this post was submitted on 22 Nov 2024
745 points (96.7% liked)

Technology

59605 readers
3094 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Automotive research firm finds that Tesla has higher frequency of deadly accidents than any other car brand

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 133 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (10 children)

Which is odd, because most electric vehicles (including some models of the Tesla) have better crash ratings due to having a crumple zone where the engine would be. Assuming that’s still true, there must be another factor that tips the balance towards deadly accidents. Some thoughts:

  • They are heavy cars. Maybe it’s safer for the passengers but more deadly for the other vehicle.
  • Maybe Tesla drivers are more irresponsible than other car owners.
  • Maybe the torque and acceleration is too high, causing people to lose control more often.
  • Maybe something that doesn’t get rated in the crash ratings causes deaths, eg. electric locks which are unable to open when power is lost, a likely scenario during collisions.
  • Maybe the FSD features are causing more collisions to happen.
[–] kent_eh@lemmy.ca 69 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Maybe Tesla drivers are more irresponsible than other car owners.

That was going to be my suggestion.

[–] fuckingkangaroos@lemm.ee 50 points 2 days ago (2 children)

More irresponsible than Nissan Altima or Dodge Ram owners isn't easy

[–] ripcord@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Altima owners

...This is a stereotype I've never heard before.

[–] TheD00d@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Let me bring you up to speed fam.

[–] brbposting@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Most deadly to driver is not the same thing as most deadly. SUVs are usually extremely deadly to pedestrians and other road users.

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (2 children)

As an SUV driver in Appalachia, I’ve mostly only injured pedestrians.

Anecdotal, I know. I’ve only killed 2 people. What’s the average?

Now I won’t sleep for fear of jinxing myself.

Being human is stupid.

[–] kusivittula@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

please be kidding because otherwise im a terrible person to have laughed my ass off to this 😂

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)
[–] Whats_your_reasoning@lemmy.world 3 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Obviously you’re kidding. You said you drive in Appalachia. Yet, you are so clearly a seal. Driving by the beach, okay maybe I could see that, but mountains? Is there even anything for seals to do in Appalachia?

[–] theangryseal@lemmy.world 4 points 2 days ago

Why do you think I’m so angry? I’ve never even seen the ocean!

[–] cafeinux@infosec.pub 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Am I being wooshed, and if no, wtf? When did killing even one person become an "only" occurrence?

[–] PerogiBoi@lemmy.ca 1 points 23 hours ago

My wife mowed down this guy once in downtown ottawa. We still have the commemorative dent on the hood :)

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 18 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

If there's a systemic reason Tesla drivers have more accidents in a Tesla than drivers of other cars, that car is inherently less safe.
You can't simply put it down to "Tesla drivers suck", that's irresponsible and flawed logic.

If it's the acceleration, maybe we shouldn't have cars that accelerate the way a Tesla can. But I very much doubt that is the reason except anecdotally. I suspect more that safety features may in fact serve to distract, or people "learn" to rely on them, and than they turn out to not be 100% reliable.

We've all heard the weird tendency of Tesla breaking for no reason, that is hazard, also the turn signals are placed wrong, causing them to be impractical in some situations like roundabouts. Also the instrumentation in general of a Tesla is centered very much around the touch screen, another source of potential distraction. AFAIK even the speedometer isn't placed where it should be to observe it quickly without looking away from the road for too long.

A lot of inherent safety feature in traditional cars, have been shaved away in Tesla cars. Even getting out in an emergency can be a problem, as the handles may fail because they are electric, and the "real" handles are hidden.

There a dozens of examples where Tesla is designed for less safety than traditional cars, and if (when) the safety features fail, I bet they are a lot less safe than if those features weren't there to begin with.

Tesla cars are designed with a VERY strong focus on reducing production cost, Elon Musk is even boasting about it, and how he has an uncompromising goal to simplify production. But Tesla also lack the experience about why things are like they are in traditional cars.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 14 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The systemic reason might just simply be "They were the kind of a person that would buy a Tesla".
If I wanted to buy a safe car to drive responsibly while respecting all the traffic rules, an EV with almost a thousand horses with a 0-60 time of 2.1-2.4 seconds wouldn't exactly be my first choice.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (9 children)

If you want a more environmentally friendly car, which would you prefer: A Tesla or a Prius?
A lot of Tesla cars were sold when there were very few to no alternatives if you wanted an EV.
Also 2.1-2.4 is not normal for a Tesla. That's the very fastest of them.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Prius. Teslas are way too large and heavy for my tastes.
Though preferably I'd swap my VW Up to an electric one, they were too expensive back when I got mine.

As for the acceleration figure, I took it from this review:

We haven’t tested a standard Tesla Model S for some time, but a 2020 model that we ran through our instrumented test regimen reached 60 mph in a blistering 2.4 seconds. You can expect roughly similar performance from the current standard Model S today. The gonzo Plaid version, which boasts a third electric motor and 1020 horsepower, reached 60 mph in just 2.1 seconds in our testing.

