21st century business herald reporter Zheng Zhiwen Intern Wang Qingwei Shanghai Report
On November 25th, Chengdu Longquanyi Public Security Bureau reported a traffic accident on Chengluo Avenue in the district. When a small car was driving in the direction of Xihe River at the Shiling Interchange ramp of Chengluo Avenue, it collided with the vehicle in front at the intersection of Shiling subway station. Three people were slightly injured in the accident and all were treated in the hospital.
According to the video taken by the driving recorder of the rear vehicle, all the vehicles were waiting for the traffic lights at the intersection, and a white Tesla car suddenly rushed out and hit more than a dozen cars in a row. The scene of the accident was a mess, car parts were scattered all over the place, and many cars were seriously damaged.
On November 27th, Tesla responded to the cause of the accident. Tesla said that by checking the background data, it was found that when the collision occurred in the video, the accelerator pedal of the accident vehicle was depressed at a depth of 100%, and the vehicle speed increased from 54km/h to 132km/h at the time of collision. However, the brake light was not turned on because the driver stepped on the brake pedal, but because the collision in the video was not the first collision. After the first collision, the "multi-collision braking" function of the vehicle was triggered, so the brake light was turned on in the video. The background data also shows that the driver did not step on the brake pedal within 2 seconds after the collision in the video.
In view of the fact that the vehicle did not stop in time, Tesla said that by checking the background data, the driver stepped on the brake pedal 2 seconds after the collision in the video. However, combined with the background data and the damaged state of the vehicle, after the first collision, the front wheel of the vehicle has fallen off, the braking system pipeline has been damaged, and the vehicle has been unable to brake normally.
It is worth noting that this accident is not the first storm in Tesla’s braking, and related "brake failure" incidents have emerged in an endless stream in recent years.
The whole story of "Shanghai Auto Show Roof Rights Protection Event"
At the 2021 Shanghai Auto Show, two Tesla owners dressed in "brake failure" made a big fuss about Tesla booth demanding rights protection. Since then, Tesla has been shrouded in the suspicion of "brake failure".
On the afternoon of the auto show, Tao Lin, vice president of Tesla China, responded to this matter: Tesla had no way to compromise. The next morning, Weibo, the official of Qingpu Branch of Shanghai Public Security Bureau, issued a notice saying: Zhang, a woman involved in the "Tesla Auto Show Encountered Owners’ Rights Protection" incident, was sentenced to administrative detention for five days for disturbing public order, and Li was given an administrative warning for disturbing public order.
Since then, the two sides have opened the curtain of going to court, and whether Tesla has "brake failure" has also attracted much attention.
On May 6, 2021, Ms. Zhang formally sued Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Tesla (Beijing) Co., Ltd. and Tao Lin, global vice president of Tesla. Ms. Zhang believes that after the rights protection incident at the Shanghai Auto Show, some remarks made by Tao Lin and Tesla officials were intended to create a negative image of the plaintiff’s unreasonable troubles and professional car troubles, which violated their reputation and caused troubles to their lives. These remarks include "all the recent negatives are her contribution", "only willing to pay high compensation" and the so-called "there is a team from Beijing". Ask the defendant to stop the infringement of the plaintiff’s reputation right, apologize to him and pay 50 thousand yuan for mental damage.
Two years later, Tesla issued a document in response to the failure of the female car owner of Tesla’s roof rights protection: the female car owner of Shanghai Auto Show advocated that the woman sued Tesla’s reputation right dispute case and personal information protection dispute case. After trial, the court of first instance decided to reject all the claims of Ms. Zhang in the two cases. On November 22, 2023, Tesla v. the case of infringement of the reputation right of female car owners in Xi ‘an "Shanghai Auto Show Incident", the court made a first-instance judgment, and found that Ms. Li in Xi ‘an was guilty of reputation infringement, and she had to publicly apologize to Tesla and compensate for the losses, and at the same time bear the vehicle appraisal fee.
Recently, according to Tesla’s news, the court made the latest judgment in the case of Tesla v. another female car owner in Xi ‘an, who was involved in the right to defend the roof of Shanghai Auto Show, and found that Ms. Li in Xi ‘an was guilty of reputation infringement, and she had to apologize to Tesla publicly and pay 2,000 yuan, and at the same time bear the vehicle appraisal fee of 20,000 yuan. After identification, there is no braking problem in the vehicle involved.
It is reported that before this, the judgment was made in December 2021, and the result was that Ms. Li won the case. Tesla then filed an appeal, and the Xi ‘an Intermediate People’s Court ruled that the case was sent back for retrial. On November 9, 2023, the weiyang district court made a new judgment, and the verdict was that Ms. Li lost the case. For the result of Tesla’s victory in the first instance, Ms. Li said that she respected the court’s decision, but she would appeal again.
It is worth noting that in March 2021, Weibo, the "Tesla Customer Support", said that the accident liability certificate issued by the traffic police showed that Mr. Zhang (the owner’s father) was found to have violated the relevant laws on safe driving and keeping a safe distance from the vehicle in front, and should bear full responsibility for the accident.
After the "Shanghai Auto Show Rights Protection" took place, Tesla provided the data one minute before Ms. Zhang’s vehicle accident, and made a written explanation, which stated that when the driver stepped on the brake pedal for the last time, the data showed that the vehicle speed was 118.5 kilometers per hour. Within 2.7 seconds after the driver stepped on the brake pedal, the maximum brake master cylinder pressure was only 45.9bar. After that, the driver stepped on the brake pedal more, and the brake master cylinder pressure reached 92.7bar. Then, the forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking function started (the maximum brake master cylinder pressure reached 140.7bar) and played a role, reducing the collision amplitude. 1.8 seconds after the ABS action, the system recorded the collision. After the driver stepped on the brake pedal, the vehicle speed continued to decrease, and before the collision, the vehicle speed decreased to 48.5 kilometers per hour. Through the inspection and analysis of vehicle data and on-site photos, it is found that ABS works normally during the braking period of the vehicle, and the functions of forward collision warning and automatic emergency braking are started and played a role, and no abnormality is found in the vehicle braking system.
