- Why is Tesla’s Quality Control Still So Poor?
- Tesla Issues Statement On Paint Shop Problems
- Why is Tesla’s Quality Control Still So Poor?
- Paint issues causing Tesla Model 3 bottlenecks, Elon Musk admits
- Paint issues causing Tesla Model 3 bottlenecks, Elon Musk admits
Why is Tesla’s Quality Control Still So Poor?For all the assembly issues faced by the Tesla Model 3 in the first year of production, from battery modules to steel-welding robotsperhaps the last thing that many industry observers were expecting to be holding up the electric sedan are paint issues. But that's what Tesla CEO Elon Musk blamed days ago when asked by a Model 3 buyer who had been waiting beyond the original delivery window. It all started when one particular reservation holder contacted Musk via Twitterindicating that he was already scheduled to take delivery of a car but then learned that the VIN itself had been canceled. Got to be done. Musk indicated that paint issues were not only holding up the production process of some Model 3s as they were being repainted, but that Tesla has had to build entirely new cars. When a blogger asked for specifics, Musk indicated that some multicoat colors were more difficult to execute to specification than others. Neither Musk nor Tesla indicated just what percentage of cars were being repainted or what percentage of orders were being redone entirely with new cars being built, and given the range of items that has held up delivery over the past six months, it is perhaps difficult to isolate the exact numbers. Most of the assembly "artifacts" that Tesla Model 3 buyers have been reporting have concerned panel-fit issues, particularly the doors, trunks and C-pillar panels. Variable paint finishes have been reported as well from time to time, but this issue has received relatively little attention until now. It's unclear just how many Model 3 deliveries have been delayed in recent months due to paint issues, but a number of buyers have noted delays when the cars were almost ready to be delivered to them. Type keyword s to search. Today's Top Stories. Need an Month Loan? You Can't Afford the Car. Our Picks. Elon Musk indicated that some cars were being repainted after not passing quality control. Related Story. Advertisement - Continue Reading Below. More From Tesla. The Tesla Cybertruck could become a Lego set you could buy. This Mexican police rendering of the Tesla Cybertruck is even better than we could have hoped. Eccentric billionaire bachelor Elon Musk heads to trial over 'pedo guy' comments. Ford has nothing to gain by pitting the F against the Tesla Cybertruck. Here's what the Tesla Cybertruck needs to become a threat to established truckmakers. Tesla Cybertruck packs genuine truck cred under its dystopian nightmare bodywork.
Tesla Issues Statement On Paint Shop Problems
More than a week after The Drive reached out to Tesla for comment on the violations reported at their factory by the Bay Area Air Quality Management Districtthe electric automaker has broken its silence about the situation. Tesla released the following statement to InsideEVs :. Contrary to what has been reported, none of these deviations — which we proactively self-reported out of transparency and as part of our ongoing dialogue with BAAQMD to update our air permit — have resulted in any adverse community or environmental impacts. Further, the agency has yet to make a final determination on the notices. Over the past year, we implemented new compliance management software and hired a third-party auditor, additional air compliance staff, as well as a year veteran of BAAQMD, and we are working closely with the agency to ensure we are in full compliance. Tesla's statement boils down to two fundamental claims: that this entire situation is the result of its proactive transparency and engagement with BAAQMD, and that none of the deviations from permitted conditions resulted in emissions exceeding the factory's allowable levels or "adverse community or environmental impacts. To begin with, it's important to acknowledge that Tesla doesn't refute any of the specific factual claims in The Drive 's reporting. Though their statement attempts to recast the past 18 months of elevated deviations and violations as having no environmental or community impact, the unique nature of these events and both BAAQMD and Tesla's response to them proves that the situation is indeed serious. NUMMI paid fines for the excess emissions between the discovery of the unexpected problem and its resolution, but crucially it also went before the District's Hearing Board to request a variance for its period of noncompliance because simply shutting down production would not have put it into compliance because the regulation it was violating was based on abatement efficiency and not simply the level of emissions which did not exceed the limit for the bumper line, even without proper abatement. This event was a typical violation in that it was an isolated incident caused by the unexpected failure of a single piece of equipment that was repaired promptly. All of these characteristics fundamentally differentiate this incident from the current situation at the Tesla factory over the last 18 months, making InsideEV's comparison between the two situations more reason for concern than reason to dismiss the matter. For the 19 violations at Tesla's factory to have been comparable to the NUMMI violation, there would have to have been a statistically improbable number of random and unexpected equipment failures as well as evidence that Tesla promptly returned them to compliance, provided a fully transparent accounting of the situation and sought variances before the Hearing Board for the period of noncompliance. This is clearly not what happened, as is obvious to