[HN Gopher] Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for 'Right...
___________________________________________________________________
Tesla, Rivian Put on Fake Show of Support for 'Right to Repair'
Author : rntn
Score : 231 points
Date : 2023-09-02 13:41 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.techdirt.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.techdirt.com)
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| >Among the auto blogs that covered the announcement, few pointed
| out the hollowness...
|
| Regurgitation via a Google news search link cites absolutely
| nothing. Its the sloppiest journalism I have ever seen on any
| tech website.
| [deleted]
| dundarious wrote:
| What makes you think looking at that google news search was the
| extent of the research they did to justify that assertion?
| Journalists typically do not show _all_ their workings (though
| they could always show more). To me, the link is obviously just
| a moderately useful stepping stone /prompt for people to
| research the point themselves.
| marak830 wrote:
| I'm sorry I have seen the thread leads, and I cannot agree with
| them and think the replies do not get enough notice.
|
| Right to repair _should be_ a full set of instructions for
| "everything" are available.
|
| That's it. Give the full specs for everything. If it's code
| reliant(which wtf), what does it require to work?
|
| That's. Fucking. It. We give you rules to say peeps cannot sell
| what you made, you make it so we can repair it.
|
| If you don't like it, sell fucking service.
| jandrese wrote:
| Remember the old days when you would open up an appliance and
| there would be the full circuit diagram pasted on the inside of
| the case? Unfortunately VLSI kinda killed this off, nowadays
| everything is crammed into a single chip that you can't repair.
| [deleted]
| candiddevmike wrote:
| Right to repair eventually runs head first into security and
| encryption--how do you allow right to repair and TLS,
| encryption, secure computing, etc to coexist? Get rid of IoT
| black boxes like Google Homes? Allow Linux on Xbox?
|
| How do you create secure platforms while also giving consumers
| the keys to their devices?
|
| (FWIW I'm not advocating against right to repair, I actually
| hope it helps to get rid of black box IoT devices. My device,
| my keys, etc)
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| In automotive, we've had to conform to Right to Repair laws
| for 10+ years. We handle encryption by facilitating access to
| tools that allow users to encrypt/unencrypted the data so
| they can make the repairs, but without exposing how the data
| is encrypted/unencrypted.
| gnfargbl wrote:
| I don't see the conflict. If it important that the device can
| prove its authenticity to some centralised service then yes,
| it is likely that the consumer can't also modify that device.
|
| But how many devices really _need_ that level of attestation?
| Does a tractor need to be able to prove to John Deere that it
| is a genuine unmolested vehicle, or does it just need to
| prove to JD that an active subscription is in place for
| whatever remote service is being used?
|
| If just the latter, then we can still have encryption, no
| problems. That's just username & password over TLS, same as
| we have been doing for decades on untrusted endpoints.
| [deleted]
| prepend wrote:
| This is pretty simple to engineer.
|
| With TLS it's just authing the server, accept any income
| connections. Support basic authentication.
|
| For home devices don't require TLS. I don't run TLS on my
| home network. I'm remote, I get devices, I accept that risk.
| TLS is not required for security.
|
| For encryption just design so customers can swap out keys.
|
| The biggest problem is designing cloud in the loop so they
| can mine data. This needs to stop.
| FloatArtifact wrote:
| Think of it as like Android and unlocking the bootloader.
| There's a warning that it's running on modified system.
| [deleted]
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Except this Android can mow down a farmers market full of
| people if you get things wrong.
| prasadjoglekar wrote:
| For which we already have laws to deal with. Even without
| modification, the car can be used to mow people down.
| wizee wrote:
| People have been repairing their own cars for a century,
| and the world functioned just fine with it. This locking
| down is a recent phenomenon. Your car is not going to mow
| down people just because someone other than the dealer
| serviced it.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| How many of those were capable of self-driving?
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| Which is another reason right to repair is so important,
| because carmakers can go out of business without all
| their cars ceasing to to exist. Someone finds an
| exploitable bug in a million cars after the only systems
| with the documentation and signing keys have been wiped
| and sold at auction, and what then?
| ceejayoz wrote:
| That situation calls for an entirely separate set of
| legislation.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| It calls for the ability of the general public to be able
| to repair their vehicles, so that anyone with such a
| vehicle can fix such problems.
|
| What alternative would you even propose? The only entity
| with the ability to feasibly fix the bug is defunct and
| bankrupt, leaving them both judgment proof and with no
| resources to develop a patch. The only people with the
| incentive to spend resources fixing it are the people who
| own the vehicles. So the owners need the ability to
| repair their vehicles.
|
| Which you can solve by just doing that to begin with,
| requiring no separate legislation.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| I'd propose something like the FDIC. Every car sold pays
| into an insurance fund that, if a company collapses,
| takes over to maintain access to software updates for the
| reasonable lifespan of the vehicles.
|
| I don't think people should be _forced_ to self-manage
| software updates on multi-ton machinery.
| josefx wrote:
| So can any vehicle that runs without software.
| ceejayoz wrote:
| Not at scale.
|
| You could perform phone phreaking in the 1960s, but a
| million phones in a botnet provides different challenges
| even if both are technically just a compromised phone.
| starbase wrote:
| > Right to repair should be a full set of instructions for
| "everything"
|
| Tesla provides that (and more) for free:
|
| * Service Manual, Parts Manual, and Body Repair
|
| * Tooling Catalog and Wiring Diagrams
|
| * Service Bulletins
|
| * Labor Codes and Times
|
| * Service Mode Diagnostic Software (on the touchscreen)
| mozman wrote:
| Does Tesla sell parts? If so, do you need a Tesla tool to
| program/activate them?
|
| Electronics fail more often than mechanical parts and even
| today with independent auto shops having access to
| manufacturers programming software you still have to go to
| the dealer for some things
| kelnos wrote:
| Assuming they do, that's not enough. There needs to be a
| market for non-Tesla-built parts that will nonetheless work
| in the cars. We shouldn't allow manufacturers to lock
| things down so that becomes impossible (or even illegal,
| when the DMCA comes into play).
| starbase wrote:
| Yeah they sell parts at service centers or you can order
| through the app.
|
| Most parts pair automatically and can be calibrated by
| putting the vehicle in Service Mode:
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_e1_xr81l38
|
| Repair shops that buy high voltage batteries have to pass
| safety training.
| callalex wrote:
| You can't even replace a smashed window on a Tesla without
| Elon's personal blessing.
| revscat wrote:
| Where? I found press releases stating some of this, but none
| of the actual docs/software.
| starbase wrote:
| go to service.tesla.com, sign in, then click the car model
| at the top of the page
| bagels wrote:
| I think the biggest problem with Tesla is access to parts, much
| of the process (minus the computer bits) are easy to reverse
| engineer.
| naremu wrote:
| Even the need to "reverse engineer" something that you paid
| for and _ostensibly_ _own_ , though, is overwhelmingly
| insulting and in some ways (though obviously not technically
| legally, ethically) is basically directly challenging public
| perception of property ownership.
|
| It's not even like it's say, a watch that I might actually
| need specialist equipment or knowledge to repair/maintain.
|
| It's actually something I'm expected to at some point, be
| required of me, but is tactically not provided to me as to
| benefit a private entity.
