Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login
Tesla voluntarily recalls 53,000 cars due to faulty parking brakes from supplier (electrek.co)
18 points by fmihaila on Apr 20, 2017 | hide | past | web | favorite | 12 comments

> faulty parking brakes from supplier

When the parts in its cars work well, does Tesla give the suppliers the credit? Tesla is very good at PR, if not parking brakes. The faulty parking break is from Tesla, not the supplier; Tesla is responsible for the car, including all parts from suppliers; it's Tesla's responsibility, technically and legally, to make sure the part works properly. Any engineer would (I hope) be embarrassed if it was suggested otherwise about their work product.

I would be ashamed to deliver something to a client and blame a supplier for a problem. It implies that I'm not in control and that worse, I don't understand that I should be in control and my fundamental responsibilities, and that I lack judgement. My client couldn't care less why my product has a problem; from their perspective it's my fault - which is true and exactly how I want them to think.

I'm sure the supplier could blame their suppliers, who could blame yet more.

That's why most manufacturers have extensive QA on their input side to make sure that what they ordered is what they get and that quality does not change from what was supplied in test batches. In other industries these problems are so large that QA is done in the country of origin of the parts to make sure problems are caught as early as possible.

In some cases that means that company representatives are found dockside inspecting containers and taking samples before they are being loaded.

I'm not sure the extent to which Tesla blamed the 3rd party. This is obviously a pro-electric-vehicle source. They are trying to give Tesla a pass.

Both companies are responsible, and both companies take full responsibility. Tesla doesn't make you go to the supplier.

Also it's a very rare problem, so it's probably hard to find in QA.

People (maybe not you) are still interested in the source of the problem, but it's an ortoghonal question.

It depends really.

Takata airbags got the PR damage, even though its airbags were installed into Ford / GM / etc. etc.

I understand that who gets the blame depends on PR fu, but that doesn't affect who is really responsible.

This to me is always great PR for Tesla (for those who look into the details). If they're willing to do a recall for something as not-safety-critical as this, it means when a real safety issue occurs they will recall. There have been many cases of car companies not recalling for cost reasons, this shows that's not how this decision gets made at Tesla.

To play the devil's advocate. While I agree with you, the article did say the costs were being incurred by the part manufacturer.

Yes, but the PR hit would be felt by Tesla.

The part manufacturer is covering the cost in this case, not Tesla.

And rightly so, they screwed up. Had the part screwed up whilst a customer was driving their tesla; tesla would be on the receiving end of a PR nightmare!

Does "voluntarily" here mean they did not wait for the lawsuit? Were they legally obligated to do it? If yes, that "voluntarily" is a pure shit PR move.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact