Power Loss Update

[Mysta]

So i'm looking at one that's got this listed incomplete on NHTSA site, should I make them do the fix first? it's a bit of a drive.

Sponsored

 

[kort]

Whatever!

whatever? you're posting fan boi like comments

 

[fullmetalbaal]

Doesn't Porsche collect these errors online, so shouldn't they know exactly the numbers?

If Porsche made a recall and owned up to the problem, why would they fake numbers?

Why would they? Perception. That's why.

Because there's a big difference between "a single digit number was affected and we are doing this in an abundance of caution" (Something like that is actually a common phrase, just google that and you'll get tons of this stuff) vs. "hundreds or thousands impacted! this could hit anybody!"

This is true both in the the numerator and denominator.

Less than 10,000 cars potentially affected sounds like less of a problem than more than 10,000.
8 actual cases sounds like an an anomaly, once you're in the tens of cases, it must be real!
PR folks usually don't worry about the ratio - the vast majority of people don't divide, look at ratios, percentages etc etc.

Not saying Porsche is doing this right now - but that's WHY they would do it.

And it's also super common, at least in the US. Google pretty much any more important/noteworthy recall that has a corporate response and you'll see them downplaying both the numbers of affected customers/cars and the total number of cars potentially impacted.

Sometimes just the wording (calling something "potentially" or "suspected" when it's already proven etc), sometimes they explicitly twist numbers. And in the rare case they get called on it, have some BS response ("I got confused, I mistakenly quoted Q2 numbers when I meant to use full year bla bla")

Their whole job is PR.

 

[chrisk]

Why would they? Perception. That's why.

Because there's a big difference between "a single digit number was affected and we are doing this in an abundance of caution" (Something like that is actually a common phrase, just google that and you'll get tons of this stuff) vs. "hundreds or thousands impacted! this could hit anybody!"

This is true both in the the numerator and denominator.

Less than 10,000 cars potentially affected sounds like less of a problem than more than 10,000.
8 actual cases sounds like an an anomaly, once you're in the tens of cases, it must be real!
PR folks usually don't worry about the ratio - the vast majority of people don't divide, look at ratios, percentages etc etc.

Not saying Porsche is doing this right now - but that's WHY they would do it.

And it's also super common, at least in the US. Google pretty much any more important/noteworthy recall that has a corporate response and you'll see them downplaying both the numbers of affected customers/cars and the total number of cars potentially impacted.

Sometimes just the wording (calling something "potentially" or "suspected" when it's already proven etc), sometimes they explicitly twist numbers. And in the rare case they get called on it, have some BS response ("I got confused, I mistakenly quoted Q2 numbers when I meant to use full year bla bla")

Their whole job is PR.

Exactly this.
In addition they do not admit the Taycan is not capable of OTA updates except the infotainment system.
They say they want to update the car at the authorized service center because the update is for powertrain components and they want to make sure everything is safe. They make it sound ot is good customer service to perform the update at the dealer. It sounds much nicer than saying that the car's OTA does not support these updates.

I wish their software and customer support was as good as their PR..

 

[daveo4EV]

I personally put little faith in the accuracy of anything reported by a Government Agency.

so you have evidence of inaccuracy? you have alternate sources of information you can cite? please share with us the alternative data so we can evaluate it. It’s fine to be skeptical - but you can’t just reject data you don’t like, one must also provide alternate and factual data to contrast the inaccurate data - otherwise you’re just putting your head in the sand.

the NTHSA numbers look pretty accurate based on all accounts.

I’m going to guess you don’t like the data - but that does not make it inaccurate.

 

[epirali]

I would hazard a guess the “urgency” of this issue is very much colored by if it has happened to you. I do not doubt that as a software/coms issue the number of cars effected will increase over time as it is a variable probability event, probably due to various factors in each car. But even if its “low” for your car over time it will happen. I haven’t seen it yet, but I won’t be shocked if it happened next time I am driving.

Also it seems very resolvable and already addressed. So I guess I am a little puzzled by the energy around this issue.

 

[kort]

I would hazard a guess the “urgency” of this issue is very much colored by if it has happened to you. I do not doubt that as a software/coms issue the number of cars effected will increase over time as it is a variable probability event, probably due to various factors in each car. But even if its “low” for your car over time it will happen. I haven’t seen it yet, but I won’t be shocked if it happened next time I am driving.

Also it seems very resolvable and already addressed. So I guess I am a little puzzled by the energy around this issue.

wait until your car decides to shut down while you are on a crowded high speed highway. then you'd grasp the urgency. the reliability of the car cannot be even 99.6% of the time, it must be 100% of the time.

 

[Jhenson29]

wait until your car decides to shut down while you are on a crowded high speed highway. then you'd grasp the urgency. the reliability of the car cannot be even 99.6% of the time, it must be 100% of the time.

…100%? ?

 

[Midlifecrisis]

Reminds me of the old one about how if cars had developed as fast as computers they would be able to drive hundreds of miles on a gallon of petrol and cost a fraction of their current price. But as someone pointed out, who would want a car that crashed twice per day?

 

[kreshi]

wait until your car decides to shut down while you are on a crowded high speed highway. then you'd grasp the urgency. the reliability of the car cannot be even 99.6% of the time, it must be 100% of the time.

Can you name one car that is at 100% ???

Ive said it many times. While people are still going crazy about this issue, the rest is driving and enjoying their cars.

 

[kort]

…100%? ?

100% reliable

 

[kort]

Can you name one car that is at 100% ???

Ive said it many times. While people are still going crazy about this issue, the rest is driving and enjoying their cars.

I have never had a car that just stopped running randomly.
cars certainly do break down, however there is usually a cause like lack of proper maintenance that causes the breakdown, not a random software flaw like what is happening in this case.
do you really enjoy playing roulette with your car? with your safety?

 

[Jhenson29]

100% reliable

I’m the controls rep on my company’s Risk Assessment team. I also wrote the RA software we use. Part of my job is to calculate reliability levels (as that’s all SIL and PLr is) of safety functions to verify they meet the required reliability levels determined by the RA.

And I think your statement about 100% reliability is…ridiculous.

It’s fine to dislike the issue with the car. But lets also have realistic expectations.

 

[kort]

I’m the controls rep on my company’s Risk Assessment team. I also wrote the RA software we use. Part of my job is to calculate reliability levels (as that’s all SIL and PLr is) of safety functions to verify they meet the required reliability levels determined by the RA.

And I think your statement about 100% reliability is…ridiculous.

It’s fine to dislike the issue with the car. But lets also have realistic expectations.

then I am glad that I do not need to rely on anything the firm that the firm that you work for supplies.
anything short of 100% reliable out of the box is unacceptable.

 

[Jhenson29]

then I am glad that I do not need to rely on anything the firm that the firm that you work for supplies.
anything short of 100% reliable out of the box is unacceptable.

Ha ha ha ha ha ha….

What a joke. You have no clue what you’re taking about…it’s not my firm…it’s ANSI and ISO standards….

Sponsored