Tesla has lowest maintenance and repair cost of any brand(electrek.co)
electrek.co
Tesla has lowest maintenance and repair cost of any brand
https://electrek.co/2024/04/22/tesla-lowest-maintenance-repair-cost-any-brand/
55 comments
You bring up a valuable point that should not be ignored: The article seems to erroneously include "repair", where Consumer Reports seemingly did not:
Hertz's situation was particularly noteworthy because of how much their purchases of Teslas affected the company itself, though that was partially because Hertz started to firesale their Tesla fleet just as Tesla itself lowered prices, further exacerbating the loss.
> When comparing cumulative costs by brand for years one through five
> and six through 10, we found that Tesla had the lowest maintenance costs.
Hertz's situation was particularly noteworthy because of how much their purchases of Teslas affected the company itself, though that was partially because Hertz started to firesale their Tesla fleet just as Tesla itself lowered prices, further exacerbating the loss.
The CR article [1] uses the phrase "maintenance and repair" nearly everywhere. That quote from the article is one of only two paragraphs where "maintenance" is not "maintenance and repair". The other is a paragraph talking about the "free maintenance periods" that some new cars include, and even that paragraph also mentions repairs.
[1] https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-maintenance/the-cos...
[1] https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-maintenance/the-cos...
Thanks for clarifying!
Even their own site--don't have access to the actual report--is very unclear whether they're just talking routine maintenance or if they're also talking about (accident) repair.
I assume that the point of their maintenance and repair comparison is to help consumers figure out the cost of owning the car. The target audience would be people comparing different cars to figure out what their overall costs might be for the different options.
Such a consumer would be comparing typical maintenance and repair costs, fuel costs, insurance costs, license and registration costs, and probably others I am forgetting.
If that's the case then I'd expect collision repairs to not be included in maintenance and repair costs, because collision repairs are usually handled by insurance. If a particular car is more expensive to repair after a collision that would show up in higher insurance rates and so when comparing cars is accounted for when your compare insurance costs.
Such a consumer would be comparing typical maintenance and repair costs, fuel costs, insurance costs, license and registration costs, and probably others I am forgetting.
If that's the case then I'd expect collision repairs to not be included in maintenance and repair costs, because collision repairs are usually handled by insurance. If a particular car is more expensive to repair after a collision that would show up in higher insurance rates and so when comparing cars is accounted for when your compare insurance costs.
In fairness, rental cars are driven harder and treated much more roughly than private vehicles tend to be. (Which is why I've never been a fan of Turo's concept.)
Also, collision repairs likely represent only a fraction of total maintenance costs.
Also, collision repairs likely represent only a fraction of total maintenance costs.
if the article is claiming 'lowest REPAIR costs', why would you ignore the collision repair?
Collisions are not unique to rental fleet, they happen to normal customers too!
Mechanical repair (i.e. broken camera here and there, stuck seatbelt, etc) is going to be always cheaper than collision repairs.
Also makes sense to exclude collision repairs - as an individual owner I am not going to run to a shop to repair scratch or gash - I am perfectly happy with mechanically worthy car that has imperfect looks (thats why I maxed out excess on my insurance).
Also makes sense to exclude collision repairs - as an individual owner I am not going to run to a shop to repair scratch or gash - I am perfectly happy with mechanically worthy car that has imperfect looks (thats why I maxed out excess on my insurance).
The comparison the other poster made is rental to rental. Like it may be the case that rentals see more collision repairs, but it's still informative for everyday use, things like insurance are going to take into account cost differences like that.
Even double collision costs for an average car (with an average number of collisions) might still lead to lower overall "maintenance and repair costs" if other items are lower.
Could tip the balance if your business model is to rent them out to Uber drivers though, and if those are more likely to hit or be hit by other cars.
Could tip the balance if your business model is to rent them out to Uber drivers though, and if those are more likely to hit or be hit by other cars.
Hertz HURTS. Worst customer service and run car rental agency. I can see this as a Hurtz problem more than Tesla, but it also may be a combination with renter abuse.
I’d love to hear the mental gymnastics involved in blaming this on Hertz.
Much of the Hertz problem with Tesla was because they rented most of the Tesla's to ride share drivers rather than normal renters. Ride share drivers are a lot harder on cars than normal renters, depreciating them much quicker. Hertz knew that. Hertz also knew they were going to be renting them mostly to ride share drivers. They should have expected increased depreciation, but instead chose to blame others.
I wonder when the battery pack needs replacing. Is that counted? Got to cost a bundle.
5 figures, depending on model. The largest packs are around $40k.
But Tesla claims 300k - 500k miles before the battery comes due for a replacement. Most of the very oldest Teslas haven't reached that mileage yet. The average drive certainly doesn't reach it in their first 10 years of owning their car.
But Tesla claims 300k - 500k miles before the battery comes due for a replacement. Most of the very oldest Teslas haven't reached that mileage yet. The average drive certainly doesn't reach it in their first 10 years of owning their car.
