Tesla Blames Bosch For Automaker’s Largest Recall

MAY 5 2018 BY MARK KANE 19

The costs associated recent recall of around 125,000 Model S due to excessive corrosion in the power steering bolts is to be covered by the parts supplier, according to Tesla.

The problem concerns only very cold climates, but Tesla decided to replace bolts in all Model S made through the end of March 2016.

Other Tesla Recall – Tesla Recalls 53,000 Model S & X For Faulty Parking Brake

Consumer Watchdog Calls For “Recall” Of Tesla Autopilot Feature

BRABUS Zero Emission: Tesla Model S

“We have observed excessive corrosion in the power steering bolts, though only in very cold climates, particularly those that frequently use calcium or magnesium road salts, rather than sodium chloride (table salt). Nonetheless, Tesla plans to replace all early Model S power steering bolts in all climates worldwide to account for the possibility that the vehicle may later be used in a highly corrosive environment.”

The responsibility of the recall will be flipped to Bosch, who in turn will likely look to the supplier of the corrosive bolts to cover losses.

In its Q1 report, Tesla said:

“The recent voluntary recall of 125,000 Model S vehicles related to steering bolt corrosion was not material to our warranty re serves and is expected to be covered by the indemnification obligations of the supplier.”

Bosch did not respond on the matter yet.

We don’t expect that the cost of the recall is very high, but for Tesla it would be important to defray these costs from a profitability standpoint.

Source: Handelsblatt

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

19 Comments on "Tesla Blames Bosch For Automaker’s Largest Recall"

newest oldest most voted
Maybe not the best way to get a good deal with a parts supplier in future deals? Just say it is a part from a supplier, and that they will cover expenses – which they allways will, since it is in all contract. If you look at the close relationship between a huge auto manufacturer, you will see the parts supplier may build their parts factory right next til the assembly plant, to make parts on demand. On top of that a supplier will usually pay for the custom part design AND may pay for some of the design and testing og the vehicle. When that is said, corrotion resistance and cars. . That is a pain, and a constant problem. We have some cars with small GM diesel engines (which have worked perfect over the years. Not one single problem with any of them, and only minor problems with the Opels they are in). . . But if you look under the hood, and see some bolts, nuts and screws that is just totally destroyd by corrotion.. only a few dollar would cover stainless or at least special bolts with no problems. Will be expensive due to extra labour… Read more »

So you are saying Tesla should bite their tongue, take a reputation hit on their already questionable reliability – much of it perceived and perpetuated by their detractor ? As a customer, I would rather know the source of the problem than simply have it corrected under warranty.

No I was saying blame it on a parts supplier – and say they will cover expences.
I would not name the supplier, unless they had messer up on purpose.
What people find out later, and share on the Internet is another thing.

Can be smart to have goodwill from a supplier. Maybe they will cover labour til, and give discount on a future order

I know people who work for a parts supplier, and they deliver parts to many brands.
Sometimes a car manufacturer choose cheaper bolts and nuts, and sometimes they will have the part without cast lines and stuff like that is remove.
Sometimes the part is used in a different way, or location then it was designed for..

Tesla has no choice by law but to name the parts supplier, way back when they first issued the recall. Bosch knows how this works, and their name was already in public docs long before Tesla issued their quarterly statement. Bosch isn’t going to hold it against Tesla that Tesla followed this law exactly as mandated:

“(iv) In the case of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment in which the component that contains the defect or noncompliance was manufactured by a different manufacturer from the reporting manufacturer, the reporting manufacturer shall identify the component and, if known, the component’s country of origin (i.e. final place of manufacture or assembly), the manufacturer and/or assembler of the component by name, business address, and business telephone number.”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/573.6

When struts on Falcon rocket 9 failed (causing an explosion and a payload loss) because they were not tested as manufacturer claimed in the documentation, SpaceX just said that supplier failed to supply the parts according to specification and will pay for the damage. Nobody knows who the supplier was, though Boeing is the most likely suspect.

@John No, you name Bosch because Bosch is in question where as largest parts supplier in the world it decided to forgo making batteries because the initial investments were too high. A green laggard will always, ALWAYS be suspect. Hope Tesla avoids them if possible in the future. Oh, we had the opportunity to do batteries but they didn’t seem like a good investment- not just for us but generally kind of bs…

@ Henry Tesla reliability is not at all questionable if it was they wouldn’t be dominating the high end. Its not a matter of stranding someone. Its due to sponsored shill rags petrol masters trying to conflate the radically superior reliability of electrics, especially Tesla which does the cleanest of all power train designs, with Falcon wing doors and the attempt petrol/ICE to try to pain a radical superiority as a weakness as a projection and to try to shift attention away from their own huge disadvantage.

