Tesla: Third Model S Fire In Past Two Months

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
Move over Lamborghini and Ferrari, we have a newcomer in the "burn to the ground for any ol' reason" category. The culprit this time seems to be a vehicle destroying trailer hitch. Yes, I said trailer hitch. :eek:

The fire resulted from an accident when the car hit what was believed to be a trailer hitch, according to company spokesman Patrick Jones. "After the impact, the car safety systems warned the driver about the incident and instructed him to pull over to the side of the road which he safely did," said Jones. who said a team of investigators is traveling to the site of the accident.
Click to expand...
 
OH MY GOD

The driver got into an accident and the car told him to pull over and get out, then caught on fire. What a death trap. These things are just spontaneously combusting all over the place!
 
152,000 car fires per year in the us. 254 million cars. .059% catch on fire every year

3 Tesla fires. 18,200 cars sold. Thats .016%

what a disaster
 
maverikv said:
152,000 car fires per year in the us. 254 million cars. .059% catch on fire every year

3 Tesla fires. 18,200 cars sold. Thats .016%

what a disaster
Click to expand...

Going from your total stat, that's... 17 gas vehicle fires PER HOUR.

Yeah I think Tesla (not to mention GM and Nissan) has some serious work catching up to that.
 
Parja said:
But what's the stat for cars less than 18 months old?
Click to expand...

What difference does it make how old they are? These cars aren't bursting into flames just sitting there, they are smashing into things
 
maverikv said:
152,000 car fires per year in the us. 254 million cars. .059% catch on fire every year

3 Tesla fires. 18,200 cars sold. Thats .016%

what a disaster
Click to expand...

3 in 1000 IC engine vehicle accidents result in fires and that is all cars. Not just bright shiny new $100,000 cars but 15 year old clunkers held together with bubble gum and twine.
 
jpm100 said:
3 in 1000 IC engine vehicle accidents result in fires and that is all cars. Not just bright shiny new $100,000 cars but 15 year old clunkers held together with bubble gum and twine.
Click to expand...

What difference does it make what its held together with if a steel plate punctures the fuel reserve
 
maverikv said:
OH MY GOD

The driver got into an accident and the car told him to pull over and get out, then caught on fire. What a death trap. These things are just spontaneously combusting all over the place!
Click to expand...

The pictures I've seen is what burns badly is the goo that leaks out of the battery and accumulates on the ground. So if you get in an accident with a Tesla KEEP MOVING. DON'T STOP. Maybe Keanu Reeves can pull you out one at a time onto a movinge dolly.
 
maverikv said:
What difference does it make what its held together with if a steel plate punctures the fuel reserve
Click to expand...
How thick are you to seriously ask that?

Mechanically defective cars are more prone to fire. The longer a car has been on the road and the more hands its been through, the more likely some age or [lack of proper] maintenance or prior accident related defect which will contribute to it potential for catching fire.
 
I'd still take one over pretty much any other car in the world, any day.

Besides, Compare this to how many gas fueled cars burst into flames after accidents, and you are looking at something more realistic.

The Tesla Model S is hands down the safest car in the world to be in during an accident.
 
jpm100 said:
How thick are you to seriously ask that?

Mechanically defective cars are more prone to fire. The longer a car has been on the road and the more hands its been through, the more likely some age or [lack of proper] maintenance or prior accident related defect which will contribute to it potential for catching fire.
Click to expand...

I'm talking specifically about the kind of accidents that the Teslas that caught fire have gotten into

You don't think any car, would for example, catch fire if a piece of steel punctured the gas tank?
 
jpm100 said:
How thick are you to seriously ask that?

Mechanically defective cars are more prone to fire. The longer a car has been on the road and the more hands its been through, the more likely some age or [lack of proper] maintenance or prior accident related defect which will contribute to it potential for catching fire.
Click to expand...