|
| And arguments can be made about who's ethical and economical
| burden it is to make documentation, but the fact is it'd just
| save an overall immense amount of societal time and
| productivity for those who already have the potential to
| provide documentation, to do so.
|
| And so the expectation that we are left to our own devices on
| various forums and social media websites that may or may not
| be SEO'd by google to be brought to our attention with the
| right combination of keywords.
|
| Is kind of baffling, to be honest. If it's easy for us, it
| should be even easier and quicker for them. Especially when
| most in many countries are unfortunately reliant on such
| things, many of them may not be reverse engineerers, or even
| versed in google-fu.
| charcircuit wrote:
| >It's not even like it's say, a watch that I might actually
| need specialist equipment or knowledge to repair/maintain.
|
| If it doesn't need specialist knowledge then why are you
| asking for people to release their knowledge on how it
| works? Just use your general knowledge on how it works
| then.
| Transpire7487 wrote:
| No normal person can repair a Tesla, it's basically a trade
| secret. My brother is a mechanic and servicing Teslas are a non
| starter due to the complexity. The notion that I can just
| download a manual, buy some parts and DIY my own repairs is
| absolutey ludicrous.
|
| The only reason for Tesla to support right to repair is to
| increase regulatory burden on competitors, stunt innovation and
| raise costs for their competition. Shame on this anticompetitive
| behaviour.
| api wrote:
| EVs could be a gigantic step down in complexity but that
| doesn't benefit their manufacturers. It would risk making them
| a commodity that can be assembled from parts like an old school
| PC.
|
| Instead the industry is looking at the EV transition as a way
| to increase costs and decrease customer freedom. This is
| absolutely artificial and in no way mandated by the technology.
|
| A similar case in computing is what happened with mobile and
| tablets where a change in form factor allowed lock down to be
| smuggled in without people asking too many questions. A Mac is
| now a big overgrown tablet in terms of its CPU and innards but
| you can install your own OS on a Mac but not an iPad. Why? No
| technical reason at all.
|
| Right to repair is good but it's actually less than what we
| need. We need a huge rebirth of DIY technology and less
| centralized supplier ecosystems. This may require some
| regulation but it also requires consumers to stop being so
| passive and prioritizing shininess and laziness over every
| single other thing. The "millennial minimalism" era needs to
| end both as an aesthetic and a framework for consumer-producer
| relations. (The two are related.)
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| > EVs could be a gigantic step down in complexity but that
| doesn't benefit their manufacturers. It would risk making
| them a commodity that can be assembled from parts like an old
| school PC.
|
| But the step down in complexity also makes it easier to
| become a manufacturer, and as battery costs come down this is
| likely to happen.
|
| At which point a startup with no other way to distinguish
| themselves can start selling highly repairable electric cars.
| Customers figure out that these have a lower ownership cost
| (whether or not they do the repairs themselves) and start
| preferring them. The incumbents then follow suit or lose the
| market.
|
| The main reason this doesn't happen for phones is that the
| market is so consolidated. The main SoCs are made by only a
| small handful of companies who don't publish documentation,
| and producing a competitive one is capital-intensive because
| of the constraints of the form factor. But even there it may
| not be permanent -- what's going to happen to phones once
| there is a fully-documented RISC-V SoC on the market that has
| tolerable performance and power consumption?
| morphle wrote:
| When we transition to 4WD in-wheel motors the drivetrain and
| the moving parts could become standard. The inverters could
| become programmable. We designed programmable networks of
| per-battery-cell (dis)charger computers that would take the
| danger out of clusters of battery cells of unequal batteries.
| When each battery is wired in parallel, not in series not
| only can you go from 800 charge cycles to 20000 cycles
| (lifetime nearly 50 years) but you would eliminate fires and
| prevent short circuits in the power networks. It would thus
| be possible to build cars completely from standard parts.
| Mind you, not a single company has tried this yet, but there
| is no economical or theoretical impediment to build from off-
| the-shelf components in the next two decades. EV car kits
| will be poossible and probably cheaper. After an amateur has
| build one, for example the Dutch Government RDW would test
| the car for safety for less than a thousand Euro's, like they
| already do for car, truck and camper conversions. I remember
| an Scientific American article in the 90's predicting single
| mechanic African custom EVs as a future possibility.
| api wrote:
| We need a Framework for EVs perhaps to get this going.
|
| The EV I want is a simple super reliable easily repairable
| one.
|
| I personally went for the Nissan Leaf in lieu of this
| because it's basically a Nissan Versa with a motor and
| batteries where the engine and gas tank go. Not good for
| road trips but a nice city car and decently repairable. (I
| have an older ICE for road trips that I don't drive much
| otherwise.)
| morphle wrote:
| I do not agree. The parts of the mechanical drivetrain or the
| molded plastics can be impossible to obtain before a large
| number of Teslas have been scrapped and sold for parts. But the
| battery and electronics can be understood and repaired without
| schematics. The software reverse engineering is possible. I
| agree that repairs can be far to time-consuming to be
| economically viable, but given free labour it can be done.
| brandonagr2 wrote:
| Go to service.tesla.com, login with a free account, you can
| access all repair information and service manuals for free. You
| absolutely can download a manual, buy some parts, and DIY
|
| https://service.tesla.com/user/vehicle-models/ModelS
| rnk wrote:
| There are a very few private tesla repair garages that do know
| how to repair some things. They seem to be run by former tesla
| repairmen. They have been able to salvage a lot of dead cars.
| They seem to be mostly in california.
| omgJustTest wrote:
| No normal person can cast an ICE header.
|
| Same logic.
| esjeon wrote:
| It's not the best example unfortunately. People do build
| custom headers by cutting and welding various pipes using
| off-the-shelf tools. Welp, ICE is an old tech (from 18c), so
| it doesn't take dark magic to fix a whole ICE car
| _mechanically_. The real deal breaker is electric controllers
| w / proprietary software.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| That's assuming you need the controller to do the exact
| same thing in the exact same way as the OEM one. But in
| many cases people are replacing it because they want it to
| do something different anyway.
|
| And these functions are in many cases quite simple. You
| replace the controller for the door locks. It operates a
| solenoid that locks and unlocks the doors. Maybe they no
| longer function by calling the call center to have them
| unlock your car, but maybe you don't want that anyway. They
| still function if you press a button on your key fob.
| B1FF_PSUVM wrote:
| > No normal person can repair
|
| No, it takes two.
|
| Seriously, I've read that some EV makers require that two
| persons be present when working on the HV system, the second
| one on watch with a pull-up hook in case the first one seizes
| up touching some 400 or 800 V DC part.
| photochemsyn wrote:
| Repairability is like online security: if companies really cared
| about it, they'd have built it into the product beginning at the
| design stage. With most products these days, repairability is
| actively discouraged at many different levels: components are
| inaccessible, soldered or glued on, specifications are
| unavailable, replacement parts are not sold direct to the public,
| etc. This is all done to shorten product lifetimes such that
| consumers have to purchase new products more frequently, that's
| clear enough.
|
| Some companies might realize that there's a market for repairable
| products and shift tactics, there seem to be a few out there,
| though not many.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| omgJustTest wrote:
| You can't even jump another car with your Tesla, let alone do
| repairs.
