Study finds Tesla drivers crash more than any other brand — sneaky data tricks hide EV maker's true accident rate in Autopilot Safety Report

[Redaktion]

A recent study found that Tesla tops the list of car brands with the most accidents per driver, despite the company's claims to the contrary. Tesla often boasts about the safety of its vehicles, comparing its numbers to NHTSA data, but the company seems to be using sneaky data tricks to hide the true Tesla accident rate.

https://www.notebookcheck.net/Study-finds-Tesla-drivers-crash-more-than-any-other-brand-sneaky-data-tricks-hide-EV-maker-s-true-accident-rate-in-Autopilot-Safety-Report.785344.0.html

[A]

Clickbait with cherry-picked data from unrelated study about GOOD OR BAD DRIVERS, not SAFE OR UNSAFE CARS. By the end of an article it's kinda clear Tesla's algorithm of accident calculations is more legit, as it uses real accidents and not just car damage, yet author insists unrelated study has more credibility, okay.

Author also "didn't notice" study saying BMW drives have the highest rate of driving under influence by a huge margin, which is by far more concerning.

Competitors' marketing money going strong against Tesla.

[vertigo]

Clickbait with cherry-picked data from unrelated study about GOOD OR BAD DRIVERS, not SAFE OR UNSAFE CARS. By the end of an article it's kinda clear Tesla's algorithm of accident calculations is more legit, as it uses real accidents and not just car damage, yet author insists unrelated study has more credibility, okay.

Author also "didn't notice" study saying BMW drives have the highest rate of driving under influence by a huge margin, which is by far more concerning.

Competitors' marketing money going strong against Tesla.

Agree. I could only make it about halfway through before giving up reading this "article," which is really just garbage reporting on a garbage "study."

Just a couple issues with the study and article:

- Per the author of this article, it's not counting accidents, even, but claims, so broken windows, etc, will count against them. Teslas are more common in more urban areas, where there are going to be more claims like this.

- It counts per driver, not per mile driven. The former is a poor method to measure this statistic, and the latter is much better. Not only that, but this article makes the ridiculous claim that the study counters Teslas data because it shows more "accidents" (again, really claims) per driver which doesn't match up with Teslas data that uses (true) accidents per mile driven. IOW, their data using completely different data doesn't line up...imagine that.

Every day I spend on this site I find it less and less credible. NBC needs to be more demanding of their writers or they're going to find themselves in tabloid territory very soon.

[Paul DeCoux]

"..doesn't distinguish between mild fender benders and more serious crashes."

This should've been a bright, flashing red sign to any self respecting journalist to discard the study as garbage and forget any idea to write a news piece about it.

Yet here we are.

Main stream media reporting is now synonymous to "bought and sold like inner city cheap whores."

[anan]

Oh com on. The article only compares data from within the study. And that study found that Teslas get into more accidents. Sure, maybe Teslas are hated so much that people are going around and breaking windows on parked Teslas and that skews the results. But what is more likely - Teslas are expensive and/or hard to repair. Some people will repair minor damage without involving warranty in order not to raise their premiums. You kinda cannot do that with Teslas as you will not get the parts.
However good is Teslas methodology on calculating accidents they are at fault for comparing it to data sets from a completely different methodology. And it is even stated in the article that both the NHSA and Tesla methodologies likely intersect in the results they track, Tesla shouldn't have compared them. This is likely why Tesla did not publish new data.