Pray tell, how much maintenance exactly do you do on your gas tank? If a large metal object is shaped properly and has sufficient force to breach the metal, it's going to do so whether you have a squeaky serpentine belt or not.
 
phdt2.jpg
 
I have the immediate fix for Tesla drivers

DON'T RUN OVER SH*T ON THE ROAD

(driving in WA state and not catching fire since 1979)
 
maverikv said:
What difference does it make how old they are? These cars aren't bursting into flames just sitting there, they are smashing into things
Click to expand...

I would argue that newer vehicles meet higher safety specifications and thus are less prone to things happening that would result in the vehicle catching on fire.

Now if you could just provide the statistics, it would be fairly simple to determine if there's any correlation there or not.
 
"For consumers concerned about fire risk, there should be absolutely zero doubt that it is safer to power a car with a battery than a large tank of highly flammable liquid," Tesla CEO Elon Musk wrote.​

Lithium batteries are filled with highly flammable liquid. I just loss all respect for his intelligence.
 
Parja said:
I would argue that newer vehicles meet higher safety specifications and thus are less prone to things happening that would result in the vehicle catching on fire.

Now if you could just provide the statistics, it would be fairly simple to determine if there's any correlation there or not.
Click to expand...

Are they three times less prone to things happening that would result in a fire?
 
Draktharbar said:
"For consumers concerned about fire risk, there should be absolutely zero doubt that it is safer to power a car with a battery than a large tank of highly flammable liquid," Tesla CEO Elon Musk wrote.​

Lithium batteries are filled with highly flammable liquid. I just loss all respect for his intelligence.
Click to expand...

I thought these batteries didn't have metallic lithium in them
 
maverikv said:
152,000 car fires per year in the us. 254 million cars. .059% catch on fire every year

3 Tesla fires. 18,200 cars sold. Thats .016%

what a disaster
Click to expand...

Thank you for looking up the statistics - I was wondering about that myself.

Although, as others mention, I am curious what the statistics are for cars of equal age - and per 100K miles driven...
 
maverikv said:
OH MY GOD

The driver got into an accident and the car told him to pull over and get out, then caught on fire. What a death trap. These things are just spontaneously combusting all over the place!
Click to expand...
Consider that these cars are:
1) Really expensive
2) Really new and really low mileage
3) Very low production

And yet three of the damn things have not only caught fire, but have caught fire to such an extent that firefighters arriving on the scene in absolutely no time (likely because the rich owners were driving in rich neighborhoods) were struggling to try and contain the fire (spraying water seemed to only make the flames higher).

Fail.
 
Ducman69 said:
Consider that these cars are:
1) Really expensive
2) Really new and really low mileage
3) Very low production

And yet three of the damn things have not only caught fire, but have caught fire to such an extent that firefighters arriving on the scene in absolutely no time (likely because the rich owners were driving in rich neighborhoods) were struggling to try and contain the fire (spraying water seemed to only make the flames higher).

Fail.
Click to expand...

Maybe people should stop crashing them into things then
 
03grandam said:
QFT. Why pay that much for a car and not pay real good attention to what your doing so to avoid stupid shit.
Click to expand...

I don't know why people on this site love to hate on Tesla this much.

For the techies, the car is a dream. Have you seen the inside of it? Its amazing!

For the right wingers, its an American car. Go America!

For the liberals, its electric. Yay electric cars!

The only reason I can see to be a hater is if you're a sniveling corporate apologist
 
maverikv said:
I thought these batteries didn't have metallic lithium in them
Click to expand...

You're right, they don't have metallic lithium in them. But they're still using a flammable organic solvent to suspend the lithium salts. Metallic lithium will ignite from contact with moisture, which is why so many fires happened with early generation laptop batteries. The solvent used is still flammable, but requires an additional heat source to ignite, often from a short circuit in the battery. This was a step in the right direction, but still hazardous.

The real problem with lithium ion batteries is that collisions can cause the separator in the battery cells to be ruptured, creating a short circuit. This alone won't cause an immediate fire. But if you then run the battery for a while and it gets hot enough, it will eventually explode and/or ignite. Since you have a bank of batteries, if one starts on fire, they will likely all burn.

