On November 25th, the Longquanyi Public Security Bureau in Chengdu reported a traffic accident on Chengluo Avenue in the area. A small car collided with a vehicle ahead at the intersection of the Shiling subway station on Chengluo Avenue and Shiling Interchange towards Xihe direction. The accident resulted in three people suffering minor injuries and receiving treatment at the hospital.
According to the video captured by the driving recorder of the vehicles behind, all vehicles were waiting for traffic lights at the intersection when a white Tesla suddenly rushed out and collided with more than ten vehicles in a row. The accident scene was in chaos, with car parts scattered all over the ground and multiple cars severely damaged.
On November 27th, Tesla responded to the cause of the accident. Tesla stated that through checking backend data, it was found in the video that when the collision occurred, the accelerator pedal of the vehicle involved was pressed 100% deep, and the speed increased from 54km/h to 132km/h at the time of the collision. The brake lights on were not caused by the driver stepping on the brake pedal, but because the collision in the video was not the first collision. After the first collision, the vehicle's "multi collision braking" function was triggered, so it was seen in the video that the brake lights were on. The backend data also shows that the driver did not press the brake pedal within 2 seconds after the collision in the video.
In response to the vehicle's failure to brake in a timely manner, Tesla stated that after verifying backend data, the driver pressed the brake pedal 2 seconds after the collision occurred in the video. However, based on background data and the damage status of the vehicle, after the first collision, the front wheels of the vehicle had fallen off, the brake system pipelines were damaged, and the vehicle could no longer brake normally.
It is worth noting that this accident is not Tesla's first brake related incident, and related "brake failure" incidents have been rampant in recent years.
The Beginning and End of the Shanghai Auto Show Roof Rights Protection Incident
At the 2021 Shanghai Auto Show, two Tesla car owners dressed in "brake failure" caused a sensation by causing a commotion at the Tesla booth demanding rights protection. Since then, Tesla has been shrouded in suspicion of "brake failure".
On the afternoon of the auto show rights protection day, Tesla China Vice President Tao Lin responded to this matter: Tesla cannot compromise. The next morning, the official Weibo account of the Qingpu Branch of the Shanghai Public Security Bureau released a notice stating that Zhang, a woman involved in the Tesla Auto Show, was administratively detained for five days for disrupting public order, and Li was given an administrative warning for disrupting public order.
From then on, the legal battle between the two sides began, and the question of whether Tesla had a "brake failure" has also attracted much attention.
On May 6, 2021, Ms. Zhang officially sued Tesla (Shanghai) Co., Ltd., Tesla (Beijing) Co., Ltd., and Tesla Global Vice President Tao Lin. Ms. Zhang believes that after the rights protection incident at the Shanghai Auto Show, some of Tao Lin's and Tesla's official comments were intended to create a negative image of the plaintiff being unreasonable and causing professional car trouble, infringing on their reputation and causing trouble in their lives. These comments include statements such as "her recent negative contributions", "only willing to pay high compensation", and "the existence of teams from Beijing". Request the defendant to stop infringing on the plaintiff's reputation rights, apologize to them, and pay a compensation of 50000 yuan for mental damages.
Two years later, Tesla issued a response stating that the female owner of Tesla's rooftop rights protection was ruled against: the Shanghai Auto Show rooftop rights protection female car claimed that the woman sued Tesla for a reputation dispute and personal information protection dispute. After trial, the first instance court ruled to dismiss all of Ms. Zhang's claims in both cases. On November 22, 2023, Tesla sued the "Shanghai Auto Show Incident" for infringement of the reputation rights of a female car owner in Xi'an. The court made a first instance judgment, determining that Ms. Li's reputation infringement responsibility in Xi'an was established. She must publicly apologize to Tesla and compensate for the losses, while also bearing the vehicle appraisal fee.
Recently, according to Tesla, the court has made the latest ruling in the case of Tesla suing another Xi'an female car owner for reputation infringement in the Shanghai Auto Show roof rights protection incident, determining that Ms. Li's reputation infringement responsibility in Xi'an is established, and she must publicly apologize to Tesla and compensate 2000 yuan, while also bearing a vehicle appraisal fee of 20000 yuan. After appraisal, the vehicle in question did not have any braking issues.
It is reported that the first instance judgment was made in December 2021 before this, and the result was that Ms. Li won the lawsuit. Subsequently, Tesla filed an appeal and the Xi'an Intermediate People's Court ruled to remand the case for retrial. On November 9, 2023, the Weiyang District Court made a new judgment, with Ms. Li losing the lawsuit. Ms. Li expressed respect for the court's ruling regarding Tesla's victory in the first instance, but will appeal again.
It is worth noting that in March 2021, "Tesla Customer Support" Weibo claimed in response to this rights protection incident that the accident liability determination letter issued by the traffic police showed that Mr. Zhang (the owner's father) had violated relevant laws on safe driving and maintaining a safe distance from the vehicle in front, and should bear full responsibility for the accident.
After the "Shanghai Auto Show Rights Protection" incident, Tesla provided data from Ms. Zhang's vehicle one minute before the accident and provided a written explanation, stating that when the driver pressed the brake pedal for the last time, the data showed that the vehicle was traveling at a speed of 118.5 kilometers per hour. Within 2.7 seconds of the driver stepping on the brake pedal, the maximum brake master cylinder pressure was only 45.9 bar. Afterwards, the driver increased the pressure of the brake pedal, and the brake master cylinder pressure reached 92.7 bar. Subsequently, the front collision warning and automatic emergency braking functions were activated (the maximum brake master cylinder pressure reached 140.7 bar), which reduced the magnitude of the collision. Within 1.8 seconds after the ABS was activated, the system recorded the occurrence of the collision. After the driver stepped on the brake pedal, the speed continued to decrease. Before the collision, the speed decreased to 48.5 kilometers per hour. After reviewing and analyzing vehicle data and on-site photos, it was found that the ABS was working normally during braking, and the front collision warning and automatic emergency braking functions were activated and played a role. No abnormalities were found in the vehicle's braking system.