| masklinn wrote:
| > You can't even jump another car with your Tesla
|
| That's pretty common for EVs (and hybrids), since they don't
| have (or need) a traditional starter engine and only use the
| 12V to boot up the car they downsize the 12V and / or switch to
| lithium chemistries.
| blamazon wrote:
| Small nit: I can 'jump' (read: charge the battery of) other
| cars with my model X, as long as the other car is an ICE car.
| In the frunk there is a panel that pops off and underneath
| there are (unlabeled) 12V and ground terminals that I can put
| jumper cables on.
|
| However, I have had to get my car towed a mile to a charging
| station before, I really deeply wish I could have received a
| jump then.
| thayne wrote:
| > I have had to get my car towed a mile to a charging station
| before
|
| It really seems like EVs should have easily replaceable
| batteries, so that in situations like that you can just have
| roadside service bring you a charged battery and swap it out.
| Or for that matter, charging stations could pre-charge
| batteries, and you pay to swap your drained battery for a
| charged one.
| bonestamp2 wrote:
| Tesla has talked about that. The main issue with swappable
| batteries is that the whole battery has to be accessible
| from the bottom or side of the car. This provides design
| constraints on battery size. Most automakers don't want to
| compromise on battery size, they want to pack as much
| battery as possible in the space that's available.
|
| The next biggest issue with swappable batteries is
| responsibility. If all of the batteries are shared, who
| pays for a new battery when a battery reaches its end of
| life? This problem will have to be solved at some point
| anyway since nobody likes paying $15K+ when their vehicle
| battery reaches end of life. It would make much more sense
| to amortize this cost over the life of the vehicle. It
| would be easy to do that with higher fees of battery swaps,
| but people don't normally like higher upfront costs even if
| it works out to the same in the end.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| This became very difficult when Tesla added the
| undershield.
| blamazon wrote:
| In that case I was towing a U-haul trailer, which leads to
| another thing that probably should exist: trailers with
| supplemental EV batteries. Not sure if the extra capacity
| is made up for by the extra weight though.
|
| (For context my car uses maybe ~1.5 - 4.0 times as much
| power when pulling the various sizes of U-haul cargo
| trailers)
| WaxProlix wrote:
| Aerodynamics are at least as bad as weight when it comes
| to trailers iirc. And there are at least leisure trailers
| that come with battery packs in them. The Lightship and
| Boulder come to mind for instance. I suspect it's a
| matter of time for more utility trailers, if it's not
| already a thing. Batteries are expensive though.
| fbdab103 wrote:
| Maybe it would be distasteful, but a trailer with an ICE
| engine that could charge the battery while driving. Might
| be a trick to make it so that the generator could supply
| more energy than is consumed per minute.
| foolfoolz wrote:
| it's been done
|
| https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Better_Place_(company)
|
| they were probably 25 years too early
| blamazon wrote:
| It's today a popular and I think ubiquitous thing in
| Taiwan for scooters:
|
| https://youtu.be/87T6okeKu3A
|
| https://www.gogoro.com/
| rnk wrote:
| swapping been done and shipped on production vehicles that
| are still around. The original tesla model s had this
| capability. Tesla had a working station in california, it
| took a couple of minutes to do the swap. It had basically
| no demand.
|
| Tesla stopped supporting it.
| raisedbyninjas wrote:
| I wish there was some standard to add short term battery
| capacity for EVs and PHEVs. An e-scooter battery can get
| most EVs 5 miles down the road. A standardized battery pack
| and wiring harness in the trunk could allow roadside
| assistance to get you unstrained or rent a bigger pack for
| road trips.
|
| I'm sure OEMs don't want to warranty 3rd party equipment
| connecting to their vehicles and making charge/discharge,
| cooling, securing heavy packs, etc. reliable.
| omgJustTest wrote:
| Have you tried it? My Tesla doesn't keep the terminals
| charged unless the car has recently been in motion and shuts
| down in a few minutes.
|
| Also Tesla says not to do this, jumping in the conventional
| sense is more as you describe, charging the other battery and
| may require more than 20min to do it.
| blamazon wrote:
| Yes, I have an unfortunate habit of leaving the lights on
| in my ICE vehicle, and I've used it to run an inverter many
| times in a camping type of scenario. My memory is that
| there's two 12v terminals in my frunk, one that turns off
| and one that does not. My car is older though, pre
| facelift.
| rnk wrote:
| Some AAA services carry a portable charger to recharge your
| ev, with the goal to give it a small charge so it can go to a
| nearby charging station for a full charge.
| https://cleantechnica.com/2022/12/05/aaa-expanding-
| service-n....
|
| There's nothing magic about it, you have a regular j1772 plug
| on the end of a generator, or a battery to provide it. Also a
| few evs now have 120v or 220v AC outlets, that you could put
| a j1772 into and give another car a charge. Sadly there
| appear to be no direct DC charging systems available between
| cars at this moment.
| blamazon wrote:
| That map is a lot more expansive than I expected, that's
| awesome! AAA was the roadside assistance provider I called
| in that instance I mentioned and they didn't offer this
| service at that time. (Although the driver did an
| incredible job dropping my car off in a difficultly placed
| charging stall!)
| Retric wrote:
| That is the exact use case where solar roofs on EV's become
| very useful. However you can "jump" EV's, supply power to
| their 12v system and then charge off of another cars 120v
| plug, or a portable generator etc.
| blamazon wrote:
| Similarly, I've always thought it's a no brainer for any
| ICE car to have a solar roof. At a minimum it can keep a
| 12v battery from dying over long parking durations or high
| parasitic drain, and at best it could like, keep a
| container refrigerated or something.
| kec wrote:
| Continental America averages on the order of
| 4.5kWh/m^2/day total solar irradiance.
|
| A clean, car roof sized solar panel in direct sunlight
| all day would be good enough to offset parasitic drain
| with maybe enough left over to charge a phone or two but
| not much else. Not worth the cost (or the variance given
| you're not always going to park in direct sunlight for 8+
| hours).
| pengaru wrote:
| I once drove back to SF from Castle Lake with a dead
| alternator by hanging an 85W portable solar panel over
| the rear window of my mx-5, connected to the battery in
| the trunk.
|
| It supplied enough juice to run the car with no
| accessories most of the way back, until a combination of
| overcast sky and uncooperative route direction started
| making the car hesitate at the slightest throttle input.
|
| So it'd definitely give a little MPG boost by taking a
| load off the alternator, in addition to keeping the
| battery topped up like you said. I was tempted to epoxy a
| cheap flexible one permanently on the trunk-lid. With the
| trunk-mounted battery it'd be trivial.
| blamazon wrote:
| That story brings me great joy, thank you for sharing.
| euroderf wrote:
| or run a small ventilation fan in the summer.
| runnerup wrote:
| I'd rather pay $2,000 less for my Honda HR-V than get a
| solar roof. But I agree it seems like a very nice option
| for those willing to pay more for their vehicles.
| [deleted]
| Retric wrote:
| 2k is IMO a poor price point as it's too much for the
| minimal utility but not enough for meaningful power. IMO
| solar roofs are useful at the low end for ~400$ ICE cars
| could top off their battery and run a solar fan to keep
| the temperature down when parked in the sun. Not a huge
| deal, but still a nice luxury feature.
|
| Or a significantly more expensive solar roof could add
| meaningful highway mileage per year. You both largely
| offset its cost via less charging and have the option for
| a low speed crawl to a charging station.
