Real Story behind Tesla review

[MetroMPG]

For those who want to follow the response of the NYT, here's the blog of the paper's "Public Editor":

The public editor’s office [...] handles questions and comments from readers and investigates matters of journalistic integrity.

Margaret Sullivan - Public Editor's Journal Blog - NYTimes.com

The editor has already posted that she's continuing to look into the Tesla story, although she has also already stated:

I hope to post again Friday with some conclusions but for now, based on a day’s reporting, I will say this much: I reject Mr. Musk’s central contention that Mr. Broder’s Sunday piece was faked

Conflicting Assertions Over an Electric Car Test Drive | The Public Editor - NYTimes.com

[gone-ot]

Yellow journalism at its best? ...or... urinal journalism at its worst?

[TheEnemy]

If I remember correctly on Top Gear they admitted to flogging the living crap out of the roadster, and that they were impressed with it in general.

[jjackstone]

I'm pretty sure that the Model S log being used to refute the reporter's story was simply manufactured at the factory after the ride was already completed. It is not the actual log from the ride.





















GOTCHA

JJ

[NeilBlanchard]

Another point that needs to be made: cold reduces the range of internal combustion cars, too. Quite a bit on shorter trips, in fact. I know my mileage drops by about 20% in the winter vs the summer. Some of that decrease is due to increased aero drag (colder air is denser) and this obviously affects any car, but a lot of it is due to slower warm up time. And if I plug in a block heater, my warm up time would be shortened by enough to save me a fair bit on my mileage.

ICE cars also benefit from being plugged in, is my point.

At 6F (which it apparently was on the night Mr. Broder stayed in the hotel) and say a 4 year old battery or if he left the dome light on or if there was a little water in the tank - what guarantee would Mr. Broder have that the engine would even start; let alone be able to go as far as it would have on the ~1/4 tank of gas?

[MetroMPG]

FYI, here's the NYT public editor's position on the Broder/Tesla supercharger article after interviewing all parties:

http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.co...in-tesla-test/

[NeilBlanchard]

Well, they seem to have taken the squishy route... If Mr. Broder was "imprecise" then he should admit that he made several mistakes, and make a written retraction and apology. If he headlined his article and included an embarrassing picture of the Model S on a flatbed - that was actually caused by him and not any deficiencies in the car, then his article is worse than "imprecise", in my opinion.

By the way, I think that Zachary Shahan at CleanTechnica has an interesting point:

2nd Thing I've Learned From The Tesla--NYTimes Firestorm - CleanTechnica

Basically, most people have habits and assumptions and take things for granted with internal combustion engined cars - and until we drive an EV for a while, we only see their disadvantages, and we don't appreciate their strengths.

[niky]

Still... it looks like he went to a whole lot of trouble to make a point that wasn't there.

Nobody in their right mind will fill a gasoline car with less gasoline than it would take to get someplace... and still try to make the trip. No matter how inconvenient it would be to get that gas. (Say, you're out of cash, have no card, and need to make an ATM withdrawal three blocks away from the gas station to buy gas.)

[wdb]

Originally Posted by NeilBlanchard

If Mr. Broder was "imprecise" then he should admit that he made several mistakes, and make a written retraction and apology. If he headlined his article and included an embarrassing picture of the Model S on a flatbed - that was actually caused by him and not any deficiencies in the car, then his article is worse than "imprecise", in my opinion.

This is also my conclusion; Mr. Broder's own actions, starting with almost willful ignorance of how the car works, turned a challenging test into a sensationalist news piece. I said as much in a comment to the Public Editor's article. They haven't bothered to post it.

[NeilBlanchard]

Reporters should report on facts. How does Ms. Sullivan justify that it matters that Mr. Broder was "unaware that his every move was being monitored"? Is she saying that he would have tried to be more precise if he had only known that Tesla had the hard numbers? What does that say about Mr. Broder's "journalism" let alone his integrity?

Ms. Sullivan than goes on to make an unsubstantiated accusation of Mr. Musk that somehow the numbers are "quite misleading"? How so, Ms. Sullivan?