I don't know how it varies in different parts of the world, but where I live 300k miles is a rustbucket that's one pothole away from the scrapyard.
I can get a refurb 100kw pack for my Model S for ~$14k from Tesla. 2018, has ~125k miles on it, less than 10% degradation heavily Supercharged.
On _average_ they last enough. Problem is that sudden failure can happen at anytime, even at 161k miles or so.
Sounds like something insurance companies (or government) should offer. Would cost extra $1 per customer, but would keep tons of drivers happy.
Sounds like something insurance companies (or government) should offer. Would cost extra $1 per customer, but would keep tons of drivers happy.
This is the big one. A timing belt change , new spark plugs etc on a ICE car would cost about CAD 3000 ~4000 for Honda. And then your engine is good for another 100000 km or so.
That only starts being a risk after the ten year mark, maybe longer. Supposedly it’s down to 8k-12k for the Tesla battery packs (+ labour).
At this points it's seeming like they function well enough to last the life of the chassis. You're not going to spend $10k to put a new engine in a 10 year old car either, it's simply not worth it. You deal with some bumps and bruises and squeaks and reduced efficiency.
Hm. Last time I replaced an ICE engine, it cost < $1000
Small car, common model. From the junkyard, but much newer than my toasted one.
I know, not the same thing. I wonder why the comparison was made at all, I'm just following up.
Small car, common model. From the junkyard, but much newer than my toasted one.
I know, not the same thing. I wonder why the comparison was made at all, I'm just following up.
My neighbors just spent $5k replacing the engine in their 2017 Honda Pilot, with another used engine, and the mechanic was a close friend who gave them a great deal on labor costs..
As someone who just spent $400 to have one of the (third) pop-out door handle replaced, I'm not convinced.
My Tesla is 10 years old (as of this coming July). I bought the extended warranty when they still offered it, which covered me for 8 years (amazing).
I'm really glad I did too, under warranty, I've had 2 door handles replaced, a new motor, a replaced computer.
My Tesla is 10 years old (as of this coming July). I bought the extended warranty when they still offered it, which covered me for 8 years (amazing).
I'm really glad I did too, under warranty, I've had 2 door handles replaced, a new motor, a replaced computer.
What’s the point of doing this at a brand level.
What would seem more relevant is the type of car, so SUVs vs Sedans etc even if you want to group it further by brand after that.
I can’t imagine a truck would have the same maintenance as a compact.
What would seem more relevant is the type of car, so SUVs vs Sedans etc even if you want to group it further by brand after that.
I can’t imagine a truck would have the same maintenance as a compact.
Data at the type level is problematic too. For instance, CR also has data showing that Hybrids are the most reliable but PHEV's are the worst. Which doesn't make any sense because they are very similar vehicles, and PHEV's should theoretically be better than non-pluggable hybrids.
But most Hybrids are Toyotas, and most PHEV's aren't.
But most Hybrids are Toyotas, and most PHEV's aren't.
Wouldn’t total cost of ownership be a better measure?
Maintenance, repair, insurance, fuel, residual value.
I would think Tesla’s lower residual value from price declines would result in a poorer(possibly much poorer) showing using a total cost of ownership framework.
And I would think Toyota, especially Toyota plug-in hybrids, would get a strong boost in total cost of ownership rankings.
Wouldn’t an important inflection point for EVs be winning a total costs of ownership comparison with Toyota plug in hybrids?
Maintenance, repair, insurance, fuel, residual value.
I would think Tesla’s lower residual value from price declines would result in a poorer(possibly much poorer) showing using a total cost of ownership framework.
And I would think Toyota, especially Toyota plug-in hybrids, would get a strong boost in total cost of ownership rankings.
Wouldn’t an important inflection point for EVs be winning a total costs of ownership comparison with Toyota plug in hybrids?
Except if you factor in the months of rents car time while you wait for repair parts because Tesla prioritizes parts for new builds and refuses to allow 3rd party parts.
Or the cyber truck which apparently will get bricked if you wash it or sometimes right when you pick it up from the dealer
Good to see more articles pointing out maintenance costs as part of the total costs of ownership, but that's still only part of the story. Purchase, fuel, maintenance (tires, brakes, oil change, etc.), insurance, time, and depreciation costs should all be considered.
I just watched Youtube video saying electric cars have much higher depreciation than non electric cars. It would be a big mistake to think they are cheaper than non-electric cars.
So buy one of the highly depreciated second hand ones and get a double win.
Maintenance cost, calculated by completely ignoring repair costs where Tesla hass pretty bad track record??
https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/20...
Who wrote this? Elon Musk?
https://www.consumerreports.org/media-room/press-releases/20...
Who wrote this? Elon Musk?
Does that include the cost of tires - which is said to be MUCH higher on Teslas?
Good question. In fact this is an issue on ALL electric cars, as they tend to be much heavier, which is directly correlated with tyre wear.