| runnerup wrote:
| I'd be surprised if solar panels in the roof were less
| than $2,000. An android-auto enabled head unit is like
| $500. Heated seats are often $1000 and that's "just"
| resistive wire. A cover for your truck bed is like $700.
| Premium carpet mats are $250. Unlocking your tailgate
| using a remote beeper instead of a physical key costs
| $300.
|
| > IMO solar roofs are useful at the low end for ~400$
|
| So I agree with this, but I don't believe that would be
| an option, at least without some DIY aspect.
| Retric wrote:
| Car options are priced independently from what they
| actually cost to manufacture. A cheap luxury car will
| often include a host of features that cost quite a bit
| when you added as features to a lower end car. And
| sometimes it's the reverse where missing features in
| luxury cars ends up being almost as expensive as the
| cheap cars they come standard in.
|
| It's a combination of price discrimination and the
| overhead of having multiple different specs being
| manufactured independently of whatever the actual
| differences are.
|
| > at least without some DIY aspect.
|
| Solar car battery chargers already exist for less than
| 30$. I'm assuming the overhead of including it into the
| cars design and modifying body panels etc significantly
| increases costs. But it's the kind of thing Subaru could
| add to every car for diversification without
| significantly impacting final price.
| runnerup wrote:
| Yep. So I'm expecting it to cost me $2,000 as the
| consumer, and I wouldn't want to spend that. If costs
| some trivial amount, I'd love to have a battery that
| basically never dies.
| blamazon wrote:
| It's worth noting simple solar 'trickle chargers' can be
| had for less than 100 bucks, today. They are awesome for
| such things like additional confidence while overlanding
| in a remote location, or for a trailer with a winch, or
| an electric boat lift on a dock without shore power.
| bdcravens wrote:
| Solar roofs provide very little power, generating less than
| 5 miles a day in charge.
| Retric wrote:
| That's to do to the tiny amount of solar added to most
| "solar" roofs.
|
| It's a lot more interesting on the ~8m2 roof of a van /
| full sized SUV than a ~1.5m2 center roof of a car which
| excludes the trunk and hood segments.
|
| That said, EV charging is at a premium. If you're saving
| an average of say 1$/day which IMO is a reasonable goal
| that's 9,000$ over the lifetime of the vehicle. IMO, it's
| not an unreasonable threshold for a solar roof to aim for
| especially at California energy prices.
| amluto wrote:
| I would be cautious doing that. The analogous (I think)
| terminals hiding under the old Model S nosecone are not
| particularly thick, and you might fry something. Also, if
| they are fused (I don't know whether they are) and you blow
| the fuse, then merely opening the doors of the car if
| anything else goes wrong with the 12V system becomes quite
| complicated.
| blamazon wrote:
| Oh yeah, I take caution, but believe me, I'm no stranger to
| being locked out by an inoperable 12v system.
|
| Regarding the topic of the original post, it is infuriating
| to try to figure out which fuses do what in this car. It is
| information that is simply not provided.
| starbase wrote:
| It is provided at service.tesla.com. Wiring diagrams,
| service manual, etc. Sign in with your Tesla account to
| get the documents that match your VIN. It's free.
| blamazon wrote:
| > free
|
| Not for me, after signing in and prompting for my
| country, takes me to a page asking for 165 dollars for a
| one day access, 500 for a month, or 3,000 for a year.
|
| Edit: oops, despite what I said above, after browsing
| around I think I found what you're talking about? Nice!
| TY! This is awesome! There are wiring diagrams!
| jefftk wrote:
| That's not normally what people mean by "jump": jumping an
| ICE car is using the battery of one car to power the starter
| motor of another to get it running (after which it doesn't
| need a battery to keep running).
| blamazon wrote:
| For me it means "no longer stranded" but I get the point.
| To explain the semantic ambiguity in my head, I find that
| ICE vehicles needing a jump often have a voltage so low (or
| that the battery pack or donor vehicle I'm using is anemic
| enough) that they need to be charged the same way, or the
| dead battery disconnected to allow the other battery to
| turn the starter motor.
| shkkmo wrote:
| That's being unnecessarily nitpicky. Anytime someone helps
| you get started when your starter battery is dead is close
| enough that people will call it a "jump".
|
| Not having jumper cables, I've "jumped" several people by
| hooking them up to my battery charger and getting enough
| charge into their battery to start their engine.
| lelanthran wrote:
| > Small nit: I can 'jump' (read: charge the battery of) other
| cars with my model X, as long as the other car is an ICE car.
| In the frunk there is a panel that pops off and underneath
| there are (unlabeled) 12V and ground terminals that I can put
| jumper cables on.
|
| "Jump" isn't the same as "charging the battery" of other
| cars.
|
| You can charge a 12v car battery with as little as 4A if
| you're willing to wait. Jump starting requires between 45 and
| 60A, minimum. For a larger car engine, you're looking at
| 80A-100A, or even more.
|
| I don't think that the EV 12v terminals are able to provide
| that sort of current; I think those terminals are provided so
| that normal camping equipment (lights, winch, things like
| that) can be powered.
| blamazon wrote:
| Another commenter already pointed that out about the word
| jump, you can reference that comment for my reply. On the
| second point, I can comfortably pull 50-100 amps for an
| inverter from those terminals. I believe the DC-DC is 2500W
| on my car [1] - I have an early model X which is over
| specified in many regards. It does not take long to charge
| an ICE battery enough to be able to turn a starter.
|
| [1]: https://www.ebay.com/itm/403056555370
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| Taking this literally, it would be a massive publicity stunt.
| Have a stock Model 3 jump 20 school buses, and then see how the
| competition goes.
| esjeon wrote:
| Yeah, it's just a tiny compatibility issue, but it's really a
| bummer that you're sitting on enough electricity to power a
| house for days and can't even jump a car. It's gonna be great
| if we can utilize all the juice in our cars...
| 1970-01-01 wrote:
| Because they are apples and oranges and Tesla is using 48v!
| Jumping a 12v lead acid battery with 48v is a fantastic way to
| completely fry the ICE vehicle.
| diebeforei485 wrote:
| Tesla has future plans for 48V, but they're still on 12V
| today.
| masklinn wrote:
| AFAIK Teslas use 12V like everyone else, do you have a source
| for 48V?
|
| However EVs (and hybrids) do tend to have pretty small 12V
| batteries and I think some of them have switched off of lead-
| acid: they only need the 12V to boot up the electronics, not
| to power a starter engine.
| [deleted]
| jayd16 wrote:
| You can get a small jumper battery and leave it in the car. You
| can easily charge it with the EV. It'll be smaller than a full
| set of jumper cables, even.
| [deleted]
| bad_alloc wrote:
| Well, most EVs have weak 12V batteries to power computers,
| lights etc. They are not designed to output the amps needed to
| turn an engine. That makes sense for the EV since it saves a
| lot of weight. And the main batteries are usually 400V to 800V,
| which you can't use to jump another car (or you can use it
| once, at most).
| cj wrote:
| Adding to that, you also can't jump start another Tesla with
| your Tesla (according to the manual)
|
| Edit: link to jumpstarting in manual:
| https://www.tesla.com/ownersmanual/model3/en_au/GUID-3567D5F...