At this point, the dispute over rights protection at the Shanghai Auto Show has also come to an end for the time being. Although Tesla won the rights protection, the price it paid was also heavy. In the face of rights-defending car owners, Tesla CEO Musk dissolved the public relations department and showed a tough attitude of refusing to apologize. Tao Lin, global vice president of Tesla, publicly told the media that Tesla had no way to compromise and asked consumers to strengthen education and study. This attitude caused dissatisfaction among many car owners in China, which made Tesla’s share price plummet at that time, and its market value evaporated by hundreds of billions of dollars overnight.
In the lawsuit with Ms. Li, Tesla asked Ms. Li to pay 5 million yuan in the first instance, but the amount of compensation awarded was only 2,000 yuan. On November 27th, Tesla said that it would continue to appeal. The incident caused huge losses to it, and the loss of Tesla’s orders and goodwill was as high as 100 million yuan as assessed by the judicial evaluation agency.
Give up the "single pedal" mode
In the storm of Tesla’s "brake failure", the "single pedal" mode seems to have become the target of public criticism.
This year, Tesla recalled 1.1 million Tesla cars around the world. The announcement on the website of the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine once said that drivers were not allowed to choose the energy recovery braking strategy for vehicles within the scope of this recall; At the same time, it may not provide enough reminder for the driver to step on the accelerator pedal for a long time. The superposition of the above factors may increase the probability of mistakenly stepping on the accelerator pedal for a long time, which may increase the risk of collision and pose a safety hazard.
In the analysis of professionals, Tesla’s kinetic energy recovery technology is the strongest in the industry. Through kinetic energy recovery, it can save about 20% of energy and improve the endurance by about 15%-20%. Moreover, Tesla’s energy recovery mode is mandatory default mode, and the owner can’t set it by himself and can’t choose to turn it off. Most of the energy recovery modes of other electric vehicles on the market give the owners the freedom to choose.
Many users reported to 21st century business herald that the "single pedal" mode was not suitable for use at first, but it was really "fragrant" after being used to it, but some users still could not accept the "single pedal" mode.
Tesla said that the "single pedal" mode is more convenient and efficient. However, there are also risks. A survey report in 2021 showed that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) had investigated 246 cases of Tesla’s runaway acceleration, and all 246 cases were caused by stepping on the wrong pedal.
"There is no evidence that there is any fault in the accelerator pedal assembly, motor control system or braking system that leads to accidents, and there is no evidence that design factors will increase the possibility of pedal misuse." NHTSA said.
The so-called "single pedal" mode, in simple terms, can realize starting, accelerating, decelerating (braking) and other operations only by controlling the switch pedal. In this mode, kinetic energy recovery can not only save electricity, but also reduce the use of brakes, which can improve the cruising range of electric vehicles. Although the "single pedal" mode is not only equipped with one pedal, it is still equipped with a brake pedal. However, in this mode, users put their feet on the accelerator pedal instead of the brake pedal for a long time, which changes the way users are used to driving traditional fuel vehicles, but there may be potential safety hazards in an emergency.
Tesla has cancelled the "Kinetic Energy Recovery Adjustment Option" since the beginning of 2021, that is, on Tesla cars, this function is mandatory, not a switchable option. According to Tesla, after the OTA recall, car owners who like energy recovery braking can continue to choose the "standard" mode, and control the speed by "foot feeling", while improving the endurance of the vehicle by 10%-20% and reducing the wear of brake discs and pads. Car owners who are not used to this function can now choose the "low" mode to transition.
Although Tesla returned the option of kinetic energy recovery to the public, there are still other doubts that not recognizing the wrong operation of the owner can explain all the accidents of Tesla vehicles out of control and brake failure. Tesla’s roof rights car advocates that the top of Ms. Weibo is the video of Tesla Hainan accident released by another well-known Tesla rights car owner. The car owner can’t step on the brakes, but the staff will open the video that still can’t step on the brakes. In its latest Weibo, it forwarded a video recorded by another Tesla owner who obviously stepped on the brake system but mistook the owner for stepping on the accelerator.
There is also a question about whether Tesla’s data is reliable. "All data collection is based on Tesla’s unilateral provision, and Tesla only records the data collected by itself in the background. Is this data record objective? For example, if the owner steps on the brake, but can’t step on it, is it recorded in the background that he didn’t step on it? The owner did not step on the acceleration, and the vehicle automatically accelerated. Will the background also be recorded as acceleration, which means that the owner is stepping on the switch? "
Regarding the data problem, industry experts also said that there is no institution in China that has the professional ability to detect the data of smart electric vehicles. Zhang Xiang, a member of the automotive industry expert think tank of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, said in an interview with the media: "Now the institutions on the market basically only test mature and long-developed technologies, that is, mainly test traditional cars. As a smart car, Tesla can’t be tested according to the standards of traditional cars. Moreover, Tesla’s time to market is not long, and the technical iteration is changing with each passing day. Our regulations and industry standards have not kept up. "
There have been different opinions about the real cause of Tesla accident. Whether it is the owner’s "habitual thinking" or the quality of car design, the result of frequent vicious traffic accidents is unacceptable. At the moment of rapid development of new energy vehicles, car safety is the most important issue, and it needs the joint efforts of many parties to form effective supervision.
