Lawyers! Irresponsible parents! So the passenger dies because the battery was defective. The same battery that propelled the car up to the 116 mph speed at the time of crash. Had nothing to do with the driver removing a speed governor and then speeding?
Maybe I missed something, Jack? How does the removal of the limiter — which didn’t exist when the car rolled off the assembly line — make the battery dangerous?
The car was operating exactly how the manufacturer intended, with no limiter installed. It’s not like the kid took of the manufacturer’s governor and mod’ed the car to spec’s not intended by Tesla.
The battery was defective and Tesla is responsible. That had nothing to do with the installation and removal of an after-market limiter.
I wasn’t defending Tesla – I was asking Jack for clarification on how removing an aftermarket limiter and simply bringing the vehicle back to the condition it was in when it left the plant could have cause the battery to be defective.
Rosey,
My point is that this is the driver’s fault for speeding. I didn’t say that removing the limiter made the battery defective. If the limiter was still intact, then the kid would’ve possibly crashed going 85 mph. I don’t know that the battery was defective at all. When you propel something at 115 mph and it hits something and breaks, it isn’t necessarily defective.
January 11, 2019 at 3:02 pm
Rosenblatt says:
Like or Dislike:
0
0
Roger that, Jack. I’m with you that the proximate cause of the fatality was the excessive speed. No argument here! :)
January 10, 2019 at 9:15 am
Captain Planet says:
Like or Dislike:
2
5
Agent, if that is your metric, then ‘unsafe’ is literally every year, make, and model on the streets today. They are all running over vehicles and killing people. You are on the losing side. Technology will win, always has. I mean, you aren’t still using Wizard Mail and fax, are you? As much as you and Tramp want to believe it’s always the wheel and the wall, we now have spacecraft (look Mom, no wheels), hovercraft (certainly you’ve seen Bubba Watson’s golf cart), and invisible fence for our pets. Keep watching as the world passes you by, my friend.
The limiter should not be a non-issue on whether the battery is defective. I would think that any vehicle type, gas or electric, would have a unpredictable outcome in a 116mph crash. Some cars blow-up when wrecked at 116, others don’t. I am no real fan of Tesla, but I wouldn’t blame this one on them.
Thank you SWFL. I couldn’t wrap my head around the delimiter playing a factor in any battery issues. That said, if there are/were battery issues and Tesla did nothing to warn owners of said dangers (and I believe there were major battery issues, but I don’t know what Tesla did to disclose that info, if anything at all), then it stands to reason Tesla may hold some negligence here.
If Martinez’ estate has a lawsuit, shouldn’t it be against the estate of the 18 year old driver who hit a wall at 116 mph? Oh, right, the 18 year old probably had no assets so we need to find the deep pocket. I feel bad for both families that lost their young sons, but it seems that Darwin wins again.
This is a tragedy. However, every car made can go 85 mph, not just Tesla’s (limiter or no limiter). Any car driven into a wall at 85 mph will have catastrophic results. I would never want to even contemplate the death of one of my children. However, I would not give my Tesla (or any car) back to my son to drive within a month or so after he had been ticketed for driving it 112 mph.
116 MPH versus a concrete wall. The car is going to lose this battle. Wasn’t the battery’s fault the driver hit a wall at this speed. It was the driver’s fault. A terrible tragedy for both families, but not Tesla’s fault on this one.
Lawyers! Irresponsible parents! So the passenger dies because the battery was defective. The same battery that propelled the car up to the 116 mph speed at the time of crash. Had nothing to do with the driver removing a speed governor and then speeding?
Maybe I missed something, Jack? How does the removal of the limiter — which didn’t exist when the car rolled off the assembly line — make the battery dangerous?
The car was operating exactly how the manufacturer intended, with no limiter installed. It’s not like the kid took of the manufacturer’s governor and mod’ed the car to spec’s not intended by Tesla.
Keep on defending Tesla, Rosenblatt. They are an unsafe car and keep running over vehicles and killing people. You are on the losing side.
The battery was defective and Tesla is responsible. That had nothing to do with the installation and removal of an after-market limiter.
I wasn’t defending Tesla – I was asking Jack for clarification on how removing an aftermarket limiter and simply bringing the vehicle back to the condition it was in when it left the plant could have cause the battery to be defective.
Rosey,
My point is that this is the driver’s fault for speeding. I didn’t say that removing the limiter made the battery defective. If the limiter was still intact, then the kid would’ve possibly crashed going 85 mph. I don’t know that the battery was defective at all. When you propel something at 115 mph and it hits something and breaks, it isn’t necessarily defective.
Roger that, Jack. I’m with you that the proximate cause of the fatality was the excessive speed. No argument here! :)
Agent, if that is your metric, then ‘unsafe’ is literally every year, make, and model on the streets today. They are all running over vehicles and killing people. You are on the losing side. Technology will win, always has. I mean, you aren’t still using Wizard Mail and fax, are you? As much as you and Tramp want to believe it’s always the wheel and the wall, we now have spacecraft (look Mom, no wheels), hovercraft (certainly you’ve seen Bubba Watson’s golf cart), and invisible fence for our pets. Keep watching as the world passes you by, my friend.
The limiter should not be a non-issue on whether the battery is defective. I would think that any vehicle type, gas or electric, would have a unpredictable outcome in a 116mph crash. Some cars blow-up when wrecked at 116, others don’t. I am no real fan of Tesla, but I wouldn’t blame this one on them.
Thank you SWFL. I couldn’t wrap my head around the delimiter playing a factor in any battery issues. That said, if there are/were battery issues and Tesla did nothing to warn owners of said dangers (and I believe there were major battery issues, but I don’t know what Tesla did to disclose that info, if anything at all), then it stands to reason Tesla may hold some negligence here.
If Martinez’ estate has a lawsuit, shouldn’t it be against the estate of the 18 year old driver who hit a wall at 116 mph? Oh, right, the 18 year old probably had no assets so we need to find the deep pocket. I feel bad for both families that lost their young sons, but it seems that Darwin wins again.
This is a tragedy. However, every car made can go 85 mph, not just Tesla’s (limiter or no limiter). Any car driven into a wall at 85 mph will have catastrophic results. I would never want to even contemplate the death of one of my children. However, I would not give my Tesla (or any car) back to my son to drive within a month or so after he had been ticketed for driving it 112 mph.
116 MPH versus a concrete wall. The car is going to lose this battle. Wasn’t the battery’s fault the driver hit a wall at this speed. It was the driver’s fault. A terrible tragedy for both families, but not Tesla’s fault on this one.