| fipar wrote:
| Question out of ignorance: what does it mean to jump start an
| EV?
|
| I know what it is for an ICE (and I have a jump-starter-
| battery always in the trunk, with usb ports it doubles as a
| phone charger if you're somewhere without power), but for an
| EV, I'd guess you either have enough battery charge for it to
| run, or you need to charge, right?
| [deleted]
| giancarlostoro wrote:
| If you need to jump start an EV you need to charge it
| basically. I cant think of a case where it would be needed
| with an otherwise filled battery.
| raisedbyninjas wrote:
| I just learned that my ICE vehicle can drain the 12v
| battery overnight if it fails to turn off the accessories
| circuit. No lights or infotainment etc. were left on. In
| my case, it was the switch on the park gear flaked out. I
| imagine a variety of similar faults could cause the same
| issue in an EV.
| cj wrote:
| Reminds me of renting a zipcar for a few days and parking
| it in an underground parking lot.
|
| When I went to use the car after a couple days, the
| battery was drained. This happened on multiple occasions
| with different vehicles parked in the same garage.
|
| My best guess is Zipcar has cellular comms to phone home,
| which enter some weird "always trying to connect" state
| when cut off from cellular signal underground.
|
| Zipcar's response was to ban me from renting on their
| platform ever again for too many disabled vehicles.
| zerocrates wrote:
| My car (a hybrid) has a long-standing bug in the radio
| system that can make it "freeze" and stay on forever.
| Only way out once it's frozen is to pull the right fuse
| (or wait for it to drain your battery all the way).
| falcolas wrote:
| An EV has two power systems, 12V (typically) for the car
| accessories, and 120V for the drive motors.
|
| And if the 12V system is down, you can't drive the car
| (can't close the contactor that connects the 120V batteries
| to the system).
|
| So, in theory, you could jump the 12V system so you can
| engage the 120V system.
| scotty79 wrote:
| The design that allows 12V to completely discharge while
| there's charge in high voltage batteries is idiotic. I
| ran into that in Toyota hybrid. Why there's no manual
| override that enables charging of 12V battery? It could
| be under the hood and turn off automatically when the
| voltage in 12V battery is high enough.
| sgerenser wrote:
| Some Hyundai hybrids and PHEVs have this (I saw it in the
| original Ioniq). It's a button you press that temporarily
| charges the 12V battery through the high-voltage system
| rather than being always enabled, but it seems like a
| great idea.
| rnk wrote:
| This same problem happens in evs where due to some
| problem the 12v discharges. When everything is working
| the 12v is charged up from the main battery bank.
|
| Tesla in the early days sometimes ran down the 12v and it
| wasn't that uncommon, there were problems with runs of
| batteries yielding poor ones; I think they had messed up
| software that wasn't charging the 12v enough, but they
| made changes to address that long ago. On my second ev, a
| rivian, I just had to have my 12 battery replaced. They
| said sometimes the 12v batteries just die on them.
| anaganisk wrote:
| Jump start? Pfft. The stupid car, got stuck with AC stuck on
| full heat, with a blacked out screen. Unresponsive to resets.
| I couldn't even open the damm frunk to remove the fuses, yeah
| okay I don't carry a 12v battery around with me to jump the
| frunk.(how difficult is it to give damm manual overrides for
| critical stuff) It was a rental so no access to Tesla app.
| Tesla Customer service refused to help, since it's a rental
|
| Tesla is a smart phone with wheels that can't make calls.
| It's great while it works but it is as dangerous as it can be
| once things go wrong. This car must be banned. It scarred me
| enough to keep me away from other EVs too which put all the
| controls in a screen. There is no excuse for EVs to have
| everything electrically controlled.
| rnk wrote:
| I agree these situations can be dangerous and frustrating.
| There is a manual trunk release on the tesla, here's a
| video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1bJ0F3R0Nc.
|
| I have a rivian and the 12v battery died on it while I had
| it plugged in charging at home. In the manual I found the
| emergency trunk release (access from underneath the car),
| and then there was a manual release for the charging port
| inside the frunk.
|
| My gas cars have died with some electrical problem before,
| out in the boonies where there was no one to help. But that
| was back when all my cars had a key, so I could at least
| open the door with physical key.
| bdcravens wrote:
| Many EVs still have a physical key to open the car (my
| EV6 and my wife's ID.4 both do for example)
| rnk wrote:
| Well that's great, my Tesla and my rivian do not have
| physical keys, and I wish they did.
| javajosh wrote:
| Rather than us fighting for the right to repair, shouldn't
| manufacturers be fighting for the right to limit our ability to
| repair? Isn't "right to repair" the default state? The right to
| repair, modify, disassemble, recombine your own property is a key
| component of capitalism, is it not?
| MoreSEMI wrote:
| Agree, the language is problematic. But unfortunately companies
| sometimes use the law to take away that right. Additionally,
| right to repair sometimes means going beyond the default state
| and requiring companies to go the extra mile, so that is where
| the langauge may also stem from.
| mypastself wrote:
| To my understanding, you do have the right to repair a device
| or a piece of equipment yourself, but you don't have the right
| to force the manufacturer to make it easier or to keep your
| warranty.
|
| If you use the former definition, it's already the default
| state. If you use the latter, "right to repair" becomes a
| reasonable-sounding term for a concept that's not quite as
| reasonable.
| SenAnder wrote:
| In addition to all the legal restrictions on "reverse
| engineering" (i.e. examining how stuff works) and circumventing
| DRM, as technology advances, using technical means to restrict
| otherwise legal end-user activities is becoming a big problem.
|
| That you're legally allowed to repair your tractor doesn't help
| much if the on-board secure TPM chip flags your replacement
| parts as counterfeit, locks the engine, and reports you to the
| manufacturer so they refuse to sell you parts in the future.
| MostlyStable wrote:
| This is something I've wondered about. For cars there is a
| bunch of regulatory stuff that might preven you from doing
| this, but I believe the regulatory burden on tractors is much
| less. Why has no one just built a full on control system swap
| for tractors? Yeah, the OEM control board won't recognize
| your replacement part. Or it won't tell you whats actually
| wrong. Etc. Etc. But if you just replace it with an entirely
| OSS control system, that problem goes away.
|
| I know that this probably not a trivial task, but, given the
| amount of money at stake, it feels worthwhile, but maybe I'm
| just underestimating the degree of integration of the current
| control system into the parts. If everything down the
| internal engine sensors is running priprietary, encrypted
| software and you basically have to tear it down and replace
| every single electronic component on the tractor, then yeah
| it probably won't ever make sense.
| chmod600 wrote:
| That sounds like a fun project if you are a bitcoin
| millionaire that moved to a ranch. Rip the components out
| and try to re-engineer all of the control systems.
|
| Given the number of sensors, it could also be a great way
| to collect open data for farming innovation, environmental
| data, etc.
| forinti wrote:
| Manufacturers make things difficult to repair, use nonstandard
| components and tools that you can't get from a third party,
| they glue things together in such a way that you have to have
| break it to get inside, they take away your warranty if you do
| anything they don't want you to do, and so on.
|
| This dispute is all about not letting manufacturers use such
| tactics. I see it also as an ecological issue, because
| unrepairable and upgradeable stuff means more garbage.
