Consumer Reports Announces Tesla Model 3's Predicted Reliability, Tesla Gets Pissed — WHOSE Side Are YOU On?

I can't wait to read this review! Consumer Reports probably has about 100 or 200 deposits down already (under assumed names) to ensure that they get a Model 3 anonymously. I suspect that the Model S they tested in 2013 was a heavily prepped model (can't prove that of course) given the terrible results when it was retested later based on customer issues.

I will get my lawn chair and martini shaker all cued up to watch this spectacle!

I may be mistaken but I believe I read a few months back that Tesla substantially reduced the number of development miles testing the Model 3 components and engineering design compared to what other manufacturers put their cars thru. The reasons being 1) that Musk assumes the reliability will be the same as past models, despite coming from a brand new factory; 2) to live up to its hype and stock price by getting to market quickly in order to justify the heavy investment; and 3) capture as much market share as possible as quickly as possible before the heavy guns (M-B, BMW, Audi, etc) get their act together. Musk is a high risk, high reward guy and in his mind the upside likely far outweighed the downside from not thoroughly testing the Model 3 before bringing it to market. It would not surprise me if Musk pushed a good bit of product testing onto the consumer.

Tesla definitely pushed this car out without significant developmental testing.

It will be interesting to see the end result and if the simplification Musk cites is really making the Model 3, overall, a more reliable product.

It's just a prediction. Does anyone get mad at a psychic's predictions at the fair?

It's a prediction based on no real evidence. However, I don't think Tesla should have made the comment they did--it seems pretty childish to be honest.

I do know that they engineered the Model 3 to be significantly more reliable than the S or X, so I think Tesla is assuming the 3 will have exceptional reliability and Consumer Reports is saying it will be average based on the S/X. Still, it didn't really merit this kind of response. If they were going to respond, it could have been something like:

"Consumer Reports has not been able to test a Model 3 and their analysis is based only on past models. We engineered the Model 3 with reliability in mind and expect it to be significantly more reliable than other cars in its class."

I think there is some real evidence in the way some manufacturers do business and put out products that are, overall, better/worse reliability wise.

For example, people paint broad strokes when discussing reliability and may say/think "Toyota makes a pretty reliable vehicle," or "Land Rovers are electrical nightmares." Is it based on science? No. It's based on unscientific anecdotal data. Is it factual? No. But is it wrong? No.

It comes down to how much one values qualitative vs quantitative data.

To your point though, it is correct that CR doesn't have any evidence based on the Model 3 as it has not put one through its paces or collected owner's data. I think your statement would have been a much better PR move; however, I don't think Tesla wants to say "past models" since it is broad and paints the S and X in rather bad light.

Teslas have had a LOT of quality control issues.

They are lucky to get average based on their track record and lack of volume experience. If it was easy to achieve above average, the big 3 would not have collapsed to the Japanese makes.

Early adapters though should expect a few glitches, hopefully they can be corrected in warranty.

Tesla and SpaceX employees will absorb most of the glitches, it should be solid by the time it gets to normal consumers. They are also releasing lots of software/Autopilot updates right now--will be fully baked to at least Autopilot 2.0 standards by the time regular people get it. Autonomous braking and auto-parking up to 90mph is already live.

*Auto-parking and Autonomous braking up to 90mph

Plus freeway Autopilot is live.