Road Damage to Rocker Fairing

[CyberGus]

Tho Cybergus's idea of a different material is an interesting one.

I get called "interesting" a lot

Sponsored

 

[DoberManPin-Sure]

I've now had to replace 3 of the 4 tire-leading fairing. Passenger's side (front and back) knocked off by tire debris I saw but couldn't avoid at freeway speeds when returning home from CrossFit Game, and Driver's side (front) later knocked off by debris I couldn't see when headed to the gym at 5 a.m. until I had already hit it.

Before hearing my explanation, the Service Center tech said lots of people back or drive into curbs since the CT rides fairly low.

I've had lots of relatively low-riding vehicles and I've never had damage of this kind caused by tire debris. The frequency in the few months I've had the CT is also not acceptable. There has to be a better fix. I'll keep my eyes and ears open for aftermarket alternatives. Allowing us to drive a medium height might resolve--or at least reduce the frequency of--the issue, but admittedly might create others issues (e.g., aerodynamics? handling? other?).

 

[AirShrike]

I've now had to replace 3 of the 4 tire-leading fairing. Passenger's side (front and back) knocked off by tire debris I saw but couldn't avoid at freeway speeds when returning home from CrossFit Game, and Driver's side (front) later knocked off by debris I couldn't see when headed to the gym at 5 a.m. until I had already hit it.

Before hearing my explanation, the Service Center tech said lots of people back or drive into curbs since the CT rides fairly low.

I've had lots of relatively low-riding vehicles and I've never had damage of this kind caused by tire debris. The frequency in the few months I've had the CT is also not acceptable. There has to be a better fix. I'll keep my eyes and ears open for aftermarket alternatives. Allowing us to drive a medium height might resolve--or at least reduce the frequency of--the issue, but admittedly might create others issues (e.g., aerodynamics? handling? other?).

Where are you ordering the leading fairings from. I can find the rear wheel rockers (1851439-00-B) on the parts catalog but not the front ones.

 

[DoberManPin-Sure]

Where are you ordering the leading fairings from. I can find the rear wheel rockers (1851439-00-B) on the parts catalog but not the front ones.

Tesla Service Center did it for me, including installation.

 

[rbalkun]

Just order a couple and keep them in your garage

 

[mongo]

Where are you ordering the leading fairings from. I can find the rear wheel rockers (1851439-00-B) on the parts catalog but not the front ones.

I ordered through service center.
Keep in mind left/right are different numbers.
https://epc.tesla.com/en-US/catalog...emGroups/61ace378-9bbb-48c6-a90f-6b5eeb8e1fff
Fronts are part of bumper:
2
FRONT FASCIA FAIRING ASSEMBLY - LEFT HAND
1780809-00-C Sold by Tesla; None 1 1
3
FRONT FASCIA FAIRING ASSEMBLY - RIGHT HAND
1780812-00-C Sold by Tesla; None 1 1

 

[Crissa]

I've had lots of relatively low-riding vehicles and I've never had damage of this kind caused by tire debris. The frequency in the few months I've had the CT is also not acceptable.

It's sample bias plus the aero cover is designed to break free in a collision.

Like, my car isn't really a ticket magnet or a crash magnet - but in its first two years of having it I was involved in, or was next to, four different collisions and two tickets. Two additional collisions that didn't physically involve my car may not have happened had we not been there: two road rage incidents where the other driver lost control of their vehicle and hit one next to us instead.

Of the others... One was a dog that hit the car (literally, tore off the rear bumper) and another was a stick that pulled the brake line off the clips it was on after popping up just right to slip behind the skid plate. Another was a pickup failed to merge and took off a mirror, and another was a pickup that rolled down a hill and hit the car while parked.

It was just random chance (and two off-duty officers with nothing better to do than pick our car out of a line of faster vehicles.)

It wasn't the car, per se. I have had two collisions more since, someone backing into it in packing lots, but it's now been twelve years.

Hitting debris that can break the panels isn't an everyday thing - but it's gonna happen to someone. Unfortunately it was you.

-Crissa

 

[DoberManPin-Sure]

It's sample bias plus the aero cover is designed to break free in a collision.

Like, my car isn't really a ticket magnet or a crash magnet - but in its first two years of having it I was involved in, or was next to, four different collisions and two tickets. Two additional collisions that didn't physically involve my car may not have happened had we not been there: two road rage incidents where the other driver lost control of their vehicle and hit one next to us instead.

