Right to repair; Sustainable prioritisation

[JBee]

I meant it in a self-deprecating way, but ok if you say so!

 

[Crissa]

I’d like to take this opportunity to remind you this forum has a block feature and it is lovely.

Yes, well, sometimes I peek. Or think someone has gotten over their tendency and unblock them for awhile.

-Crissa

PS, you can get the peek ability back; there's a check box on the bottom of your ignoring page.

 

[Morning Star]

PS, you can get the peek ability bag, there's a check box on the bottom of your ignoring page.

Ooh, that’s a handy feature.

 

[zymolysis]

The logic is If it barely breaks, you barely have to fix it, and if you barely have to repair it, you don't need to implement the "right to repair" for it to achieve the same or greater value for the user.

That's like being slightly pregnant. If a part breaks on your vehicle, it's irrelevant how many other people have a vehicle that didn't have that problem. It needs to be repaired (not "barely" repaired). The owner should have the option of repairing himself (if he has the time, tools, experience, and desire), having an independent shop repair it, or taking it to the manufacturer for repair.

 

[JBee]

That's like being slightly pregnant. If a part breaks on your vehicle, it's irrelevant how many other people have a vehicle that didn't have that problem. It needs to be repaired (not "barely" repaired). The owner should have the option of repairing himself (if he has the time, tools, experience, and desire), having an independent shop repair it, or taking it to the manufacturer for repair.

Feel free to read all of my posts for perspective and context. Thx.

I never said "barely repaired" in the context of "barely pregnant". I said well engineering and highly optimized technology can be made so that repairs are a rare event.

There are also things that are not repairable, no matter how much you would like to fix it. The more integrated the design gets for cost and performance, the less people will have the capability to repair. The structural battery pack, castings, and safety cabin are such items, and if not repaired as per manufacturer specification are un-insurable, which in turn is a risk for all those you cause damage to as well. So having the "RtR" doesn't mean they actually physically can repair it, even if they were allowed too.

Example: Would you allow RtR on a airliner or nuclear submarine? With technology development comes a phase where the technology is no longer within the realms of public capability, and public liability is not worth the risk for those few that wish to pursue it.

 

[zymolysis]

Example: Would you allow RtR on a airliner or nuclear submarine? With technology development comes a phase where the technology is no longer within the realms of public capability, and public liability is not worth the risk for those few that wish to pursue it.
[/QUOTE]

Absolutely. I am sure that the US Navy has the right to repair its nuclear submarines. And I am equally sure that Delta and Southwest (and other airlines) have the right to repair their airliners.

 

[Deleted member 3316]

There are also things that are not repairable, no matter how much you would like to fix it. The more integrated the design gets for cost and performance, the less people will have the capability to repair. The structural battery pack, castings, and safety cabin are such items, and if not repaired as per manufacturer specification are un-insurable, which in turn is a risk for all those you cause damage to as well. So having the "RtR" doesn't mean they actually physically can repair it, even if they were allowed too.

This was the whole point of the OP, how much should we be encouraging Tesla to make components repairable.

From the look of the Monroe Live tear down it appears that the structural battery pack is recycleable but not intended to be repairable or reconfigurable.

Other parts like the seats, the screen and interior trim all appear to be DIY fixable, in fact there’s instructions in the user manual of Model 3 to change the air filter.

I think you are quite correct that many components complexity and manufacturing/design make them impractical to repair. As such the remedy for fixing something broken it to dispose of the module and replace with a new part… Headlights,
Tail lights,
Side repeater cameras,
Seat motors,
Charger,
Etc,etc,etc.

Again though, how far should that balance of ease of manufacture and assembly be weighted, at the cost of repairability. (Have you ever tried to work on an old Renault? It was impossible to work on the engine with removing the whole drivetrain from the vehicle.)

Your concern about public liability could be partially addressed with accurate and complete repair instructions included with replacement parts.

I do wish people would chill and try to understand what people are trying to say rather than “win an argument “.
I commend you for your patience.

 

[rr6013]

how far should that balance of ease of manufacture and assembly be weighted, at the cost of repairability

Owned, repaired and fixed those cars(Renault, Hillman, Jag, A-H,etc…) Jag/Hillman/Renault neigh unrepairable unless dissembling the fronted and/or removing drivetrain equals RtR — Fiat laughably wins the piano wire accelerator pedal to rear of car in RtR wars! My point is that the industry went too far(RangeRover airbag-shocks I’m looking at you) and VW(integrated security ECU). Why do I know this?
Cars got sorted out so well that despite RR needing to replace $1500 airbag shocks and VW reinitializing your entire car; the Service business(i.e. profit center dwindled). Few mysteries remain for industry or customer. Both @JBee and @Timoj stand on settled facts.
Customers and repair shops can quickly fix a subset of standard, normal and customary component parts with no manufacturer supervision. Technicians can fix R+R(Remove+Replace) assembly components with readily available stocking parts OTS.
Monroe-level, trained engineers are never going to be available, able or feasible to fix deep-dive elements like computer hardware, FSD software and batterypack level elements. Not the throwaway car but certainly Tesla manufacturer discretion RorR(replace or repair).
Gearheads, Geeks, Dorks and professionals in the know, skilled in how all the twiddly elements go together are either on-your-own or S.O.L. And the caveat assumes all risk including legal, warrantee and liability.
Propose, if you will, RED,BLUE,GREEN and unpainted code for parts. RED==TESLA<FAV> color, BLUE==Technician<R^R, Green==Shop<R+R> with unpainted RtR.