[–] jakobmn@feddit.dk 2 points 2 days ago

We have had an e-UP for 3 years. We have ended up driving more in that than in our "primary" car which is a Golf. Had an ID5 as a loaner once, and it was great to get our UP back instead. If only the ID3 could tow our 1200kg caravan, that would be an ideal replacement for the Golf some day. Most electric cars are too large and heavy for my taste as well.

load more comments (8 replies)
[–] inv3r510n@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Even getting out in an emergency can be a problem, as the handles may fail because they are electric, and the "real" handles are hidden.

This killed a billionaire a few months ago… maybe not such a bad feature

[–] olympicyes@lemmy.world 5 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I am convinced it’s the acceleration. Also because you have that ability, it influences you to take risks in traffic (eg. Pulling out of a stopped lane) that you might not take in an ICE car because you can’t hit a high scored fast enough. They opened Pandora’s box by making every family car a Porsche.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I haven't noticed that at all for Tesla, and I did absolutely notice with BMW and AUDI for many years. Not so much driving fast, as driving like assholes. Yes an EV often starts quicker at a read light, but I've never seen anything wild here that I recall, and we have a lot of Tesla and other EV cars here now (Denmark).

But to be honest, it may be different here, because ICE cars are generally manual, which is way more fun to drive. With A Tesla you just press the speeder like an Automatic. It just responds faster. But a Tesla can also be driven for comfort, and it seems to me that's what just about everybody does here.

[–] inv3r510n@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Luxury car owners are rich so they behave like the privileged assholes they tend to be.

[–] baguettefish@discuss.tchncs.de 11 points 2 days ago

"A vehicle’s size, weight, and height certainly play a part in its ability to protect passengers in a crash,” said Brauer. “But the biggest contributor to occupant safety is avoiding a crash, and the biggest factor in crash avoidance is driver behavior. A focused, alert driver, traveling at a legal or prudent speed, without being under the influence of drugs or alcohol, is the most likely to arrive safely regardless of the vehicle they’re driving.”

[–] ShepherdPie@midwest.social 25 points 2 days ago (2 children)

When this was posted last week, I mentioned that it was odd that all the most deadliest models on the list were all low production cars, meaning there might be something wonky with their methodology.

There was a similar "study" done a year or so ago where they simply looked at car insurance applications and used people's accident history and whatever vehicle they were trying to insure at the time to generate a list of which models had the "most accidents" in an incredibly flawed manor (Pontiac and Oldsmobile were among the safest even though neither company exists anymore).

[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 16 points 2 days ago

The study said they normalize by mileage, which will account for both model popularity and driving distance. Driving safety is usually reported in incidents per mile or something to that effect, so that's all standard.

[–] JohnEdwa@sopuli.xyz 11 points 2 days ago

The data is by "Fatal Accident Rate (Cars per Billion Vehicle Miles)", Model Y having 10.6, Model S having 5.8. Ignoring Model 3, the average would be 8.2. Back in 2023 Tesla tweeted "Total miles driven by the Tesla fleet has exceeded 100 billion miles globally—equal to 532 round trips to the sun!"
So that math says 820 fatal accidents, Tesladeaths reports 614. I'd say the numbers seem close enough?

[–] Viri4thus@feddit.org 22 points 2 days ago

Or, hear me out, maybe they are just shit because so many corners have been cut in manufacturing that tesla cars should be perfect spheres by now.

[–] Artyom@lemm.ee 16 points 2 days ago (2 children)

My bet is on the extra torque being the primary problem. Rental companies have complained about increased incident rates, and they're probably not renting out Teslas.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] RandomStickman@fedia.io 19 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Maybe Tesla drivers are more irresponsible than other car owners.

This is my first thought. Anecdotally Tesla drivers joins the ranks of Audi and BMW of insane drivers around me.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Eh, I've seen the opposite. Most of the Tesla drivers in my area seem to drive relatively slowly. Yes, Teslas can go fast, but that burns through range like crazy, so I think a lot of them want that better range.

BMW drivers here are the worst because act completely entitled. They'll cross multiple lanes on the highway w/o signaling, aggressively pass on the right just to slow down to the speed of traffic again, and they'll park across multiple parking stalls. Audis are similar, but the demographics seem to skew a bit older.

Here are the main demographics I tend to see in my area (Utah):

  • wannabe cowboys - big lifted trucks
  • rich "racers" - BMW, sports cars (mostly Corvettes here), etc
  • entitled "family" types - huge SUVs (esp. Cadillac Escalade)
  • "outdoorsy" people (and wannabe "outdoorsy" people) - Subaru
  • wannabe "green" people - Tesla, Rivian, etc
  • actual green people - Chevy Bolt, Toyota Prius

The first three drive super aggressively, the fourth can vary, the fifth drives pretty normal, and the last tend to drive pretty conservatively. At least that's my read from my area.