There are two reasons why this is worse than a gas tank. First of all, puncturing a gas tank will not ignite it, whereas puncturing a battery can cause it to ignite. For a gas tank, you still need an ignition source. Also with a gas tank, you get the lovely smell and pooling mess under your car to help you realize there's a problem. Second problem is that the batteries do not ignite immediately unless there is another ignition source. Someone will drive off after an accident not knowing one of the batteries is damaged, and after enough use, may ignite. Users need to check batteries for damage after a collision, and disconnect them if they are damaged in any way, even if not externally punctured, because they could have an internal puncture and short circuit. I'm going to guess most users would not be aware of this.
 
Envy.

Every time one of these cars are involved in an accident, it's national news.

There are thousands upon thousands of car fires every year, including new cars, and suddenly it become a big deal.
 
Draktharbar said:
You're right, they don't have metallic lithium in them. But they're still using a flammable organic solvent to suspend the lithium salts. Metallic lithium will ignite from contact with moisture, which is why so many fires happened with early generation laptop batteries. The solvent used is still flammable, but requires an additional heat source to ignite, often from a short circuit in the battery. This was a step in the right direction, but still hazardous.

The real problem with lithium ion batteries is that collisions can cause the separator in the battery cells to be ruptured, creating a short circuit. This alone won't cause an immediate fire. But if you then run the battery for a while and it gets hot enough, it will eventually explode and/or ignite. Since you have a bank of batteries, if one starts on fire, they will likely all burn.

There are two reasons why this is worse than a gas tank. First of all, puncturing a gas tank will not ignite it, whereas puncturing a battery can cause it to ignite. For a gas tank, you still need an ignition source. Also with a gas tank, you get the lovely smell and pooling mess under your car to help you realize there's a problem. Second problem is that the batteries do not ignite immediately unless there is another ignition source. Someone will drive off after an accident not knowing one of the batteries is damaged, and after enough use, may ignite. Users need to check batteries for damage after a collision, and disconnect them if they are damaged in any way, even if not externally punctured, because they could have an internal puncture and short circuit. I'm going to guess most users would not be aware of this.
Click to expand...



Except unlike your gas tank, the teslas have systems to monitor the batteries for these issues and alert the driver.
 
Machupo said:
Pray tell, how much maintenance exactly do you do on your gas tank? If a large metal object is shaped properly and has sufficient force to breach the metal, it's going to do so whether you have a squeaky serpentine belt or not.
Click to expand...

What usually causes IC fires has very little to do with the gas tank. It's because usually there is some fuel leak or oil leak near the engine where is gets hot or is exposed to electricity where it can be ignited.

My engine desperately needs it's head gasket and the main bearing replaced. (It has 220,000+ miles) and that oil is leaking all over the hot stuff like the exhaust manifold. I refuse to keep it in the garage for that reason.

Any way, age does contribute to fires as parts wear down. It's very very very rare any new car catches fire.
 
Draktharbar said:
You're right, they don't have metallic lithium in them. But they're still using a flammable organic solvent to suspend the lithium salts. Metallic lithium will ignite from contact with moisture, which is why so many fires happened with early generation laptop batteries. The solvent used is still flammable, but requires an additional heat source to ignite, often from a short circuit in the battery. This was a step in the right direction, but still hazardous.

The real problem with lithium ion batteries is that collisions can cause the separator in the battery cells to be ruptured, creating a short circuit. This alone won't cause an immediate fire. But if you then run the battery for a while and it gets hot enough, it will eventually explode and/or ignite. Since you have a bank of batteries, if one starts on fire, they will likely all burn.

There are two reasons why this is worse than a gas tank. First of all, puncturing a gas tank will not ignite it, whereas puncturing a battery can cause it to ignite. For a gas tank, you still need an ignition source. Also with a gas tank, you get the lovely smell and pooling mess under your car to help you realize there's a problem. Second problem is that the batteries do not ignite immediately unless there is another ignition source. Someone will drive off after an accident not knowing one of the batteries is damaged, and after enough use, may ignite. Users need to check batteries for damage after a collision, and disconnect them if they are damaged in any way, even if not externally punctured, because they could have an internal puncture and short circuit. I'm going to guess most users would not be aware of this.
Click to expand...