anyone who reads the publicly-available documentation of the situation, or The Drive 's narrative account of the problems. But because this is a complex situation and because neither Tesla nor BAAQMD is being as transparent about the situation as the public deserves, not to mention Tesla and InsideEV 's efforts to muddy the waters, it falls on us to present this as simply as possible. This pattern of not waiting for regulator approval before taking actions that alter conditions from those laid out in the engineering analysis for Tesla's current permit is fundamentally different from discovering an isolated problem and fixing it as quickly as possible, and it reflects a more fundamental disregard for air quality regulation. Though there are reported deviations that do seem to involve the sudden failure of abatement equipment, there are others where Tesla simply deactivated E-Scrub abatement equipment due to fires that were at least partially caused by poor maintenance practices. Based on currently-available information, the answer appears to be no. In contrast to the NUMMI violation cited by InsideEVsTesla responded to many of these noncompliances by installing unpermitted equipment and making other unpermitted modifications rather than simply fixing or replacing broken equipment. These formal requests for variance represent the appropriate way for a company to "make a calculated decision" to use InsideEV 's characterization of the situation to not comply with existing permits, yet Tesla did not pursue them until after BAAQMD stepped up its enforcement efforts. A review of Hearing Board records shows that Tesla has only requested a single variance since the start of This variance was granted over BAAQMD's objections because Tesla claimed that A was damaged and that operating it at the normal temperature could cause it to shut down, creating more emissions than it would allow at the lower level. The fact that Tesla has now requested a variance for A's final few weeks of operation before it is replaced by an entirely new RTO A suggests that its behavior is only changing as a result of BAAQMD's higher level of scrutiny and tougher enforcement actions in the last year.
Why is Tesla’s Quality Control Still So Poor?
Being a relatively young carmaker compared to rivals such as Mercedes-Benz and McLaren, Tesla has dealt with growing pains over the years. Critics of the company have aggressively honed in on these challenges, constantly accusing the company of producing cars with bad build quality and substandard paintwork on a regular basis among others. A look at Tesla forums online would reveal numerous threads about individuals complaining about the paint quality of the Model S, X, and most notably, the Model 3. Krige is no stranger to premium vehicles. Tesla is a company that is continually improving. Thus, it is not difficult to assume that the paint quality of a Model 3 produced next year will likely be even more refined than the vehicles being produced today. Gaps from hood to fenders, doors to frame, and all the others appeared to be perfectly even, equal side-to-side, and completely parallel. Gaps of 3. Analyst Philippe Houchois noted Lifestyle Tesla Model 3 paint quality stereotypes dispelled by auto protection specialist A Tesla Model 3 with paint protection film. Recent Most Popular News SpaceX's next launch ready to go just weeks after in-flight engine failure Just weeks after SpaceX suffered its first in-flight rocket engine failure sincethe To Top.
Paint issues causing Tesla Model 3 bottlenecks, Elon Musk admits
Over the past two years, the Internet has been littered with quality control complaints about brand new Teslas. Plenty of things would warrant a complaint on a brand new car, sure. But many owners feel that Tesla rushed their models into production—and some have even filed lawsuits in order to return their cars over repeat issues. If you buy a new economy car, you might not expect things to be perfect. Some of the major complaints that continue to arise are paint-related. In April ofowner lawerence. The Service Center does take ownership of the issues and tries to fix them […] but that does not change the fact that a car costing k ships with bad paint jobs much more often than it should. Fast forward to a new Model X purchased in April : paint issues are still regularly popping up. This time, deep imperfections under the clear coat can be seen, as well as orange peeling that can be seen in the photo below. Tesla did step up and fix the issues, which should be expected in a car of that price point; however, some owners feel that having the paint fixed would only cause more issues and recommend rejecting delivery of the car instead. Most recently, on April 4,a proud new owner took delivery of his Model S 90D only to find that his A-pillar had split straight up the center. Moving on from visual quality, we expand to mechanical components. More owners also posted on forums regarding power steering loss as wellindicating this is not necessarily an isolated incident. Nevertheless, one question stays in the mind: What happens when the more affordable Model 3 starts to be released to the public? Despite Model S deliveries going on for two years, the same problems keep occurring with new Teslas. By Rob Stumpf April 7, Another user who had owned two Teslas at that point also chimed in:. Tesla owners will be able to locate their car's easter eggs from a single screen. Tesla faces a possible class-action lawsuit, but the carmaker blames human error—and claims there's nothing it can do about the problem. Tesla only releases data when it suits its purposes, a new report claims. The carmaker says it's just setting the record straight. Tesla says it delivered 25, cars in the first quarter ofa big increase over Q1