest station.
sachinag 14y ago
The Tesla in-car dash only shows Superchargers, not regular chargers.
erichocean 14y ago
They didn't clear him to go, as he suggests. They told him that it would be ready in an hour. This is exactly the point of contention, and presumably, there should be a call to Tesla after the hour of charging if Broder's version is correct, and not if Tesla's is. We'll see.
stephengillie 14y ago
Maybe a driver should be responsible enough to be aware of his vehicle's range, and able to locate refueling stations? This is like saying "I ran out of gas because I couldn't find a gas station" when you're a block away from one. It's ridiculous and, in this 21st century, not an excuse.

codex 14y ago

He called early that morning complaining about the drop in mileage overnight. He was told the mileage drop was a glitch and to recondition the battery. When he called again, he was told to recondition the battery again--this time though a quick charge at Norwich. How many times should he call Tesla about the same problem, when he was told twice that the mileage was erroneously low? He had already attempted to recondition the battery--twice, which should be sufficient. In his mind, he now he has even more juice in his tank. He has even more of a buffer than he did pre-charge. So he gets on with the review. Of course, he does call again when it is clear that the conditioning + driving has not restored the needed juice--but by that time it is too late.

lttlrck 14y ago
I sure hope Tesla has a Genius Bar in the pipeline.

adastra 14y ago

I agree, that's the key to the whole thing right there. It says to me that, if I had to guess, I'd bet he didn't call them and headed out despite the range being short, because he knew he was about to be stranded and have a tantalizing story. And when asked, he could always say he followed their recommendations to the letter. Also, the amount of weasel words he manages to use on a lot of his other explanations doesn't exactly help his credibility...

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]

bathat 14y ago

>Overall I think Broder acquits himself well, and his explanation about circling the Milford parking lot makes sense. No, it doesn't. Remember, the original article was a review of the Supercharger network. Whether or not the Superchargers are hard to find is a very important detail. The decision to buy a Model S very likely hinges on whether one can use the Supercharger network. Finding the station is almost as important as whether or not the stations exist at all. So, given that, why would he omit this particular detail from the original review? Broder wrote three pages in his original article, and wasted a lot of space writing about the bitter cold inside the cabin. Are you seriously suggesting that such a talented writer (and I do believe he is that) was not able to find space in his review for this very important detail? It strikes me that the simplest, and most logical, explanation is that Broder was not actually looking for the station a the time he was allegedly "driving in circles." Rather, it seems like an excuse cooked up after the fact, to explain behavior that, should it go unexplained, would be quite damning.