This just in.
Teardown expert Sandy Munro is being threatened with a lawsuit for his recent dissection of a Tesla Model 3.
***UPDATE - 8-21-2018 - New info revealed in Tweet embedded directly below:
Update: heard back from Sandy Munro by email. He said he’s under threat of being sued— not from Tesla, nor from any bulls or bears. It’s from a corporation that’s unnamed for now. He’d signed a contract with them that is limiting his ability to do press. h/t @autonoline https://t.co/y4azXyeQAG
— Lora Kolodny (@lorakolodny) August 21, 2018
Flip to 12 minutes and 54 seconds in the video for the breaking info, which comes to us via Autoline's John McElroy.
Munro Associates, which performed the much-publicized teardown of the Model 3, is being sued by an entity connected with that work. We don't yet know who's behind the potential lawsuit against Munro though.
Back when Munro first performed the teardown, Tesla issued a rather lengthy response. We've reproduced it again here in its entirety, though in no way are we implying Tesla is connected to this latest development, but rather we're including it as it's the only official comment made by the automaker in connection to the teardown.
“The primary car evaluated by Munro was built in 2017. We have significantly refined our production processes since then, and while there’s always room for improvement, our data already shows that Model 3 quality is rapidly getting better.”
“Since we began shipping Model 3 last year, we have been very focused on refining and tuning both part and body manufacturing processes. The result being that the standard deviation of all gaps and offsets across the entire car has improved, on average, by nearly 40%, with particular gap improvements visible in the area of the trunk, rear lamps and rear quarter panel. Today, Model 3 panel gaps are competitive with Audi, BMW, and Mercedes models, but in the spirit of relentless improvement, we are working to make them even tighter.”
“The U.S. government found Model S and Model X to have the lowest probability of injury of any cars it had ever tested, and Model 3 was designed with the same commitment to safety. While there’s always room for refinement of cost and mass, which we are already improving, electric cars have unique safety requirements to prevent intrusion into the battery, and Model 3 was also designed to meet the latest small overlap front crash requirements that other reference vehicles may not have. We stand behind our physical crash testing and our computer simulations of it, which have been remarkably accurate, and the safety that they demonstrate. The safety of our customers is more important than any other metric.”