And part of the problems Boeing 787 is having with it's Lithium batteries. Containing those kind of fires is NOT easy.

BTW: Gasoline in liquid form does not burn. It has to become vaporous before it can be ignited. I saw a firefighter drop a lit match in a very small pool of gasoline once and it went out. That's why gasoline fires SWOOSH and burn instead of go BOOOOOOOOM. They have to vaporize the fuel first from the heat. That takes time. And it's another reason why fuel truck fires can last a very long time.
 
http://www.nfpa.org/research/statistical-reports/vehicles/vehicle-fire-trends-and-patterns

"Older vehicles were more likely to have a fire caused by mechanical or electrical failures."
DigitalGriffin is correct.

"Collisions or overturns were factors in only 3% of the fires."
This is the stat I would love to see compared to Tesla vehicles. I'm betting, due to the nature of batteries and how they ignite, that there is a higher chance of ignition from a collision with a Tesla than there is when gasoline-powered vehicles are involved. I concede to Biznatch that the warning system would likely make Teslas safer (assuming people respond to them sensibly), but I think that crashing a Tesla might cause more property damage on average. Seems reasonable to me anyway, but I would need a breakdown of the fire statistics for Teslas to know one way or the other.

"One-third (35%) of non-fatal highway vehicle fires injuries occurred when civilians attempted to fight the fire themselves."
People don't always act sensibly to warnings or fires.
 
Awesome cars. God I wish my Prius would burn to the ground.

I had a mint 2003 Mazdaspeed Protege. It was pretty nice--600 watt budget SQ system. Good electrical system.

Then I got married.

Then I had a kid.

Now I have my wife's old 2009 color-of-pavement Prius and my asshole nephew has my Protege (money was spent before I even sold it).

Better yet maybe I'll die in the fire if the ghastly thing does suddenly explode. :rolleyes:
 
Machupo said:
Pray tell, how much maintenance exactly do you do on your gas tank? If a large metal object is shaped properly and has sufficient force to breach the metal, it's going to do so whether you have a squeaky serpentine belt or not.
Click to expand...
Pray tell, how does a car run if gas only stays in the gas tank? There's fuel lines and fuel rails and that stupid recapture device BTW, gas tanks don't catch fire easily. There's not enough air inside to get anything serious going in a sustained way. For there to be fire, the tank or the fuel delivery system need to be punctured and exposed to an ignition source. There are standards in play that new cars must meet. But like is obvious an older car is more likely to have a loss of integrity in the fuel system and leak oil an older car is more likely to ignition sources.

BTW you realize that car fires not only don't start in the fuel tank, they often start having nothing do with fuel at the onset. A shorting electrical system can start fires. And this blows people's minds but one of the most flammable things in your car is your engine coolant. If it hits the catalytic converter which is up over 1000 degrees that will vaporize the water and glycol from each other and the glycol will go off crazy. Not to mention power stearing and brake fluids being flamable. Much of the exhaust system in a car is far hotter than the engine hot enough if the right material or liquid touches it, instant fire.

There is so much that can go wrong in a car that 3 out of 1000 is quite an accomplishment really. And out of those three probably most have nothing to at the onset with the fuel tank being scratched.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
And part of the problems Boeing 787 is having with it's Lithium batteries. Containing those kind of fires is NOT easy.

BTW: Gasoline in liquid form does not burn. It has to become vaporous before it can be ignited. I saw a firefighter drop a lit match in a very small pool of gasoline once and it went out. That's why gasoline fires SWOOSH and burn instead of go BOOOOOOOOM. They have to vaporize the fuel first from the heat. That takes time. And it's another reason why fuel truck fires can last a very long time.
Click to expand...

I thought that's an attribute specific to Diesel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top