Tesla MODEL S 90D, page #38

Auto blog

Tesla Model S owners hack their cars, find Ubuntu

There are interesting subsets within the group of people that composes Tesla Model S owners. They include celebrities, Drudge Report-reading conservatives, and, more relevant to this post, tech-savvy geeks. Now, give that last bunch an electric car with an easily-exposed Ethernet connecter and they will try to plug into it and snoop around. Don't believe us? Well, several have already admitted to giving it a try on this thread over at the Tesla Motors Club forum. After wiring into the car's communications system, forum user "nlc" was able to find a number of ports and tap into the data flowing to the center console and navigation screens. Others soon joined in the fun and amongst the slightly esoteric bits of information the "hackers" eventually discovered was that the sub-system runs on a version of Ubuntu operating system, which is a Linux variant. While one person did manage to use the discoveries to get Firefox to display on the center console touchscreen (sideways), it doesn't seem likely anyone will be able to do more invasive things with the Ethernet entry point like, for example, transform an early 40-kWh Model S into a 60-kWh version (you can't hack extra batteries). For those who want to customize the big 17-inch display, or at least get it to play video, it seems they'll be better off waiting until Tesla is ready to release the software development kit (SDK) it has promised for third-party app builders. For its part, the California automaker isn't particularly thrilled to have its customers digging beneath the dash. Through its service center, it has already contacted the original Ethernet exploiter to let him know they were aware of his actions and that such activity could lead to a voiding of the warranty. Indeed, the Motor Vehicle Purchase Agreement (MVPA) which buyers sign does contain a clause which reads, in part, You may not, or may not attempt to, reverse engineer, disassemble, decompile, tamper with or engage in any similar activity in respect of a Tesla Vehicle, nor may you permit any third party to do so, save only to the extent permitted by applicable law. It could be argued that this light-handed geekery doesn't quite measure up to the legal extent permitted, but we know if we owned a car that costs as much as $100,000, we wouldn't be risking it. Not when there are salvage-titled cars out there on which to practice the black arts.

California could put $60,000 MRSP limit on EV rebates

In California, electric vehicles have been selling so well that the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is discussing ways to reduce the amount spent on the state's Clean Vehicle Rebate Program (CVRP). The program, which provides rebates to EV buyers, is $30 million in debt this year, according to the Capitol Weekly. A new discussion document that was presented at CARB's April 3 meeting lists two main ways that the state could save money while still supporting EV sales. There could be a $60,000 price limit on plug-in vehicles that CARB would subsidize. Option one is to reduce the rebate by $500, which would mean pure EVs would get $2,000 and plug-in hybrids would get $1,000. The other option would be to put a $60,000 price limit on plug-in vehicles that CARB would subsidize. Currently, this would only affect two vehicles: the Tesla Model S and the Cadillac ELR. You can find the details in this PDF; see pages 20-23 for discussion on reducing the rebates. CARB's numbers show that cutting the rebate by $500 would result in "only a minimal short-term impact in the growth of sales of eligible vehicles." The benefit would be that," the budget savings associated with the short-term market delay will more than offset this impact by providing rebates for about 41 percent more vehicles during fiscal year 2014-15 under a fixed budget." As far as limiting the rebate to vehicles that cost less than $60,000, CARB makes the obvious point that, "rebates are more effective in influencing purchase decisions related to vehicles with a MSRP lower than $60,000." CARB thinks this limit will impact no more than two percent of the EV market, "but will allow the program to be more effective in influencing consumer purchase decisions." Plug In America does not support CARB's proposal. PIA's senior policy advisor, Jay Friedland, told AutoblogGreen that: At this early point in the market, Plug In America is working hard along side a coalition of automakers, NGOs, utilities and consumers to maintain the CA Clean Vehicle Rebate at current levels with all vehicles included. Tesla is a leading California EV manufacturer - and has been indispensable to creating the market generally - and should not be excluded from the program. Every EV reduces pollution for kids and adults alike and our dependence on petroleum. We asked Tesla for a statement, but have not heard back.