| praptak wrote:
| We found out that this is no longer the case since hardware can
| contain software which just prevents the "owner" from replacing
| a part. On top of this manufacturers abuse copyright laws to
| prevent "owners" from tinkering with said software.
|
| That's why we need specific laws to protect the freedom which
| should be the default.
| AnthonyMouse wrote:
| No, I think there's a point here.
|
| Part of the solution isn't just laws that require something
| to be reparable, but _getting rid of_ the laws that constrain
| it. DMCA 1201 is used for _this_ more than it 's used for its
| ostensible purpose, and should have a general purpose
| exemption for any case where the circumvention or tool is
| necessary for any reason other than actual non-fair use
| copyright infringement.
| sinistersnare wrote:
| No, we no longer have that right. We don't live under
| capitalism but 'necrocapitalism' that only gives rights to
| those in the in-group.
|
| We must fight for our rights now, they have been alienated from
| us.
| andersrs wrote:
| Capitalism is like a game of Fishy
| https://www.newgrounds.com/portal/view/81219
|
| The big fish eat the small fish and the game becomes easier
| the bigger you get.
| forgottenlogin9 wrote:
| Where do your rights begin and another's end? If they wish to
| build a product in a way that you dislike, does it not impede
| their rights for you to inflict your will on them against
| their wishes?
| circuit10 wrote:
| There should be limits to what companies are allowed to do
| in order to stop user hostile behaviour. It's reasonable to
| say that if you want to sell things as a company you should
| have to take some basic steps like this
| pixl97 wrote:
| >Where do your rights begin and another's end?
|
| This idea of a nice binary black and white cutoff for
| rights does not, and has not ever existed. This really is
| an absurdist American viewpoint. Let's make an example
|
| "it's my legal right to pour a cup of water out on my
| property"
|
| And, no one would really disagree with that.
|
| "So I'm going to do it with a million cups of water all at
| once"
|
| In which a flood happens destroying others property...,
| then we would see that the measure of ones actions is the
| consequences to others. If you make a car for yourself, go
| ahead and build it how you want. If you are making a mass
| produced product it's no longer about you or your rights.
| It's a superposition of your rights, the buyers rights, and
| the 'publics' rights as you dispose of that product.
| forgottenlogin9 wrote:
| The concept of rights is not binary, but at a certain
| point there cannot be multiple conflicting "rights" -- 1
| must get preference.
|
| The maker starts with a right to make a product as they
| see best. The buyer has a right to purchase or not. The
| "public's" rights are an interesting concept.
| pixl97 wrote:
| >The maker starts with a right to make a product as they
| see best.
|
| I'm pretty sure we're not even on the same planet at this
| point. If you think this is true, go produce some
| products as 'you see best' and see how long before you
| end up in criminal/civil court. There are myriads of
| regulations on what you can and cannot put in products
| that are sold to others. To think otherwise is a level
| disillusionment that only the most staunch libertarians
| reach.
|
| The public has rights, the market is not a free for all
| do to whatever you'd like.
| c-cube wrote:
| Rights to impose your will about something, should end at
| the point where you sell this thing to someone else. That's
| how it should be. Sadly a lot of companies are trying to
| rent rather than sell (see: ebooks, anything as a service,
| etc.) because this way they don't lose control.
| forgottenlogin9 wrote:
| What if a buyer wants to lease the product under the
| seller's terms. Should it not be their right to enter
| that agreement?
| c-cube wrote:
| That's called renting, not buying. There's no buyer in
| that case. And that's exactly the rent-seeking trend I
| talk about. Most virtual "purchases" are actually just
| rent because you don't actually own the thing.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| This is easier than you think. If more people are apt to be
| disadvantaged by your actions than not why shouldn't they
| simply vote your rights away?
|
| As a business person in any industry this is already true
| in 1000 mostly reasonable ways that mostly derive from
| outrageous behavior of prior actors in your space. In that
| context it seems ridiculous to argue against 1001 on
| principle unless the specific regulation is itself ill
| advised. The only justification it needs is for it to be a
| net positive.
|
| Basically why do 338 million people give a fuck if a
| handful of people want to do user hostile things. Do them
| somewhere else.
| forgottenlogin9 wrote:
| You are advocating for "mob rule". History is replete
| with examples of this being a bad idea.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| mob rule /,mab 'ro[?]ol/ noun noun: mob rule
| control of a political situation by those outside the
| conventional or lawful realm, typically involving
| violence and intimidation.
|
| I'm advocating for regulating industry for the greater
| benefit of the overwhelming majority of society as is
| already practiced in every developed nation on earth. You
| already can't build a house or sell a sandwich without
| following half a hundred regulations which are written in
| the ashes if a million poor fuckers who were maimed,
| killed, or fucked prior to yourself. If you exist in the
| modern business landscape you have internalized this and
| accepted it as the cost of doing business. Nobody gives
| every a little fuck if for instance you think your
| sandwich shop doesn't need health inspections or your
| workers don't need food handlers cards or if you would
| like to sell houses that don't meet building codes.
|
| If we mutually understand that is literally how the world
| works everywhere then going back and pretending that
| society needs to justify "taking away Elon's rights to
| sell consumer hostile cars" then we are being
| intellectually dishonest. The same way you are being
| intellectually dishonest by denigrating simple democracy
| as "mob rule".
| DrFlipper wrote:
| Freedom is the key component of capitalism, in the purist
| sense. Including the freedom to trade the "right to repair" for
| other benefits, such as a superior vehicle due to higher
| integration, reliability and peace of mind knowing that any
| work will have been done by authorised repairers, lower up-
| front cost afforded by vendor lock-in, etc.
|
| If people wish to voluntarily trade vehicles without the "right
| to repair", that's their choice, that's capitalism. The state
| intervening in transactions one way or the other is a violation
| of the capitalist ideal.
| javajosh wrote:
| I think this ignores the complexity cost on the consumer. If
| every product has a different set of rules, the consumer will
| not be able to know them or follow them. This is already a
| big problem with long and unique EULAs for software. This is
| a market failure due to an inherent information asymmetry
| between supplier and consumer, favoring the supplier. A
| similar effect is present in the healthcare industry. It
| harms consumers and makes the market less efficient. It makes
| sense to regulate against this effect for that reason.
| Standardization efforts have yielded a great deal of value
| for society.
| sangnoir wrote:
| > Freedom is the key component of capitalism, in the purist
| sense.
|
| Competitive markets and price information are also key
| components of capitalism - and the "right to repair" enhances
| both. Empirically, manufactures don't like competing for
| repairs, and they also obfuscate the cost of those repairs so
| customers would never know the total cost of ownership ahead
| of time.
|
| State intervention does not violate capitalist ideals when it
| enhances competition, I'll go further and say coercive
| monopolies are anti-capitalist. Just because I bought a
| widget from you shouldn't force me to have it solely fixed by
| you at a price of your choosing.
| softfalcon wrote:
| Have a look at Louis Rossmann's car repair videos.
|
| There is a war going on between government and car
| manufacturers because they succeeded in side stepping most of
| the right to repair requirements.
|
| Currently, most new car's OBD2 ports are somewhat useless
| because they now use a proprietary wireless communicator to
| transmit error codes. Apparently, the old right to repair laws
| didn't say anything about "wireless communication" so they took
| the loophole and ran with it.
