Connect with us

News

Drivers think new vehicle tech is hit or miss: study

Credit: Rivian

Published

on

Drivers today seem to be hit or miss on new technology and features that have hit the market in the past few years, as highlighted in a recent user experience study.

On Thursday, J.D. Power released the results of its 2024 U.S. Tech Experience Index (TXI) Study, which showed that drivers praised some newer tech and features in their vehicles—while criticizing others.

Certain AI features were found to be extremely popular amongst users, with one example including smart climate controls. Others, including fingerprint readers and facial recognition, were criticized heavily for their problematic elements, or lack of functionality altogether.

RELATED:

Advertisement

Survey shows that 96% of consumers want to own their vehicle data

Another example of low-rated tech were interior gesture controls, which were found to have 43.4 problems per 100 vehicles, while 21 percent of respondents also said the tech simply lacks functionality.

Other highlights from the study include the fact that owners don’t seem to like passenger screens, while they rated many active driver assistance technologies lower than most advanced driver assistance system features.

It’s worth noting that Tesla, Rivian, and Polestar were not included in the rankings, because J.D. Power ranks only brands with vehicle registrations in all 50 U.S. states. According to the organization, Tesla, Rivian, and Polestar registration data is only available in 35 states.

Advertisement

Despite this, many Tesla owners submitted their experiences, with most respondents sharing enthusiasm for the company’s software platform and tech features. Overall, Tesla’s score on the index, though it isn’t ranked, was higher than other brands, with Rivian and Polestar’s scores both landing well over the study average.

As for ranked brands, Genesis ranked highest overall for premium brands with a score of 584 out of 1,000, while its own parent company Hyundai topped the mass-market category with 518. Luxury brands Lexus and BMW followed Genesis with scores of 535 and 528, respectively. Kia and GMC landed the second- and third-place spots for the mass-market category, with 499 and 439, respectively.

Tesla’s score, though the brand is technically unranked, landed at 786. The company was followed by fellow unranked automakers Rivian (666) and Polestar (578).

You can see the full list of rankings from the J.D. Power study below, or find more information about it here.

Advertisement

Credit: J.D. Power

Automakers can still listen to customers and advance on innovative technologies with future vehicle generations, while either moving away from those that are unnecessary or fixing those that aren’t functional, as highlighted by Kathleen Rizk, J.D. Power Senior Director of User Experience Benchmarking and Technology.

“A strong advanced tech strategy is crucial for all vehicle manufacturers, and many innovative technologies are answering customer needs,” Rizk said. “At the same time, this year’s study makes it clear that owners find some technologies of little use and/or are continually annoying.”

Tesla Superchargers dominate J.D. Power EV Charging Study

What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send your tips to us at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement

Zach is a renewable energy reporter who has been covering electric vehicles since 2020. He grew up in Fremont, California, and he currently lives in Colorado. His work has appeared in the Chicago Tribune, KRON4 San Francisco, FOX31 Denver, InsideEVs, CleanTechnica, and many other publications. When he isn't covering Tesla or other EV companies, you can find him writing and performing music, drinking a good cup of coffee, or hanging out with his cats, Banks and Freddie. Reach out at zach@teslarati.com, find him on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement
Comments

Energy

Tesla Megapack Megafactory in Texas advances with major property sale

Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s planned Megapack factory in Brookshire, Texas has taken a significant step forward, as two massive industrial buildings fully leased to the company were sold to an institutional investor.

In a press release, Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet. The properties are 100% leased to Tesla under a long-term agreement and were acquired by BGO on behalf of an institutional investor.

The two facilities, located at 100 Empire Boulevard in Brookshire, Texas, will serve as Tesla’s new Megafactory dedicated to manufacturing Megapack battery systems.

According to local filings previously reported, Tesla plans to invest nearly $200 million into the site. The investment includes approximately $44 million in facility upgrades such as electrical, utility, and HVAC improvements, along with roughly $150 million in manufacturing equipment.

Advertisement

Building 9, spanning roughly 1 million square feet, will function as the primary manufacturing floor where Megapacks are assembled. Building 10, covering approximately 600,000 square feet, will be dedicated to warehousing and logistics operations, supporting storage and distribution of completed battery systems.

