upvote
They have the highest rate of fatal accidents across all car brands, more than double the average.

https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a62919131/tesla-has-highes...

reply
Your link is to an article that references an iSeeCars study from two years ago. They got their crash data from NHTSA FARS, but got their mileage data from sales of used cars on their platform. At the time I noticed some issues with their mileage data.[1] It's very likely that Teslas sold on their platform have very low mileage compared to average, because people either sell a car quickly after buying it or hang on to it for years. This also lines up with the fact that the other cars in their unsafe list were all released recently.

Working backwards from their stats & FARS data, I calculated that for their claims to be true, each Model Y would need to accumulate only 4,300 miles per year. This is far below Tesla's reports of 13,000-14,000 miles per year. Also iSeeCars claimed that an average of 2.8 vehicles were involved in fatal accidents for every billion miles traveled. But at the time the US had 13.3 deaths per billion miles traveled. So for their data to be correct, the average fatal accident would need to have five fatalities.

1. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42209142

reply
Your comment is—at best—misleading. See the last two paragraphs of the article:

> The study's authors make clear that the results do not indicate Tesla vehicles are inherently unsafe or have design flaws.... Many of the other cars that ranked highly on the list have also been given high ratings for safety by the likes of IIHS and the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration, as well....

> “The models on this list likely reflect a combination of driver behavior and driving conditions, leading to increased crashes and fatalities”....

reply
could be that Tesla making fans believe their level 2 driving automation is better than it actually is and marketing BS terms like Autopilot and FSD contributing to the fatal accident stat. even if the car itself is rated safe by IIHS, isn't that mostly about how well driver and passenger of the car fare when they are involved in different types of accidents? the safety rating wouldn't take into account whether the manufacturer has done its best to accurately communicate capability of its driving automation system to its customers. and i think pedestrian or passengers of other cars dying is counted under the fatal accident stat.

and if you've been in Teslas that are a few years old, you might have experienced phantom braking. random hard braking for no apparent reason. i try to avoid being behind Teslas on the road if i can help it.

reply
You forgot to point out which part of the comment was misleading
reply
The discussion was about the car's safety, not driver behavior. A car can be the safest car, but if the drivers who choose that car all decide to drive it off a cliff, it doesn't speak at all to the safety of the car, it speaks to driver behavior.
reply
We should definitely be excited about the customers that drive off cliffs now being offered a car which contains a bomb
reply
Yes, it's a bomb, but there's no way in hell it's going to be legalized for public road use in the US or EU. It was a cool demo, it's literally a flying car, how could that not be cool.

Perhaps some billionaires will buy it, good for them.

Why do you guys contort yourselves into knots trying to find any and every conceivable problem with something that doesn't affect you ... get over it already. Go ahead and flag me.

reply
[flagged]
reply
Safety of a car is a different axis than safety of the driver. That combines them. Related, it's why performance cars have higher insurance rates: people who buy fast cars go fast.
reply
paid
reply
I would claim "has a most basic understanding of statistics".
reply
[dead]
reply
i think some self selecting populations are skewed.

i remember reading about the first cobra in the 60's, where a huge percentage of the owners didn't live to make the second payment.

reply
This is silly. I bought my Model Y specifically because its safety is so high. You can see it in (1) the crash rate numbers when using FSD, (2) the crash-test ratings are fantastic, and (3) impossible situations where people survived such as plummeting off a cliff on route 1.
reply
EU safety regs are pass/fail - there's no sources stating Tesla have exceeded anything there, they need to pass in order to be sold in Europe, so they've done whatever the minimum required is for that. To do so, they've needed to make numerous compromises & changes to their cars to make them fit for the EU market - notably no FSD. Hardly indicative of a car brand that exceeds anything.

As for US safety standards, that seems a lower bar...

reply
Europe requires removal of FSD. US safety standards "seems a lower bar"

Quite ironic.

reply
Isn’t FSD fully allowed in the Netherlands?
reply
It was recently allowed in Denmark, and the promotional video Tesla released showed the car driving through a "no vehicles" sign with FSD.
reply
Like the people who get trapped in case of accident when the electricity fail and is burned inside?
reply
Damn that's exactly what happened recently to someone here, it seems to be a recurring thing, a safer battery technology will probably fix that later
reply
A billionaire died in one that went into the water: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-68622898
reply
Every Tesla ever made has a door release that doesn't require any electricity.
reply
The discovery of which is an exercise left for the participant in this exciting escape room on wheels.

https://vsp.virginia.gov/virginia-state-police-trooper-rescu...

And 14 others - that I'm aware of - to date.

reply
It does come with a manual.
reply
It’s poor design if you have to read the manual to find a critical safety feature.
reply
Are there mandatory safety briefings when you climb in your Uber?
reply
Which I'm sure you hand out to all of your passengers in pre-flight.
reply
You shouldn't need to read a manual to figure out how to open the door of your car.
reply
I once read a claim that the greatest UI design ever was the silver metal patch on building doors, which indicate where you should push.
reply
I'll be sure to request it from my Uber driver who I'm sure will let me study it before departing
reply
That may be so, but these are two very different things:

[has X]

[has X designed, built, and visible in the car such that it can be easily found and operated whilst panicking for your life, or rushing from outside while trying to save a trapped passenger's life]

There are people who would tell you that while Tesla may have the first, it does not have the latter, but they cannot because they are dead, and should not be.

reply
The “Cybertruck” (ffs …) is not legal in the EU due to safety regulations, so I would say that you are mistaken.
reply
And yet, here's one in Poland, which is in EU: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nfMEz8eJZc

I personally saw one in Krakow, Poland.

Cybertruck does not have EU homologation so Tesla can't sell it in EU. Because at the moment they don't want to.

You can buy it, import it and certify for legal use. It requires minor modifications but is perfectly legal.

reply
Says more about the EU than about the Cybertruck.
reply
What, that the EU cares about the effects of products on people other than the purchaser?

That things which are good for an individual but bad for everyone else deserve scrutiny?

reply
Stupid Europeans (and Australians) for protecting pedestrians, what a bunch of woke pussies ?
reply
It's not legal because it's unsafe for pedestrians, not for people inside the car.
reply
That still seems like the kind of safety we should care about
reply
So, it's unsafe.
reply
Interesting POV
reply
So we agree, it's unsafe
reply
That feels like it's much more "by design" than "cannot meet regulations".
reply
Immaterial to the original claim.
reply
“We designed the Tesla Deathtrap 300 to explicitly break any regulations regarding danger to human life”
reply
[flagged]
reply