

Tesla Driving Logs Contradict New York Times Claims - reneherse
http://www.wired.com/autopia/2013/02/tesla-logs-nytimes/

======
lutusp
I expected this (<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=5209596>). A few days
ago when I read Musk's claim that the computer log contradicted Broder, I
realized Musk would have to be crazy to make claims that might later be
contradicted by the computer records, and therefore his account was likely to
be true.

And it seems it is. Apparently the desire to tell a damning story about the
Tesla is overwhelming, as it was in an earlier case that resulted in Musk's
decision to turn on logging for media-driven cars. This time the log has
prevented a classic "he said, she said" controversy.

The Tesla might have problems in cold climates, the special charging stations
might be too far apart for convenient wintertime operations (as Musk has
acknowledged), but according to this result, the Broder account isn't a useful
evaluation of the car.

What a position Tesla Motors is in. If you only allow friends of the
technology to evaluate the car, the reports aren't meaningful or useful, but
if you let a "neutral" party perform an evaluation, the wish to report
something "interesting" is apparently irresistible.

Ten or twenty years from now, when battery technology has greatly improved,
this might all seem like a tempest in a teapot, but at the moment, without
computer logging, a few unchallenged reports like Border's could destroy
Tesla's chance to produce an early example of a promising new technology.