Of the others... One was a dog that hit the car (literally, tore off the rear bumper) and another was a stick that pulled the brake line off the clips it was on after popping up just right to slip behind the skid plate. Another was a pickup failed to merge and took off a mirror, and another was a pickup that rolled down a hill and hit the car while parked.

It was just random chance (and two off-duty officers with nothing better to do than pick our car out of a line of faster vehicles.)

It wasn't the car, per se. I have had two collisions more since, someone backing into it in packing lots, but it's now been twelve years.

Hitting debris that can break the panels isn't an everyday thing - but it's gonna happen to someone. Unfortunately it was you.

-Crissa

Crissa we definitely agree on the unfortunate part, but your "sample bias" assertion is a misuse of the term. I haven't had statistics since my undergraduate studies many decades ago, so I refreshed my recollection:

"In statistics, sampling bias is a bias in which a sample is collected in such a way that some members of the intended population have a lower or higher sampling probability than others. It results in a biased sample of a population in which all individuals, or instances, were not equally likely to have been selected."​

There are no variables that make me a population member (i.e., CT/CB owners) with a higher sampling probability than others. In fact, my guess is that I drive fewer miles than most owners . . . with a relatively short commute and limited longer trips. That amplifies my experience, it doesn't dilute or discount it.

The fact that I didn't start this thread and that it contains several other owners who have had the same or similar issues suggests the CT has room for improvement in this area, including @CyberGus' alternative material solution that--like you--I found interesting. It seems a rubber alternative would still repel the rocks/tire debris, but "give" enough to not warrant the tearing-away so many of us have experienced. (And, yes, the tearing away may save us from a bigger issue, but that doesn't mean the design, as a whole, is a good one.)

Again, 2 incidents (3 fairing breakages) in just a few months of ownership versus less than a handful in the course of 45 years of driving supports the position that there's an issue leaving room for improvement here . . . whether via alternative materials, a slightly higher ride height or likely countless other things more creative people than me could devise.

Staying tuned to aftermarket alternatives.

 

[no%X#XMVk65v#cq]

I wish they sold a small cap for the bolt holes and indention there. I would take mine off all together front and back.

Agree. I just need an endcap.

 

[Crissa]

There are no variables that make me a population member (i.e., CT/CB owners) with a higher sampling probability than others. In fact,
...
Again, 2 incidents (3 fairing breakages) in just a few months of ownership versus less than a handful in the course of 45 years of driving supports the position that...

...You're confusing anecdote with statistics, and anecdote is a sample bias fallacy.

Sample bias just means the sample was biased, it does not posit there was a reason for the bias, just that is the most commonly there is a reason.

'So, uh, we did the green study again and got no link. It was probably a--''RESEARCH CONFLICTED ON GREEN JELLY BEAN/ACNE LINK; MORE STUDY RECOMMENDED!'

-Crissa

 

[DoberManPin-Sure]

...You're confusing anecdote with statistics, and anecdote is a sample bias fallacy.

Sample bias just means the sample was biased, it does not posit there was a reason for the bias, just that is the most commonly there is a reason.

'So, uh, we did the green study again and got no link. It was probably a--''RESEARCH CONFLICTED ON GREEN JELLY BEAN/ACNE LINK; MORE STUDY RECOMMENDED!'

-Crissa

I'm not confusing anything. You're trying to exclude samples within the population because you don't like the implication and you're equally wrongly dismissing them as anecdotes when they're core to the question at hand and supported by the weight of the issues experienced by others--volitionally ignoring the apparent frequency of incidents within that sample, even if they may not equate to my two incidents and three replacements in a handful of months.

The facts based on the evidence at hand are that the faring design sucks and has vast room for improvement. Another fact is I love my CT/CB and wouldn't trade it for any other vehicle.

One can simultaneously be a huge fan and articulate objective problems (i.e., not be a perpetual apologist). Our beloved CTs/CBs can be improved for future buyers when these painfully clear design issues are highlighted so Tesla can address them.

Carry on. . . .

 

[Crissa]

I'm not confusing anything. You're trying to exclude samples within the population because you don't like the implication and...

You're asserting things that did not happen.

All of your anecdotes show damage which, if they happened to my car, would take damage.

And yet, only one car in my decades of driving off road, have I broken a slider panel.

It's an anecdote.

