2020 Tesla Model X on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Tesla, China Unicom setting up 400-station charging network in China

Tesla and China United Network Communications Corp. are working on something big. Like 400 public chargers in 120 cities big. These are not going to be Supercharger fast chargers that the California automaker is installing across the US and Europe, but don't worry, the two companies are going to install 20 Superchargers there. As with the Supercharger network, Tesla EV drivers will be able to juice up their cars for free at the 400 stations and the new Superchargers. The deal will work like this, according to Bloomberg: Tesla supplies the charging station parts and China Unicom provides the land. Laying the groundwork for easier electric vehicle charging is important, since Model S EVs are already selling well in China and CEO Elon Musk has said that the company expects sales there to reach the same level as in the US perhaps by 2015. Tesla and all plug-in vehicle sellers will benefit if China's plan to invest $16 billion on more charging stations comes to fruition. China Unicom is the second-biggest mobile phone company in China, which may help explain why TSLA stock jumped to a record high after the announcement and is climbing again today. As of this writing, the stock is just over $283, up $13.55 (5.02 percent) from last week.

Tesla driver blames 'new car smell' in fatal cyclist crash

According to the accident report compiled by the California Highway Patrol, 63-year-old driver Navindra Kumar Jain fell asleep at the wheel while driving northbound on Highway 1 in Santa Cruz, crossed into the oncoming, southbound lane, crested a small hill and then while doing 55 miles per hour hit a southbound cyclist who was riding on the shoulder. The cyclist, Joshua Alper, died at the scene. Jain was driving a Tesla Model S he had bought ten days earlier and said that the intense new-car smell - which he attempted to counter with a baking-soda scented air freshener - caused him to fall asleep.
The accident happened in November, and after a three-month investigation the Santa Cruz district attorney has decided to charge Jain with "misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter." As you could guess, there are still plenty of unresolved issues. Jain has said he "fell asleep" and there was nothing mechanically wrong with the car he had bought ten days before the incident. His attorney, however, says "he passed out while driving and still does not know what caused the accident," and that the Tesla "and all its component parts" must be thoroughly tested. The CHP tore the Tesla apart, standard practice in manslaughter cases, and, not having found anything amiss, declared the driver at fault. Observers, and especially cyclists, want to know why Jain was only charged with a misdemeanor, and why he hasn't yet been arrested. Some might ask why he didn't just roll down a window.
It will take the courts to decide - that's "courts," plural. In addition to the criminal case, Alper's family is suing Jain and Tesla, appearing to cover its bases with the new-car-smell defense by accusing the Model S of being "defective and unreasonably dangerous when used in a normal, intended and foreseeable manner." That seems like a stretch to us, but it's not like bizarre defenses haven't ever swayed a sentencing before. No matter the verdict in the criminal or civil cases, though, with Joshua Alper gone, nobody wins.

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.