Tesla strikes back against Lemon Law King over Model S dispute [UPDATE]

*UPDATE: We have now also received a statement from the Model S owner in question, which has been added below. When we asked Tesla Motors for a statement on the lawsuit filed by the "King of Lemon Laws" the other day, the company told us that it does not comment on pending litigation. Fair enough. That's a standard response. But the company has since felt the need to comment on the issue using its own company blog. In a post called "When Life Gives You Lemons...," the Tesla Motors Team called lawyer Vince Megna (indirectly) an "opportunistic lawyer" and basically called him a liar. To wit: "... there are factual inaccuracies in the lawyer's story." Tesla says that the three claimed incidents when the Model S owner in question asked the automaker to buy the car back did not happen (Tesla acknowledges it happening once). And then the company basically says the owner was breaking his car on purpose: ... the car's fuse blew on three occasions. Each time, our engineers explored all possible explanations and were never able to find anything wrong with the car. Still, just to be sure, we replaced several parts that could have been related to the alleged problem – all at no expense to the customer. When the fuse kept blowing despite the new parts, and faced with no diagnosis showing anything wrong with the car, the engineers were moved to consider the possibility that the fuse had been tampered with. After investigating, they determined that the car's front trunk had been opened immediately before the fuse failure on each of the three occasions. (The fuse is accessed through the front trunk.) Ultimately, Tesla service applied non-tamper tape to the fuse switch. From that point on, the fuse performed flawlessly. We've got the entire response below, along with Megna's response to Tesla's statement. The key line: "There are companies, great companies run by Billionaires, that force consumers to give up their Freedom of Speech and Right to Trial by Jury just for the opportunity to buy an electric car." You can watch Megna's original video introducing the world to this case here. When Life Gives You Lemons... By The Tesla Motors Team April 9, 2014 We were taken by surprise by a lemon law claim recently filed against Tesla by a Wisconsin lawyer, describing himself as the "Lemon Law King", who says that we ignored his client's three demands for a buy-back after alleged problems with a Model S.

Tesla's ZEV credit allotment changing under new CARB rules

Could the California Air Resources Board (CARB) be taking a $55-million bite out of Tesla Motors' profits? The state regulator, which grants zero-emission vehicle (ZEV) credits for automakers making plug-in vehicles, is planning to reduce the number of credits generated by each Model S battery-electric sedan from seven to four, Bloomberg News reports. That means the California-based automaker will have fewer credits to sell to big buyers such as General Motors and Chrysler, who don't make enough ZEVs on their own to comply with state mandates. While the selling price for these credits isn't disclosed (they're private transactions), the market was a lucrative one for Tesla, which generated $129.8 million in revenue from California zero-emissions credit sales and about another $65 million selling US Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) credits last year. All told, California and federal zero-emissions credit sales accounted for about 10 percent of Tesla's sales last year. A Tesla representative didn't immediately respond to a request from AutoblogGreen for comment. This issue first came up last year when CARB hinted that it wouldn't give Tesla credit for having a battery-swapping option as it's method for quick-fueling compliance. Tesla, which appears to have been preparing for just this scenario, has been collecting revenue on credits since 2010 and achieved its first-ever profitable quarter in the first quarter of 2013 because of such credits. While the maximum number of zero-emissions credits a vehicle could garner was increased from seven to nine in the new rules, Tesla can't take advantage of that because it meets neither of the most stringent criteria: that the car in question is rated to go more than 300 miles on a full tank or battery and be able to be "filled up" (or fully charged, in this case) within 15 minutes. Those are more hydrogen fuel-cell-like targets, but Tesla has the EVs that come closest to meeting them.

Tesla's new $408 per month business lease deal for Model S reminds us of last 'revolutionay' deal