I'm not excluding the possibility that they break off more easily - or even that they probably should come off more easily. They stick out to give you range! Sticking out is bad for durability.

I'm not sure what you're expecting. If you want to take the range hit, take them off. But those additional miles add up.

-Crissa

 

[DoberManPin-Sure]

You're asserting things that did not happen.

All of your anecdotes show damage which, if they happened to my car, would take damage.

And yet, only one car in my decades of driving off road, have I broken a slider panel.

It's an anecdote.

I'm not excluding the possibility that they break off more easily - or even that they probably should come off more easily. They stick out to give you range! Sticking out is bad for durability.

I'm not sure what you're expecting. If you want to take the range hit, take them off. But those additional miles add up.

-Crissa

@Crissa, respectfully, you opine on seemingly every post on this forum, "gifting" its members with your "wisdom" and opinion, which is typically pretty solid and helpful IMHO. Here, however, you've tried to "school" a forum member with a line of assertions that adds no value to the discourse and, worse, is simply wrong.

My and other posters' experience with our CT's is at the core of the matter being discussed, not anecdotal. What you just added about your prior experiences could be construed as "anecdotal" to the CT matter--as could my 45-years of driving experience in other vehicles--but, those experiences are reasonable bases for comparison in the subject context.

In this context, the most expensive non-RV vehicle I've ever purchased (this CB beat my first year TRX by $10K+) has, by far, the worst experience with road debris encounters. My position is and my expectations are that a $120K vehicle should not have 3 dangling parts requiring replacement after 2 not unexpected, not uncommon and usually inconsequential encounters with tire debris in 5 months of ownership. My hopes are that future iterations have a different, improved design and that the plethora of aftermarket creatives in this forum devise a fix for the early adopters. Not unreasonable expectations or asks.

I have a demanding career (a significant portion of which involves arguing/debate) and an active life outside of it, so the last thing I want to be doing in my limited spare time is arguing with another CT-lover. Setting expectations that even if you reply as you approach your 20,000th post here, I may not reply back (i.e., I don't need the last word) . . . or at least it will be significantly delayed. My further hope is that we just move on, agreeing to disagree about whether the experiences and pictures shared in this thread are typical or atypical or worrisome or "anecdotally" irrelevant.

Happy Saturday! Ride on. . . .

 

[Outdoors]

@Crissa, respectfully, you opine on seemingly every post on this forum, "gifting" its members with your "wisdom" and opinion, which is typically pretty solid and helpful IMHO. Here, however, you've tried to "school" a forum member with a line of assertions that adds no value to the discourse and, worse, is simply wrong.

My and other posters' experience with our CT's is at the core of the matter being discussed, not anecdotal. What you just added about your prior experiences could be construed as "anecdotal" to the CT matter--as could my 45-years of driving experience in other vehicles--but, those experiences are reasonable bases for comparison in the subject context.

In this context, the most expensive non-RV vehicle I've ever purchased (this CB beat my first year TRX by $10K+) has, by far, the worst experience with road debris encounters. My position is and my expectations are that a $120K vehicle should not have 3 dangling parts requiring replacement after 2 not unexpected, not uncommon and usually inconsequential encounters with tire debris in 5 months of ownership. My hopes are that future iterations have a different, improved design and that the plethora of aftermarket creatives in this forum devise a fix for the early adopters. Not unreasonable expectations or asks.

I have a demanding career (a significant portion of which involves arguing/debate) and an active life outside of it, so the last thing I want to be doing in my limited spare time is arguing with another CT-lover. Setting expectations that even if you reply as you approach your 31,000th post here, I may not reply back (i.e., I don't need the last word) . . . or at least it will be significantly delayed. My further hope is that we just move on, agreeing to disagree about whether the experiences and pictures shared in this thread are typical or atypical or worrisome or "anecdotally" irrelevant.

Happy Saturday! Ride on. . . .

Sometimes it is hard to fix something that posts on average like 15-20 times a day. A good hard ignore by the mod removes all those 31,000 posts. You don't see them. Those posts just add gibberish, and are of little value.

 

[Crissa]

Here, however, you've tried to "school" a forum member with a line of assertions that adds no value to the discourse and, worse, is simply wrong.

...

My position is and my expectations are that a $120K vehicle

Your position is that you've based your position on incorrect facts.

That's great.

It's not a $120k truck.

And you're allowed to take parts off you don't find value in.



-Crissa

Sponsored