Waller County Commissioners have approved a 10-year tax abatement agreement with Tesla, offering up to a 60% property-tax reduction if the company meets hiring and investment targets. Tesla has committed to employing at least 375 people by the end of 2026, increasing to 1,500 by the end of 2028, as noted in an Austin County News Online report.

The Brookshire Megafactory will complement Tesla’s Lathrop Megafactory in California and expand U.S. production capacity for the utility-scale energy storage unit. Megapacks are designed to support grid stabilization and renewable-energy integration, a segment that has become one of Tesla’s fastest-growing businesses.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error

To address the issue, IF Metall is encouraging Tesla strikers to return the refunded tax amounts to the union.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Europe

A tax correction is set to return two years of income tax payments to Tesla strikers in Sweden, after authorities determined that conflict compensation during a labor dispute should not have been taxed.

The issue is caused by a decision by IF Metall to treat strike compensation for Tesla workers as taxable income during the ongoing labor dispute with Tesla Sweden. That approach has now been reversed following guidance from the Swedish Tax Agency.

Strike compensation is typically tax-free under Sweden’s Income Tax Act, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). However, two years ago, IF Metall’s board decided to classify payments to Tesla strikers as taxable.

“We did it to secure SGI, unemployment insurance and public pension. Those were the risks we saw when the strike had already dragged on,” Kent Bursjöö, financial manager at IF Metall, stated.

Advertisement

According to Bursjöö, the union wanted to ensure that members continued to register earned income with the tax agency, protecting benefits tied to income history. At the end of January, however, the Swedish Tax Agency informed the union that compensation during a labor dispute must be tax-free.

“Of course, we knew that it could be tax-free. But we clearly didn’t know that it couldn’t be taxable,” Bursjöö said.

Following discussions with auditors and tax authorities, IF Metall began correcting the payments. As a result, two years of paid income tax will now be credited back to the affected strikers’ tax accounts. The union will also recover previously paid employer contributions.

However, the correction creates secondary effects. Since the payments will now be treated as tax-free, pension contributions tied to those earnings will be withdrawn, potentially affecting state pension accrual and income-based benefits such as parental or sickness benefits.

Advertisement

To address this, IF Metall is encouraging members to return the refunded tax amounts to the union. In exchange, the union plans to pay 18.5% into occupational pensions on their behalf. “Otherwise, it will be a form of overcompensation when they get the tax paid back,” Bursjöö said.

That being said, the IF Metall officer acknowledged that the union’s legal ability to reclaim the funds from its improperly paid Tesla Sweden strikers is limited. “The legal possibilities are probably limited, from what we can see. But we assume that most people see the value of securing their pension,” Bursjöö said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla falsely promoted the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in an effort to overturn a prior ruling that found the automaker engaged in false advertising related to its driver-assistance systems. 

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla misled customers about the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Tesla’s legal action follows a decision by California’s Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which concluded that Tesla’s earlier marketing of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” violated state law, as noted in a CNBC report. 

While the DMV opted not to suspend Tesla’s license after determining the company had updated its marketing language for its advanced driver-assistance systems, Tesla is asking the court to go further and reverse the agency’s conclusion.

Advertisement

In its Feb. 13 complaint, Tesla’s attorneys argued that the DMV “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled the company a “false advertiser” for its Autopilot and FSD systems. The filing argued that regulators failed to demonstrate that consumers were actually misled about the capabilities of Tesla’s systems.

According to Tesla’s complaint, the DMV “never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.”

Tesla’s legal team further stated: “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

Tesla now promotes its driver-assistance system as “Full Self-Driving (Supervised),” a name that overemphasizes the need for active driver attention.

Advertisement

Tesla’s autonomous driving program is a pivotal part of the company’s future, with CEO Elon Musk stating that self-driving technology will truly be the solution that will push Tesla into its full potential. The company is currently operating a Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area, and the company recently announced that it has produced the first Cybercab from Giga Texas’ production line. 

Continue Reading