There are talks about a cooperation between Bayer?, BASF, Continental, at least 3 automakers and 2 other companies I can’t remember. I think the consensus was to wait for a technology change in the batteries. Bosch then thought about making their own for a while, but decided not to. Given their size, they must make smart business choises all the time. There must be profits to be made BUT there must be hard competition too, to push technology forward. Many of these companies are actively investing in battery technology, and do research. If they make a breakthrough, I’m sure they will consider a factory for sure. Buy raw materials, produce and sell a high end products.. That is where the money is. Now they buy cells, or rolls of cell material – and make the batteries in house. LG, Samsung and others have to make a profit too. With massive orders, they can sell cheaper, get economy of scale and still make a healty profit. If the Chinese make a decission to totally dominate the battery market, and have good enough technology – it will be hard for others to compete. They can sell raw materials more expensive to foreign… Read more »

The biggest reason why Tesla would name Bosch is because they have to by US law when they issued the recall. Tesla simply never had any choice but to follow the law and name Bosch, but that doesn’t stop the trolls from believing they know better in an attempt to attack Tesla from any direction possible:

“(iv) In the case of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment in which the component that contains the defect or noncompliance was manufactured by a different manufacturer from the reporting manufacturer, the reporting manufacturer shall identify the component and, if known, the component’s country of origin (i.e. final place of manufacture or assembly), the manufacturer and/or assembler of the component by name, business address, and business telephone number.”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/573.6

Where do they replace these?
Do they have enough service centers to do this quickly?

Why would Tesla rush to quickly replace bolts in all their cars in warm regions where they aren’t even showing any signs of corrosion yet, and are just being replaced out of an abundance of caution that some day they MAY be used in a cold region? This is the kind of thing that most car makers would schedule for the next scheduled maintenance cycle

That is what it is for my car. They will take it on the next planned service.

GM and Ford have large dealer networks.

Concern Troll is Concerned!!

Go troll elsewhere.

This seems odd, since the power steering rack on those units is made by ZF. Did Bosch supply the bolts?

I think Bosch bought ZF – at least that is what I read somewhere …

Yep. 2014.

Matthew James Thompson
The supplier has a responsibility to ensure that their product meets the requirements for their customer, regardless of who supplied the supplier with the bolts. It is no different in my job: Amphenol is responsible for the whole connector, even if the contacts were made by a separate supplier and the final part was assembled by a separate distributor. If Amphenol supplied the military with a bad connector and an F-35 loses its windshield wiper functionality (hypothetical since AFAIK fighter jets don’t have windshield wipers) then Amphenol has to make it right. The military doesn’t want excuses, they just want the problem resolved and proof that it won’t happen again. If they need to get involved any deeper, it costs the program a lot more, and delays compound, and everybody gets thrown under the bus. I mean EVERYBODY, including me, the technician who ran qualification testing. Same goes for commercial. It is in Tesla’s best interest to say “Listen, the problem lies with Bosch. We will make it right, but we must work with Bosch to make sure they get it right, and they will work with their supplier to make sure they get it right. Beyond our supplier and… Read more »

‘Saying “It’s Bosch’s fault” isn’t illegal’

That’s absolutely true. It would actually be illegal if they DID NOT name Bosch as manufacturer. US recall laws mandate that Tesla names Bosch, including Bosch’s address, and Bosch’s phone number in the recall:

“(iv) In the case of motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment in which the component that contains the defect or noncompliance was manufactured by a different manufacturer from the reporting manufacturer, the reporting manufacturer shall identify the component and, if known, the component’s country of origin (i.e. final place of manufacture or assembly), the manufacturer and/or assembler of the component by name, business address, and business telephone number.”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/573.6

Handelsblatt acts like this is the first we are finding out that Bosch was the manufacturer of the part. But this has been public knowledge in the public record dating back to March when Tesla was legally required to name Bosch as the contractor who built the part. Here is just one of the public records with this information in it:

https://tesla.oemdtc.com/Recall/18V204/RCAK-18V204-4745.pdf