That said, wear can be substantially mitigated by how the tyres are designed and manufactured, particularly the tread compounds. But, long-wearing compounds are generally inversely correlated with grip, so there is a balance to be found there.
There is also the fact that manufactured seem to absolutely not GAF about weight anymore, even on internal-combustion cars, so the ICE-vs-EV weight difference may be narrowing.
But yes, tires for heavier cars are more expensive by themselves, and ceteris paribus, wear faster, so can definitely be a significant expense factor over the 5-10 year terms in this article and discussion.
That said, wear can be substantially mitigated by how the tyres are designed and manufactured, particularly the tread compounds. But, long-wearing compounds are generally inversely correlated with grip, so there is a balance to be found there.
There is also the fact that manufactured seem to absolutely not GAF about weight anymore, even on internal-combustion cars, so the ICE-vs-EV weight difference may be narrowing.
But yes, tires for heavier cars are more expensive by themselves, and ceteris paribus, wear faster, so can definitely be a significant expense factor over the 5-10 year terms in this article and discussion.
Look at the weight of some cars for comparison. Modern EVs aren't too far off as you say when compared with comparable performance cars:
Tesla model 3: 3920lbs (SR) 4056lbs (LR)
Kia ev6: 4017-4255lbs
Average new US vehicle: 4100lbs
BMW M3: 3,840-3,990 lbs
BMW M5: ~5300lbs
Audi A5: 3,682-3,990 lbs
Toyota Camry: ~3500lbs
Toyota Prius: 3,097-3,340lbs
Dodge charger: 5100-5900lbs
Yes, those BMWs are insane weights for an "M" ("Motorsport") series.
Especially considering that it's common knowledge in motorsports (although evidently less common than it should be) that more power only increases acceleration performance, but lighter weight increases performance of acceleration, braking, cornering, and tyre wear! Plus, reducing weight is compounding; take out one chunk of mass, and other components can also be made lighter, e.g., reduce the body mass, and you can fit lighter suspension components, brakes, wheels, tires, etc., and the light-weighting compounds.
Especially considering that it's common knowledge in motorsports (although evidently less common than it should be) that more power only increases acceleration performance, but lighter weight increases performance of acceleration, braking, cornering, and tyre wear! Plus, reducing weight is compounding; take out one chunk of mass, and other components can also be made lighter, e.g., reduce the body mass, and you can fit lighter suspension components, brakes, wheels, tires, etc., and the light-weighting compounds.
Only if you drive like an idiot. We're at 70,000 km on original tires on our Tesla.
I believe you're being unfairly downvoted. While true that Teslas and other fully electrics, due to weight and torque, /can/ go through tires faster than a fossil car. If you don't drive like a psycho, and rotate the tires in a timely fashion, they last as long as any other tire in my experience.
I drive year-round in a cold/hot climate with winter tires (because I'm too lazy to do the seasonal swap out). It is pretty hard on winter tires to run them in 100F days. But, so far, in the last 7 years of winter tires, I've gone through 2 sets.
Tires are the least of my annoyances with Tesla. Lack of quality control, lack of good customer service, and a fascist dictator at the helm have all prevented me from considering another Telsa.
I drive year-round in a cold/hot climate with winter tires (because I'm too lazy to do the seasonal swap out). It is pretty hard on winter tires to run them in 100F days. But, so far, in the last 7 years of winter tires, I've gone through 2 sets.
Tires are the least of my annoyances with Tesla. Lack of quality control, lack of good customer service, and a fascist dictator at the helm have all prevented me from considering another Telsa.
Title is misleading, if not an outright lie.
The quote they have from Consumer Reports is solely on maintenance cost. Which gets a "no shit" from me. EVs don't need engine maintenance. Brakes last forever due to regenerative breaking.
The quote they have from Consumer Reports is solely on maintenance cost. Which gets a "no shit" from me. EVs don't need engine maintenance. Brakes last forever due to regenerative breaking.
Its the quote that is misleading. They picked the one paragraph in the CR article this just mentions maintenance. Everyplace else says "maintenance and repairs". In particular the chart of costs by brand they copied from the CR article is titled "Maintenance and Repair Cost by Brand" there.
> Brakes last forever due to regenerative breaking.
Regeneranive braking is 1/100 of a normal brake ability. It can be upto 10/100 if using resistors instead of the battery as the load.
Regeneranive braking is 1/100 of a normal brake ability. It can be upto 10/100 if using resistors instead of the battery as the load.
Whatever the exact number is, I sometimes go weeks without touching the actual brake pedal. If you’re not driving like a maniac, the gradual regen braking is enough almost all of the time.
Good point, probably you are living not in the city from this list :)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_claimed_to_be_b...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_claimed_to_be_b...
Hah - actually my city (Seattle) is on that list. The regen isn’t enough to slow the car to a stop at the bottom of a hill when there’s an abrupt stop sign, but it’s usually enough to keep speed manageable.
"Telsa"..
[deleted]
eimrine(3)
[0] https://www.cnn.com/2024/03/18/business/hertz-ceo-departure-...