[–] Buffalox@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago

That's Exactly my experience with Tesla drivers too (Denmark), Tesla drivers generally drive "comfortably" as I see it, and I've never seen a Tesla show off at a red light.
In my experience Tesla drivers are responsible drivers as much as everybody else. So I am pretty sure this is NOT a driver issue.

I think of tesla drivers like BMW drivers who aren't good with their money.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Lev_Astov@lemmy.world 7 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (3 children)

Last time I looked up publicly available crash statistics in the US and calculated the per-maker numbers, Tesla was like 1/80th the typical per capita crashes of the average auto maker. That was a few years back, but I doubt that's changed without some sketchy statistic interpretations.

they used crash statistics for new cars with models from 2018 to 2022, where tesla is the most dangerous brand

[–] oo1@lemmings.world 5 points 2 days ago

They looked at fatal crashes only, which is presumably a very small share of all crashes. They also normalised to per mile driven using a sample of data they have - presumably some data on miles driven by car type.

Could be sketchy, could just be a much smaller sub-population.

[–] 11111one11111@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

Obligatory preface written after comment was written:

I am in no way a statistician or data analysis guru. I admit I could be looking at this shit entirely wrong and welcome anybody who corrects anything I I'm looking at incorrectly.

Actual comment:

The entire report itself is skewed as fuck before Rolling Stone cherry picked the fuck out of it for the article to slam Tesla. Listen I'm as sick of Elon as the next but these fucking shit on everything Elon hiveminds are so much more fucking obnoxious. Theyre always 10 to 1 comments by people who didnt read the article to comments by people who did.

At the end is the actual image from the site that issued the report. I didnt bother with a source link because it's right in the article OP posted.

Issues with the article and report:

  1. The figures are not for every car on the road it only covers cars made between 2018 and 2022. Not a big deal but still deceiving as fuck to theme the article as Tesla has one of the highest death rates. Cuz they left the time frame out of the RS article. Kinda how they left out the fact that only 1 tesla is in the top 6 and the other Tesla is second to last with a flood of much larger much more common vehicle names that fill in between 1 and 23.

  2. Each rate is calculated off 1 billion miles driven per year. When you put any Tesla model up next to any Ford, Honda, GM, Toyota, etc the % of all teslas on the road are going to be ridiculously higher than the % of the other much larger industry makes and models on the road that it takes to reach 1 billion miles. Because idk if I explained that well here is a made up scenario to illustrate it. Let's say there are 1000 teslas on the road compared to 1,000,000 Prius on the road. The tesla death rates are based out of 1000 Teslas driving 1,000,000 miles each. Whereas the Prius death rates are based off 1,000,000 Prius' driving 1,000 miles each.

  3. Remember point 2 as it plays into point 3. The method they used to calculate the rate outlined in point 2, I believe is normal when govt is figuring out vehicle death rates by category, location, driver age, etc. However the study they reference is specifically for death rates per vehicle make. Which makes the methods used for calculating deathrate by make and model completely fucked. They should've done the same number of cars per each make and model type as well as the same miles driven to get a comparable outcome of death rates per make amd model over 4 year span.

[–] simplejack@lemmy.world 11 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Re bullet 2. Irresponsibility.

My theory is that it is isn’t the badge on the car, it’s the fact that people’s grocery getter now was the performance of a high-end sports car from a decade ago. And, like a with a sports car, Teslas are designed to encourage users to have “fun” driving. Every test drive from a Tesla store ALWAYS includes a segment where the store rep encourages people gun it onto or on a large open road.

Before Telsa it was the German manufacturers who dominated the commuter-car-with-sports-car-performance market. And guess what? Those people drove like a-holes.

[–] taladar@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 days ago

Those people drove like a-holes.

That is not true. I mean the bit where you put that into the past tense. They still do.

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 11 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

This is my hunch too. Perhaps the UI is more distracting with Tesla's implementation of screens/menus/feedback for car functions too.

Just pointing out the study emphasize occupant fatalities which I take as to exclude external fatalities such as other vehicles.

[–] pennomi@lemmy.world 6 points 2 days ago

Oh yeah, the big infotainment system could definitely be a factor in bad driving.

Also thanks for pointing out the methodology on how they’re counting fatalities, that easily scratches one item off my list.

[–] Morphit@feddit.uk 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (2 children)

I expect (hope) it's a small factor, but I wonder where pedestrian fatalities fit in. Several of the worst models seem to be large SUVs or sports cars - alongside these Teslas and some rather cheaper compact cars.

[–] inv3r510n@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

Large SUVs must be worse for pedestrians because they’re essentially tanks that you can’t see out in front of for a good 20’ or so. A small child running to get their ball in the road will be completely invisible to a large SUV whereas a Tesla driver would be able to see the child a lot sooner and hopefully avoid them.

[–] Ebby@lemmy.ssba.com 6 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Pedestrians were not part of this study.

[–] oo1@lemmings.world 2 points 2 days ago

oh yeah, "... at least one occupant fatality".

The source dataset seems to have pedestrian/non-occupant fatalities, pretty shitty of tthem to go out of their way to exclude them.