Feds told Tesla to stop making “misleading statements” on Model 3 safety

"Your company has issued a number of misleading statements," NHTSA wrote to Musk.

Read the whole story

 

[traumadog]

Btw there is an article on this on Teslarati
I'm ignoring all the opinions on that site

https://www.teslarati.com/tesla-model-3 ... deep-dive/


They have actually posted the letter & the response.
Ars should have posted both of them to make it an objective article


NHSTA Letter
https://www.scribd.com/document/4210684 ... from_embed

Tesla's Response
https://www.scribd.com/document/4210684 ... from_embed

1) quoting Teslarati as an independent, unbiased source of information is problematic, at least.

2) if you are going to say "Tesla Model 3 has the lowest probability of injury of all the cars ever tested" (the exact line stated from the Teslarati post), then to the lay public, it means "the Tesla Model 3 is the safest car out there".

And yet that is clearly not the case. Unless you're saying that NHTSA never tested a 2014 BMW 535i/xi... because per the IIHS, it had scored a zero fatality rate through 2018. Not something a Model 3 can claim.

 

[traumadog]

The weight thing is a red herring. Even if Tesla made all the technically-correct qualifications on their statement (according to NHTSA test data, within its weight class, etc.) they'd have still been in violation of NHTSA guidelines, which only allow automakers to use the star rating and specific other claims in their marketing materials. If consumers want to look up VSS scores in order to inform their purchasing decisions, the data is publically available, but it's not supposed to be used in advertisements or spec sheets.

Specifically prohibited from using and "not supposed to" are 2 different things

These same sort of loopholes allow audi & jaguar to advertise their ev's with EU mileage/ratings
which is quite short of U.S ones

This might explain in the legal response letter why the telsa lawyer did not back down.

Which sets up Tesla for a false advertising lawsuit if a Model 3 hits a heavier vehicle head-on, and the Model 3 occupants fare worse than the others...

 

[traumadog]

Probably, we'll see. Lawyers will stand ground if they think they are in the right & its too early to tell where this goes

If audi/vw, porsche etc start using the same metrics then it puts the NHSTA in a bit of a bind, if there was no legalese prevent such use in the first place.


Model 3 owners will be ok regardless, myself included. This car has already saved my life twice with auto braking & the sensors, so no complaints in that dept

I did get an email offer from Tesla to upgrade from EAP to FSD for $3,000 which I passed as I don't drive very long distances & I do enjoy driving the model 3 for short distances.

You do realize that there's a large difference between Model 3 buyers being happy with their car (for which there is nothing wrong), and Musk claiming it is the "safest car made". Especially since the data doesn't compare the Model 3 to every other car directly, and the source of the data is actively saying as such.

 

[traumadog]

Let's level set here. Tesla's Model 3 performed better on NHTSA's "Vehicle Safety Score" than any other car ever. NHTSA does not dispute that fact.

NHTSA disputes comparison claims using VSS when those claims can be interpreted to suggest that a better VSS for Vehicle A than Vehicle B supports the conclusion that Vehicle A will be safer than Vehicle B in all scenarios. Tesla's claims don't clarify that there are specific circumstances where comparison using VSS won't be valid.

The specific circumstance NHSTA cites as an example where VSS comparisons are dubious is where Vehicle A has a crash with a significantly heavier vehicle, Vehicle B.

Tesla counters with two solid points in their response to NHTSA:

(1) As a matter of law, Tesla's claims only make the generic statement about overall likelihood of injury - they make no claims (implied or otherwise) about performance in specific crash scenarios (with a heavier vehicle, rolling over, setting on fire, etc.), AND

(2) the basis for taking the overall VSS score and applying it to real-life crash scenarios OVERALL, is that most crashes involving death or serious injury are not the weight-mismatch scenario that NHTSA highlighted.

Something around half of serious injuries/deaths occur in crashes that are single-vehicle , and, among multi-vehicle crashes, a significant percentage will involve vehicles that are going to be of similar or lesser weight than the Model 3 (which is about average in weight among light duty cars and trucks).

I appreciate NHTSA wanting to police the use of their data for representations made to consumers. And I also think it's appropriate for a consumer protection agency to confirm the validity of the evidence Tesla uses to support, in particular, Point 2 above (that their VSS comparison is valid for the majority of crash-types that result in serious injury or death).

But this is not the same, for example, as Musk's statement about having secured the funding for Tesla to be bought out or making irresponsible claims about when FSD will be truly available. Teslas really are exceptionally safe vehicles, and at least on certain tests, have outperformed all others, and - frankly - I think leaders in safety should be able to take credit for having done so.

To be clear, Tesla's claims may not specify circumstances where VSS may be invalid, but an absence of such a clarification tends to make the reader think there are no exceptions to the claim, not that the claim is valid for specific circumstances.

Honestly, I would think that actual empiric data - namely IIHS type data - would be a better talking point than NHTSA testing.