Almost exactly a year ago, Tesla Motors announced what it called a "revolutionary" lease deal for the Model S. Since the electric automaker used some unusual assumptions in its calculations to get to a headline-worthy $500-a-month "true cost of ownership," the company had to quickly change its tune. Some of the same assumptions are back in a business lease deal from new subsidiary, Tesla Finance, for $408 a month (sort of) that was announced today. Tesla is touting the easy-to-understand lease agreement, which takes all of three pages and is "written in plain language." The agreement can also be signed digitally on the car's touchscreen when the car arrives. That, plus the low cost, is the good news. The business lease program is currently only available in ten states. The estimated effective cost of $408 a month sure sounds great but, just as with the first consumer lease plan for the Model S, there are a lot of caveats to be aware of. For one thing, the actual monthly payment is $1,012, well over twice the $408 number. Tesla estimates that you'll save $261 a month in gasoline costs and $343 a month in business tax benefits (with Tesla calculating a 40 percent effective tax rate and 70 percent business use). Those gas savings, "are calculated assuming $0.11 per kilowatt hour compared to paying $4.90 per gallon for premium gasoline with a fuel efficiency of 20 miles per gallon," so if your business already runs a fleet of Toyota Priuses, you can forget the $408 number. Oh, and the business lease program is currently only available in ten states - CA, CO, CT, FL, IL, MA, MD, NY, TX, and WA. Yes, that list includes Texas, where you can't officially buy a Model S. Tesla spokeswoman Shanna Hendriks told AutoblogGreen that the company has a lessor's license in the state of Texas, which allows it to offer the business leasing deal there. The dealership license, which the company can't get in Texas, is the thing that is preventing sales. No matter which of the ten business lease states you're in, the first vehicles under this program have an estimated delivery date of June 2014. Read more below. Tesla Business Leasing By The Tesla Motors Team April 8, 2014 A year ago, Tesla introduced a Resale Value Guarantee that gives customers the option to return their Model S after three years for a known value.

'King of Lemon Laws' Vince Megna files suit against Tesla Motors

Tesla Motors is already busy in the courts, filing a suit in New Jersey last week to appeal the direct-sales ban of its automobiles in that state. But now it's going to have to deal with the self-described "King of Lemon Laws," Vince Megna, in Wisconsin. Now that we think about it, this showdown was quite inevitable. In a video that is obviously part one of who knows how many (view it below), Menga sets up his argument against Tesla because the Model S of a client won't start. Then, he picks up a cardboard George Clooney hitchhiker and goes off to file suit in Milwaukee County Courthouse with an assistant with duct tape on her mouth and "WTF" on her shirt. Subtle, Megna is not. If that cardboard celebrity bit seems familiar to you, then perhaps you're thinking about the Justin Bieber standup that Megna used in his lemon lawsuit over the Fisker Karma. In fact, Megna is famous in the auto industry for fighting against automakers that he says make shoddy products. In this case, he claims Tesla sold a faulty Model S to a doctor in Franklin, WI. This doctor, Robert Montgomery, got his 2013 Signature Performance Model S in March 2013, and the car has been in the shop for more than 30 days since then. He has asked for his money back, but the automaker has apparently not responded. The nearest shop is in Chicago, so the car gets to ride in a flatbed back and forth, as you can see in the video below. Plus, of course, Megna's one-sided conversation with a fake George Clooney. Tesla told AutoblogGreen it does not comment on pending litigation. This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Tesla breaks 28-year-old monthly sales record in Norway

Someone may want to try to translate "Gigafactory this!" into Norwegian. Tesla Motors just set the all-time monthly sales record for a single model in Norway, The Wall Street Journal says, citing Norwegian transportation officials. And that's for any type of model, gas-powered or not. The California-based electric-vehicle maker, which is planning a massive Gigafactory battery plant in the US as it prepares to unveil a lower-priced model, sold 1,493 Model S sedans in Norway last month. The sales total more than doubled the No. 2 selling Volkswagen Golf (624 units) and beat a 28-year-old monthly sales record set by the Ford Sierra (1,454 vehicles). And March marked the second straight month an electric vehicle took Norway's best-selling crown, which was won by Nissan for its Leaf in February. That's heady stuff, and it gets headier when you factor in Norway's population of only about 5.1 million people. That means that on a per-capita basis, that'd be like Tesla selling about 94,000 Model S vehicles in a month in the US. By comparison, Ford sold "only" about 71,000 of its best-selling F-Series trucks last month. With cheap and abundant hydroelectric power, Norway heaps lots of incentives for its EV buyers, including perks such as free parking, an extensive recharging network, use of bus lanes and free ferries and road tolls. With EV subsidies tallied at about $8,000 per vehicle, the country reportedly may reach its limit of providing incentives for 50,000 EVs by mid-2015, or about two-and-a-half years ahead of schedule. And for that, Norwegians, blame Tesla.