At this point, the dispute over rights protection at the Shanghai Auto Show has temporarily come to an end. Despite Tesla's victory in the rights struggle, the cost it bears is also heavy. Faced with car owners defending their rights, Tesla CEO Musk dissolved the public relations department, showing a tough attitude of refusing to apologize. Tesla Global Vice President Tao Lin publicly stated to the media that Tesla cannot compromise and demanded that consumers strengthen education and learning. This attitude caused dissatisfaction among many Chinese car owners, causing Tesla's stock price to plummet and its market value to evaporate by hundreds of billions of dollars overnight.
In the lawsuit against Ms. Li, Tesla requested Ms. Li to compensate 5 million yuan in the first instance, but the amount of compensation awarded was only 2000 yuan. On November 27th, Tesla announced that it would continue to appeal, and the incident caused huge losses to it. According to judicial evaluation agencies, Tesla's order and goodwill losses amounted to billions of yuan.
Abandon the "single pedal" mode
In the Tesla brake failure controversy, the "single pedal" mode seems to have become a target of criticism.
This year, Tesla has recalled 1.1 million Tesla cars worldwide. The announcement on the website of the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine once stated that the vehicles within the scope of this recall were not allowed to choose energy recovery braking strategies for drivers; At the same time, insufficient reminders may not be provided for drivers who deeply press the accelerator pedal for extended periods of time. The combination of the above factors may increase the probability of accidentally stepping on the accelerator pedal for a long time, which may increase the risk of collision and pose a safety hazard.
According to professional analysis, Tesla's kinetic energy recovery technology is the strongest in the industry. By using kinetic energy recovery, it can save about 20% of energy and improve battery life by approximately 15% -20%. Moreover, Tesla's energy recovery mode is a mandatory default mode, and car owners cannot set it themselves or choose to turn it off. The energy recovery modes of other electric vehicles on the market mostly give car owners the freedom to choose.
Many users have reported to 21st Century Business Herald reporters that the "single pedal" mode may not be suitable to use at first, but after getting used to it, it is indeed "fragrant". However, there are still users who are not very receptive to the "single pedal" mode.
Tesla claims that the "single pedal" mode is more convenient and efficient. But there are also risks involved. A 2021 investigation report showed that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) investigated 246 Tesla runaway acceleration incidents, all of which were caused by stepping on the wrong pedal.
"There is no evidence to suggest any malfunctions in the accelerator pedal assembly, motor control system, or braking system that could cause accidents, and there is no evidence to suggest that design factors increase the likelihood of pedal misuse," NHTSA said.
The so-called "single pedal" mode, in simple terms, only requires controlling the throttle pedal to achieve operations such as starting, accelerating, and decelerating (braking). In this mode, kinetic energy recovery can not only save electricity, but also reduce the use of brakes, which can improve the range of electric vehicles. Although the "single pedal" mode does not only have one pedal, it still comes with a brake pedal. However, in this mode, the user places their foot on the accelerator pedal instead of the brake pedal for a long time while driving, changing the traditional driving habits of fuel vehicles. However, there may be safety hazards in emergency situations.
Tesla has cancelled the "kinetic energy recovery adjustment option" since early 2021, which means that on Tesla cars, this feature is mandatory rather than a switchable option. According to Tesla, after the OTA recall, car owners who prefer energy recovery braking can continue to choose the "standard" mode, control vehicle speed through "foot feel", and improve the vehicle's range by 10% -20%, reducing brake disc and pad wear. Car owners who are not accustomed to this feature can now choose the "low" mode to transition.
Although Tesla has returned the option of kinetic energy recovery to Volkswagen, there are still other doubts that do not recognize the fact that owner mishandling can explain all accidents where Tesla vehicles lose control and brakes fail. The woman advocating for Tesla's rooftop rights car posted on Weibo was another well-known Tesla rights car owner who posted a video of the Tesla Hainan accident. The video shows the car owner stepping on the brake but unable to move it, and the driver changing staff still unable to move the brake. In its latest Weibo post, it reposted a video recorded by another Tesla owner who mistakenly identified the car owner as stepping on the accelerator despite stepping on the brake system.
There are also doubts about the reliability of Tesla's data, "All data collection is based on Tesla's unilateral provision, and Tesla's backend only records the data it collects. Is this data recording objective? For example, if the car owner presses the brake but cannot press it, does the backend record that they did not press it? If the car owner does not press the accelerator, does the backend also record acceleration, indicating that the car owner is pressing the accelerator?"
Regarding data issues, industry experts have also stated that there is currently no institution in China with the professional ability to detect intelligent electric vehicle data. Zhang Xiang, a member of the New Energy and Intelligent Connected Vehicle Industry Expert Think Tank of the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, stated in a media interview: "Currently, institutions on the market mainly focus on testing mature and long developed technologies, specifically traditional cars. Tesla, as an intelligent car, cannot be tested according to traditional car standards. Moreover, Tesla has not been on the market for a long time, but its technology iteration is constantly changing. Our regulations and industry standards have not kept up."
There have been various opinions on the true cause of Tesla's accidents, whether it is due to the habitual thinking of car owners or the quality of car design. The frequent occurrence of malignant traffic accidents is difficult to accept. In the current era of rapid development of new energy vehicles, car safety is the most important issue that cannot be ignored, and it requires joint efforts from multiple parties to form effective supervision.