Heck, rollover scores are done as a static tilt test. Low-slung sports cars do well on this test, but empiric data clearly demonstrates that sports cars frequently roll over due to driver behavior.

 

[traumadog]

Let's level set here. Tesla's Model 3 performed better on NHTSA's "Vehicle Safety Score" than any other car ever. NHTSA does not dispute that fact.

NHTSA disputes comparison claims using VSS when those claims can be interpreted to suggest that a better VSS for Vehicle A than Vehicle B supports the conclusion that Vehicle A will be safer than Vehicle B in all scenarios. Tesla's claims don't clarify that there are specific circumstances where comparison using VSS won't be valid.

The specific circumstance NHSTA cites as an example where VSS comparisons are dubious is where Vehicle A has a crash with a significantly heavier vehicle, Vehicle B.

Tesla counters with two solid points in their response to NHTSA:

(1) As a matter of law, Tesla's claims only make the generic statement about overall likelihood of injury - they make no claims (implied or otherwise) about performance in specific crash scenarios (with a heavier vehicle, rolling over, setting on fire, etc.), AND

(2) the basis for taking the overall VSS score and applying it to real-life crash scenarios OVERALL, is that most crashes involving death or serious injury are not the weight-mismatch scenario that NHTSA highlighted.

Something around half of serious injuries/deaths occur in crashes that are single-vehicle , and, among multi-vehicle crashes, a significant percentage will involve vehicles that are going to be of similar or lesser weight than the Model 3 (which is about average in weight among light duty cars and trucks).

I appreciate NHTSA wanting to police the use of their data for representations made to consumers. And I also think it's appropriate for a consumer protection agency to confirm the validity of the evidence Tesla uses to support, in particular, Point 2 above (that their VSS comparison is valid for the majority of crash-types that result in serious injury or death).

But this is not the same, for example, as Musk's statement about having secured the funding for Tesla to be bought out or making irresponsible claims about when FSD will be truly available. Teslas really are exceptionally safe vehicles, and at least on certain tests, have outperformed all others, and - frankly - I think leaders in safety should be able to take credit for having done so.

To be clear, Tesla's claims may not specify circumstances where VSS may be invalid, but an absence of such a clarification tends to make the reader think there are no exceptions to the claim, not that the claim is valid for specific circumstances.

Honestly, I would think that actual empiric data - namely IIHS type data - would be a better talking point than NHTSA testing.

Heck, rollover scores are done as a static tilt test. Low-slung sports cars do well on this test, but empiric data clearly demonstrates that sports cars frequently roll over due to driver behavior.

Fortunately, businesses are not required to enumerate all specific instances where the general rule (i.e. so-and-so product is the safest) does not hold, so long as the general rule is true and supported by evidence and there are no clearly implied specific applications. Else, we would have a very difficult time communicating generally applicable rules.

It would be different if, in the context of any claim of being generally safer than other vehicles, Tesla implied that Model 3s would fair better than a heavier vehicle in a head on collision between the two (for example, if a commercial showed a Model 3 about to get into a collision with a bigger car/SUV). But that didn't happen here.

And I certainly agree that there are likely other stats/tests that car companies may want to rely on other than NHTSA's VSS.

Except the claim was

"Model 3 achieves the lowest probability of injury of any vehicle tested by NHTSA", followed by

"But when a crash happens in real life , these test results show that if you are driving a Tesla, you have the best chance of avoiding serious injury."

(Emphasis mine - note, it does not specify "under these test circumstances")

Now, the lawyerese of the Tesla response said they did not "claim Model 3 would outperform substantially heavier vehicles in a head to head crash...", it does leave open how any individual reading the previous quotes would come to the conclusion of a Tesla driver being less safe than a heavier vehicle in those circumstances.

Because presumably, any given reader would assume the heavier vehicle was tested by NHTSA as well, and that vehicle had a lower score - and therefore is less safe.

 

[traumadog]

Let's level set here. Tesla's Model 3 performed better on NHTSA's "Vehicle Safety Score" than any other car ever. NHTSA does not dispute that fact.

NHTSA disputes comparison claims using VSS when those claims can be interpreted to suggest that a better VSS for Vehicle A than Vehicle B supports the conclusion that Vehicle A will be safer than Vehicle B in all scenarios. Tesla's claims don't clarify that there are specific circumstances where comparison using VSS won't be valid.

The specific circumstance NHSTA cites as an example where VSS comparisons are dubious is where Vehicle A has a crash with a significantly heavier vehicle, Vehicle B.

Tesla counters with two solid points in their response to NHTSA:

(1) As a matter of law, Tesla's claims only make the generic statement about overall likelihood of injury - they make no claims (implied or otherwise) about performance in specific crash scenarios (with a heavier vehicle, rolling over, setting on fire, etc.), AND

(2) the basis for taking the overall VSS score and applying it to real-life crash scenarios OVERALL, is that most crashes involving death or serious injury are not the weight-mismatch scenario that NHTSA highlighted.