|
| The days of buying a reasonably affordable scanner and
| diagnosing and repairing your own vehicle are over. We're back
| to square one of forcing them to give us right to repair again.
| It's actually really really bad.
| creeble wrote:
| I think new cars are still required to report engine codes
| (ones that cause the CEL to trigger) on the OBD port. That's
| still a large percentage of engine problems, and in
| particular, the ones that prevent you from getting
| registration renewed in many US states.
| softfalcon wrote:
| There are now Audi, Peugot, and Volvo vehicles sold in the
| US that don't have an OBD port. You can't pull an engine
| code from a port that doesn't exist on the vehicle.
|
| Toyota, Ford, and Chevrolet are also rumoured to be
| removing the OBD2 port with their 2025 line-up. They're
| just testing how much they can get away with before
| committing to it.
|
| It's going to become very hard to repair or even diagnose
| our vehicles if we don't start fighting back.
| arlort wrote:
| > Isn't "right to repair" the default state?
|
| There's no such thing as a default state, only status quo.
|
| And the status quo is that right to repair is not really a
| thing all that much
| xg15 wrote:
| I think in the current flavor of capitalism, the key component
| is "fuck you, I got mine".
| circuit10 wrote:
| Right to repair is about making sure manufacturers can't
| intentionally block repair. Also there have been some cases of
| people getting into legal trouble for doing things like using
| aftermarket ("counterfeit") parts, I remember hearing about a
| repair shop having to destroy iPhone screens
| YeBanKo wrote:
| Would you support a ballot measure(if this is an option in your
| jurisdiction) that enacts a strong right to repair? I don't see
| how we can make it a default way otherwise. Lobby makes any
| attempted bill toothless.
| echelon wrote:
| Since EVs are mechanically simpler, I'd really like to see a
| return to kit cars.
|
| Perhaps you could buy the preassembled chassis and modify the
| rest of the car as you'd like.
|
| Maybe you could tear down the whole thing and rebuild it.
|
| In theory this should be super accessible. You might see a whole
| community spring up over it. It's potentially a huge market
| ranging from teenagers to retirees. Lots of people love cars and
| modifying them.
|
| There might be lots of companies that get in on the action and
| build a full ecosystem of compatible parts.
|
| It'd be really neat.
| tomcam wrote:
| Love it. Want it. In the USA, the manufacturers would probably
| be sued out of existence when someone got killed or maimed in
| one, no matter whose fault it was.
| ryandrake wrote:
| Yet, in aviation, we have the "experimental, amateur built"
| (or, E/AB) category of homebuilt aircraft which is going
| strong and honestly I'd say that most of the technical
| innovation happening in light aircraft is happening in the
| E/AB category. There are thousands of homebuilt kit aircraft
| safely flying in the sky above you right now.
|
| The difference, of course, is that for obvious reasons,
| aviation has developed a pervasive culture of safety and
| rigorous root-cause analysis whenever an accident happens,
| and deadly crashes frequently result in regulatory corrective
| action. If car accidents were as rare as aircraft accidents,
| the NTSB brought a team of investigators whenever one
| happened, and the results of that investigation led to
| stricter laws and enforcement, we'd probably be OK with kit
| cars, too.
|
| The sad truth about automotive is that crashes are so routine
| that police won't even get out of bed unless there are
| injuries. And, there is basically no penalty for negligence
| that leads to a car "accident". It's almost impossible in the
| USA to lose your driver's license, even after dozens of
| repeated DUIs. Totally different cultures.
| tomcam wrote:
| I thought of that. But happened to the scores of aviation
| manufacturers here in the 1950s?
| adolph wrote:
| Framework car
| nrp wrote:
| We have a few other categories to fix first.
| adolph wrote:
| Who's to say what comes first? Even if one thinks other
| things as being more important to fix, fixing less
| important things builds the ability to fix other thing.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| Don't they call the drivetrain of an EV "The Skateboard"?
| softfalcon wrote:
| I think this is a great idea and would massively improve
| repair-ability and possibly even affordability of EVs for
| everyone.
|
| I also think that most car manufacturers will hate this idea
| since it directly competes with and shows how incredibly un-
| repair-able current vehicles are. They don't want to change.
| They just want to pretend to change.
| more_corn wrote:
| Problem is the battery packs. These kits need batteries and the
| best and cheapest batteries come out of wrecked teslas. If
| Tesla is allowed to continue locking down their batteries
| behind proprietary battery controllers the parts aren't parts
| they're intellectual property which Tesla can turn off at their
| convenience. And it's super convenient for them to render parts
| unusable in the secondary market.
| snovv_crash wrote:
| The cells are just normal cells. The proprietary bits are the
| management systems which you could theoretically just bypass.
| bdcravens wrote:
| It's a thing.
|
| A hobby project I've wanted to do is to convert older cars to
| electric. The more iconic, the better, for troll value :-)
| [deleted]
| saintkaye wrote:
| I'm begging for a 1969 SL180 converted to electric. How do we
| do it?
| qbrass wrote:
| https://everrati.com/works/mercedes-280sl-pagoda/
| jacquesm wrote:
| Please, please, please don't. Any of those beauties should
| simply be restored or used to help others to be restored.
| There are so few of them left.
| serf wrote:
| It would be great, but personally I think that modern chain-of-
| liability concerns would probably make the premise very
| difficult to work out.
|
| An EV burns down. The chassis maker points its fingers at what
| they claim were low quality electronics used, the electronics
| manufacturer points its fingers at the sharp edges left on the
| chassis that could create chafe points.
|
| Technical interoperability too aside from standards; in a
| collision it's difficult to model/simulate/test a car that may
| have 20 different motor options, placement options, dozens of
| batteries, etc. They'll all fail differently, how do we
| regulate that kind of safety? I'd love for it to work.
| kibwen wrote:
| It's already legal in the US to build your own car from
| scratch. There are certain minimum safety requirements
| (headlights, windshields, seatbelts, bumpers), but less than
| you may think (e.g. doors are not required, the steering
| wheel doesn't have to be on the left). The NHTSA isn't going
| to ask you to prove your car's crash-safety, all you need to
| do is pass inspection in your state.
| pixl97 wrote:
| It's legal to build it, but at least in Texas it's not
| legal to drive it on the highway as you won't be able to
| get registration.
|
| https://ftp.txdmv.gov/pub/txdot-
| info/vtr/title_manual_book_4...
|
| >On page 376, under 'Eligibility for Title' it says
| "Homemade vehicles are not eligible for title or
| registration. Homemade vehicles are described as vehicles
| that were not previously manufactured by a NHTSA approved
| manufacturer..."
| echelon wrote:
| Georgia is extremely friendly with it, and I know lots of
| people with garage projects. You'll frequently see these
| cars on the road.
|
| (I also know people building planes in their garage. I
| think Georgia just has a lot of this.)
|
| https://dor.georgia.gov/assembled-and-unconventional-
| vehicle...
| pixl97 wrote:
| Texas was till recently. I have family that works at the
| registration office and needless to say there are a lot
| of people with custom vehicles that are surprised
| petabytes wrote:
| https://www.electricclassiccars.co.uk/ sells bolt in kits for
| classic cars
| abakker wrote:
| And evwest.com also stocks a lot of parts. There literally
| thousands of videos on YouTube about conversions, and
| companies all over who are dedicated to doing them.