 

[Deleted member 3316]

Cars got sorted out so well that despite RR needing to replace $1500 airbag shocks and VW reinitializing your entire car; the Service business(i.e. profit center dwindled).

Propose, if you will, RED,BLUE,GREEN and unpainted code for parts. RED==TESLA<FAV> color, BLUE==Technician<R^R, Green==Shop<R+R> with unpainted RtR.

You bring up the main obstacle for DIY, needing to get the OEM to reinitialise the vehicle. The system should be robust enough to not require that sort of intervention.
Love your idea about colour coded parts.

 

[Crissa]

I would like an example of actual manufacturer liability for allowing repair.

I don't care that modules are more difficult to repair if they're individually more robust and reliable.

The point of right to repair is that the repair can be made, not that every part isn't glued down when glue is more durable. Just that we don't have to junk an entire car when the manufacturer is finished supporting it.

-Crissa

 

[JBee]

Absolutely. I am sure that the US Navy has the right to repair its nuclear submarines. And I am equally sure that Delta and Southwest (and other airlines) have the right to repair their airliners.

They are also all highly trained technicians with strict manufacturer and FAA processes and procedures and in the case of the military not even under civilian law so RtR would never apply there anyway. They are most definitely not DIYers in any form, but highly trained and qualified engineers.

Would you ride with Tom Cruise in his jet that he was allowed to RtR, but didn't know how, using parts he found on ebay, and would you like that jet to fly over your house?

The point with this part of the conversation, is we the public need to be protected by you the citizen, if you don't know what you are doing. Can you become a medical doctor without a licence and 10-14 years of study and practice?

How qualified does a 5 minute youtube video make you in comparison? What was the literacy rate in the USA again?

Instruction manuals can't miraculously make you knowledgeable and experienced either.

 

[JBee]

I would like an example of actual manufacturer liability for allowing repair.

I don't care that modules are more difficult to repair if they're individually more robust and reliable.

The point of right to repair is that the repair can be made, not that every part isn't glued down when glue is more durable. Just that we don't have to junk an entire car when the manufacturer is finished supporting it.

-Crissa

Then the question becomes should an old jalopy be repaired or; recycled and replaced with a new model made out of recycled materials from the old ones, resulting in a new product that uses less material and has better performance?

A cyclic sustainable, ever reiterative and improving product range that improves with performance each time it remanufactured is several orders of magnitude more effective at reducing waste than giving a fringe group the right to repair. Especially if you do a full lifecycle comparison with all externalities.

Remember "waste" is a artificial man made concept that nature itself does not know so by redefining what waste is, means we instead have resources. (In fact our own biological renewable power station and process relies on collecting municpal waste to work, and therefore reduces landfill)

Look at how far aluminium cans have come, except for the energy to remanufacture them which can come from RE, material loss is minimal, especially in comparison to landfill.

But the best example by far is nature itself, have a look at the carbon cycle and how even we as humans are reiterated and recycled en mass, all without any effort required by us humans at all.

 

[Bill906]

If I have the right to repair the tires on my Ford (I do), and I get a hole in the sidewall of the tire, and I'm not smart enough to know that you don't repair damaged tire sidewalls and so I patch the sidewall hole and put the tire back on my car. My tire then blows out while doing 70MPH on a busy Interstate causing a multi-car accident killing people. That is NOT Ford's liability because Ford gave me the right to repair.

Agreed my hypothetical is a problem. And someone (me in this case) is liable. But right to repair has nothing to do with it. The alternative, if I didn't have the right to repair Ford would put special lug nuts on the wheels so only they could repair them with their special tool. So anytime you got a tire problem you'd have to call Ford to fix.

 

[rr6013]

would like an example of actual manufacturer liability for allowing repair

RtR== #1 Octo/bottle—GHG
R+R==#2 Thermal sensor–Pet mode
R^R==#3 Inverter upgrade-DC/DC
#1 escaped CFC2 to ambient by customer when properly equipped Svc Center has system to vacuum capture for reuse.
#2 Tesla self diagnostic flags passenger compartment sensor replacement. Replaced by garage OTS with Tesla partNo. Car released to customer. Subsequently, pet overheats Petmode doesn’t recognize new part windows don’t burp open to vent heat. Pet dies.
#3 Tesla authorized inverter upgrade to Fast Charging in Albuquerque. Piggyback module snaps into place and plug compatible DC component benchtest = green light. Cust. elective upgrade on IDG airport trip for Int’l flight. ERCOT spike trips Tesla Supercharger but module has no safe mode or polite shutdown. Batterypack is suspended. Airline tickets to Mykonos, 2 wk Yacht charter fee, and 3 day motel6 in Dallas to replace with NEW inverter.

 

[zymolysis]

They are also all highly trained technicians with strict manufacturer and FAA processes and procedures and in the case of the military not even under civilian law so RtR would never apply there anyway. They are most definitely not DIYers in any form, but highly trained and qualified engineers.

Would you ride with Tom Cruise in his jet that he was allowed to RtR, but didn't know how, using parts he found on ebay, and would you like that jet to fly over your house?

A CyberTruck is just another motor vehicle. Individuals and repair shops have been repairing motor vehicles as long as there have been motor vehicles. Whether Tom Cruise can or would attempt to repair his jet really isn't particularly germane, in this forum. Right to repair does apply to the military (I would bet that it is written it into most every procurement contract); but, again, it really isn't germane in this forum.
Furthermore, you appear not to understand that RtR applies not only to individual owners, but to repair shops, as well. As someone who has owned a third party service business for 35 years, manufacturers trying to restrict parts and knowledge is something that I have dealt with for many years.