Something around half of serious injuries/deaths occur in crashes that are single-vehicle , and, among multi-vehicle crashes, a significant percentage will involve vehicles that are going to be of similar or lesser weight than the Model 3 (which is about average in weight among light duty cars and trucks).

I appreciate NHTSA wanting to police the use of their data for representations made to consumers. And I also think it's appropriate for a consumer protection agency to confirm the validity of the evidence Tesla uses to support, in particular, Point 2 above (that their VSS comparison is valid for the majority of crash-types that result in serious injury or death).

But this is not the same, for example, as Musk's statement about having secured the funding for Tesla to be bought out or making irresponsible claims about when FSD will be truly available. Teslas really are exceptionally safe vehicles, and at least on certain tests, have outperformed all others, and - frankly - I think leaders in safety should be able to take credit for having done so.

To be clear, Tesla's claims may not specify circumstances where VSS may be invalid, but an absence of such a clarification tends to make the reader think there are no exceptions to the claim, not that the claim is valid for specific circumstances.

Honestly, I would think that actual empiric data - namely IIHS type data - would be a better talking point than NHTSA testing.

Heck, rollover scores are done as a static tilt test. Low-slung sports cars do well on this test, but empiric data clearly demonstrates that sports cars frequently roll over due to driver behavior.

Fortunately, businesses are not required to enumerate all specific instances where the general rule (i.e. so-and-so product is the safest) does not hold, so long as the general rule is true and supported by evidence and there are no clearly implied specific applications. Else, we would have a very difficult time communicating generally applicable rules.

It would be different if, in the context of any claim of being generally safer than other vehicles, Tesla implied that Model 3s would fair better than a heavier vehicle in a head on collision between the two (for example, if a commercial showed a Model 3 about to get into a collision with a bigger car/SUV). But that didn't happen here.

And I certainly agree that there are likely other stats/tests that car companies may want to rely on other than NHTSA's VSS.

Except the claim was

"Model 3 achieves the lowest probability of injury of any vehicle tested by NHTSA", followed by

"But when a crash happens in real life , these test results show that if you are driving a Tesla, you have the best chance of avoiding serious injury."

(Emphasis mine - note, it does not specify "under these test circumstances")

Now, the lawyerese of the Tesla response said they did not "claim Model 3 would outperform substantially heavier vehicles in a head to head crash...", it does leave open how any individual reading the previous quotes would come to the conclusion of a Tesla driver being less safe than a heavier vehicle in those circumstances.

Because presumably, any given reader would assume the heavier vehicle was tested by NHTSA as well, and that vehicle had a lower score - and therefore is less safe.

Except that Tesla's are actually quite heavy cars and unusually well built, so they will do very well against other cars, and there simply aren't many cars on the road significantly heavier.

That actually is accurate, which I did not expect when I started to look into the claim you stated.

Model 3 weight is 3600-4200lbs

Audi A8 weight is 4300lbs

BMW 5 series weight is 3700-4400lbs

BMW 7 series weight is 4200-4800lbs

Ford Taurus weight is 4000-4400lbs

Hyundai Equas weight is 4600lbs

Toyota Camry weight is 3200-3600lbs

Volvo V90 weigght is 4200lbs

There are certainly some that are much heavier, but they are not likely owned by very many.

Rolls Royce Phantom - 5600lbs

Bentley Mulsane - 6000lbs

Actually, many Rolls Royce and Bentley models are over 5000, as well as some Jaguars and a few others, so if you are in a Model 3, try to avoid hitting the fancy cars even if they look the same size.

Yes, the Model 3 is roughly on par weight wise to other large sedans. Of course, there is the flip-side argument:

The curb weights of some of the most popular vehicles sold in the US:

Ford F-150 (909,330 sold in 2018): 4415-5320 lbs
Chevrolet Silverado (585,581 in 2018): 4520-5240 lbs
Dodge Ram (536,980 sold in 2018): 4798-5232 lbs

Or if you like SUV's...

Ford Explorer (250,690 in 2018): 4345-4727 lbs
Toyota Highlander (244,511 in 2018): 4134-4508 lbs
Jeep Grand Cherokee (224,908 in 2018): 4513-5363 lbs
Chevrolet Tahoe (104,153 in 2018): 5355-5602 lbs

And of the premium versions:
Tesla Model X (26,100): 5185-5531 lbs
Cadillac Escalade (24,815 in 2018): 5578-5856 lbs
Lincoln Navigator (17,839 in 2018): 5673-5922 lbs


My point: the Model 3 would fare ok colliding with a similar sized sedan. That said, trucks and SUV's are much more popular in the US - and they both weigh more and ride higher.

And @jock2nerd: Tesla's statements didn't specify cars alone - but "any vehicles".