| [deleted]
| tegmark wrote:
| this is the ignorance that drives these silly headlines.
| building these things is very hard. theres all kinds of crazy
| solvents and adhesives. the pack is structural. the product
| that tesla builds is fundamentally not well suited to repair or
| modification and tesla isnt under any obligation, on any level,
| to prioritize people who like to imagine they could repair or
| build a tesla over building the most excellent and
| sophisticated product possible. tesla is singlehandedly
| responsible for the EV explosion and they have earned the right
| to do what they want.
| lantry wrote:
| > building these things is very hard
|
| people buying a kit aren't building a tesla, they're building
| a kit car. When you buy a kit, you're not expecting the same
| thing you get from a dealership. You're expecting something
| you can build yourself, which is fundamentally different
| callalex wrote:
| Take it easy on the paint fumes there bud. You are aware that
| other electric vehicles exist and work just fine, right?
| kelnos wrote:
| Being responsible for making EVs popular does not give them
| the right to do whatever they want.
|
| Tesla didn't push EVs out of the goodness of their hearts.
| They did so because they thought they could build a
| profitable company. Tesla's execs and shareholders are being
| compensated quite well already for their investment of
| money/time/work. No need to give them a blank check to do
| anything we (as a society) don't want them to do.
| michaelmrose wrote:
| What does earned the right to do what they want even mean.
| Why ought a society with pragmatic concerns ever concede
| those concerns based on a defective moral model where a party
| by doing some good somehow earns the right for society to
| somehow to put aside the needs of 338 million for the benefit
| of a dozen assholes in a boardroom.
|
| This is a privilege that in a decent society ought not be
| available at any price.
|
| It's silly to say that they are under no obligation when what
| we are talking about with right to repair is literally
| whether we ought to create such an obligation.
|
| If you disagree you must explain why such an obligation is a
| net negative for the millions not the few.
|
| I await your argument to that effect.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| Would be nice, but the economics would be kinda wack with how
| much of the cost is in the battery pack. Especially when
| companies like tesla put the same pack in all their cars and
| determine your "capacity" in software.
|
| I'd imagine that would either change, or people would start
| buying up the lowest-cost EVs just to pull the battery out of
| them (like "shucking" external drives) and resell all the other
| parts.
| djbusby wrote:
| Or just buying batteries directly from the Kit company or
| compatible suppliers.
| kibwen wrote:
| Reminder that, at the end of the day, Teslas are just
| running on ordinary standardized li-ion 18650 cells
| packaged up in a proprietary housing.
| softfalcon wrote:
| My thought would be buying modular battery packs so you can
| start small, save some money, buy more, then just keep adding
| them in month-after-month.
|
| Start with 50 km range at beginning, end up with 500 km range
| by the end of the year.
|
| Would also enforce positive replacement and recycling
| procedures by creating a standard modular power unit.
|
| Arguably doable, but I doubt any manufacturer or EV will ever
| tolerate such easy mod-ability or repair-ability. They live
| to destroy any attempts by the consumer knowing how to
| service their own property.
| giobox wrote:
| > Especially when companies like tesla put the same pack in
| all their cars and determine your "capacity" in software.
|
| This is an _enormously_ exaggerated statement, bordering on
| entirely false. Yes, the company has done this from time to
| time, including on some current Model S /X models, but the
| vast, vast majority of Tesla cars sold (the 3/Y) almost
| always have a different sized battery pack in reality, not
| just in software (~50kwh or ~75kwh - there is genuinely ~1/3
| less cells in the 50kwh cars almost always).
|
| The Model S/X sell in very tiny volumes, relative to the 3/Y
| too. There absolutely is not the same pack in "all their
| cars". Even the type of cells used varies between model
| packs, typically 2170/4680 in the 3 or Y, 18650s in the S/X.
| I think there are even some BYD blade batteries in some
| European Y variants, but I'm not as familiar with the German
| or China made cars.
| extraduder_ire wrote:
| Good to know. I must be mistaken from the other incorrect
| coverage I've seen around the web.
|
| I have no experience with electric cars, much less
| disassembling/repairing them.
| shoelessone wrote:
| This is very interesting, I held the same general belief as
| the person you're responding to.
|
| Any chance you have a source for this info?
| echelon wrote:
| > or people would start buying up the lowest-cost EVs just to
| pull the battery out of them (like "shucking" external
| drives) and resell all the other parts.
|
| That sounds amazing.
| YeBanKo wrote:
| What would be the point of it? The battery is the most
| expensive part of the vehicle.
| hgsgm wrote:
| Same as a hard drive.
|
| Business models and soft vendor lockouts cause price
| drift.
| Fluorescence wrote:
| I found the JerryRigEverything project converting an ex-
| military hummer to an EV interesting despite not really being
| into cars/evs.
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YxkPuEmIX4U&list=PL0vZL9uwyf...
|
| Despite the untold expense and full on car workshop... it felt
| very accessible and possible. Ridiculous hubris on my part
| obviously hah! I doubt I could change a tire on humvee without
| help.
| anvuong wrote:
| I'm not sure how this is accessible, the drive-shaft is
| entirely customly designed and customly built to handle the
| torque. That's not even mentioning the 3D design software and
| laser cutting for the motor mount. This feels simple because
| he already has everything planned very well and it's a year
| long endeavour compactified into short youtube videos.
| Fluorescence wrote:
| Heh, of course, I'm just taking the mickey out of myself.
| It avoids the car things that make me I'm know out of my
| depth: carburettors, gearboxes, firing patterns and such.
| Those come from a mysterious world I have no experience
| with.
|
| If imagining a kit car then you won't be worrying about the
| custom designed elements you highlight.
| jacquesm wrote:
| The first time you mess up with a 90Ah pack and a serious
| electric motor will make you wish for carburettors.
| seabird wrote:
| I don't see why 3D design software and getting parts
| fabricated (if you don't have the equipment to do it
| yourself) is all that inaccessible. It may cost more than
| getting into computer software, but just about everything
| is. It may not go very quick but there's nothing stopping
| you from doing this.
| masklinn wrote:
| There is also Aging Wheels' ongoing conversion of a Ford
| Escape to a 900HP EV: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=P
| LzV2uljPvyAc7dEH2EeTP...
| dylan604 wrote:
| For those that know they will be interested and not
| disappointed by this tease of a video, here's the playlist to
| all of the videos of the conversion
|
| https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jnhh1P86vQ&list=PL0vZL9uwyf.
| ..
| Fluorescence wrote:
| This might be a youtube thing... but as far as I can tell,
| I linked to the first video in the playlist and you have
| linked to the last. It looks like the playlist is in the
| reverse order? i.e. it will play newest to oldest. God I
| hate yt.
| dylan604 wrote:
| After starting to watch the link I found, I realized it
| was reversed too. Even though it says "in order" from his
| profile's page. I've never really used YT for anything
| other than one off videos, and only recently started
| trying to watch some content in a more consumerist
| manner. I'm not liking it at all, and wonder why people
| put up with it, and don't just stop like I'm already
| considering
| subhro wrote:
| In the other news, BMW has "stopped" selling service manuals for
| motorcycles showing a damn middle finger to everyone including
| law makers (in Europe even). That is absolutely rubbish, but
| somehow they can do it legally.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2023-09-02 23:01 UTC)