Tesla Motors appeals sales ban in New Jersey

Resistance to the way Tesla Motors sells its cars - directly to the consumer, with no negotiating and no dealer middleman - comes mostly from dealership organizations around the country. It's also illegal in some states, thanks to laws ushered into place with help from dealers. The reaction to Tesla's new style of business is led by what Steve Blank calls, "rent seekers" or "landlords of the status-quo." Tesla itself isn't into that sort of name-calling, but it will take to the courts when necessary. Case in point, New Jersey, where the legislature voted in mid-March to stop Tesla stores from selling cars starting April 1. This week, the New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission (MVC) extended a deadline until April 15, a move that could save the EV automaker's future in the state. Tesla has now filed with the state Superior Court asking that the ruling be appealed. Tesla says that the MVC is taking its orders from the state dealers association, the New Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers. Tesla also made an argument against the traditional gasoline vehicle dealers that we've heard before. Here is some of the text of the appeal: Franchise dealers have an inherent conflict of interest in selling electric vehicles. In order to do so effectively, they would need to enthusiastically tout the reasons why electric vehicles are superior to gasoline vehicles. This is not something that they are going to do since gasoline vehicles represent virtually all of their revenue. Dealers also depend on quick, high volume sales - incentivized by substantial sales commissions - in large, out-of-the-way facilities that contain large inventories of new and used cars. By contrast, Tesla sells its cars in relatively small showrooms, often located in shopping malls (like the two stores in New Jersey) that invite people unfamiliar with electric cars to drop in. You can read the full appeal in the PDF below. The TSLA stock price rose after the appeal was filed, but has since leveled out. Tesla vs. New Jersey Auto Dealers Superior Court Appeal by AutoblogGreen This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

Bill O'Reilly imploring everyone to get behind Tesla

Bill O'Reilly is a fan of Tesla. Calling the California car company "the one concrete thing that all responsible people should be rooting for," the popular Fox Network host is asking everyone to ignore the green lobby, the politics of global warming and dim opinions of alternative energy, declaring, "If Tesla can make a clean car, the entire automotive industry can. Therefore the air would be cleaner everywhere, and our wallets thicker. So let's get on it, people."
O'Reilly's Tesla-backing Talking Points Commentary came after 60 Minutes' recent piece on the electric car maker, but was occasioned by a new UN report on global warming. As usual, he isn't shy about sharing his real feelings, and you'll find a lot more of them where that came from in the two-minute video below.

Tesla gigafactory will source materials from North America to keep things green

It's one thing for the Big 3 to get tires and engine parts from cities along the US Rust Belt. It's another thing altogether, though, for Tesla Motors to source far more esoteric materials like graphite, cobalt and lithium from Canada and the northern US. But that's what the California-based company has in mind, and it's all in the name of environmental friendliness and cost, Bloomberg News says. Tesla is looking to bring its raw-material sourcing to this side of the Pond by the time it opens its massive gigafactory that may produce as many as 500,000 vehicles annually, Bloomberg says, citing Tesla spokeswoman Liz Jarvis-Shean. And while the raw-material price may be higher (and driven up further with the additional demand from Tesla), those costs may be offset by the fact that there will be far less transportation and logistics involved. "When all costs are considered, it should be cheaper to source most materials from as nearby as possible" - Tesla's Liz Jarvis-Shean "Transportation impacts are very significant on the heaviest raw materials if they need to be moved from halfway around the world," Jarvis-Shean wrote in an e-mail to AutoblogGreen, adding that there will be additional cost savings from reduced shipping time and less transit-related working capital requirements. "In the long term, when all costs are considered, it should be cheaper to source most materials from as nearby as possible." There are geopolitical issues as well. For instance, China is shutting down some of its graphite mines because of pollution issues, while much of the world's cobalt comes from war-torn Congo, though Tesla says it gets its cobalt from the Philippines. Most of the graphite in Tesla's Model S is of the synthetic variety from Japan and Europe. Of course, Tesla's still trying to figure out where to put its gigafactory, and has said it will be in one of four states: Arizona, Nevada, New Mexico or Texas. The factory will cost an estimated $5 billion and may support 6,500 jobs, so state governments are already starting to campaign to be the automaker's future production home. Regardless, Jarvis-Shean estimated that the sheer economies of scale from the gigafactory will reduce battery-pack costs per kilowatt hour for the company's "mass market" model (sometimes referred to as the Model E) by 30 percent after a full year of production.