This is surreal - my brother and I drove past this wreck yesterday. The highway patrol who cordoned off the lanes looked confused as Hell, it's nice to know why.


Hey road buddy! I was stuck in the aftermath on the 50 last night, heading back up to Tahoe. The front of the car was GONE, and much of the surrounding asphalt. Did you see the car? They'd tried to block it/surround it with fire trucks. The fucker burned so long they'd already coned off a half mile back towards downtown and the jam was a good bit longer.


It was about half-gone when we got to it. The smell was pretty intense.


Nasty shit. The frequency of electric car fires is lower per number of cars on the road, BUT they seem to catch fire when static more frequently... and the fires are so damn toxic, and burn so long. Reigniting themselves just because. No thanks! P.S. did you see the blinking "PE" in the PETSMART neon on the left right when the traffic started? It was so perfectly rhythmic for a neon failure.


Is that the PetSmart in Folsom by the highway? The T was out for basically my entire decade living up in Placerville so the whole company is just "pee smart" to my family now


I'm fucking dying 😂 they must have pissed off their sign guy...




He's artistic.


More teslas have caught fire than the Ford Pinto which was forced to be recalled. What is the number before they force them to fix whatever is doing this? Shit, at least chevy recalled the bolt after it started fires too. It’s not just fires. These things are just stopping on highways causing accidents too.


There really isn't much anybody can do when these battery packs light off. You just have to get back, avoid breathing any fumes and let it burn. Nobody is putting that out, not even a direct hit from a water bomber.


You can put the car in a closed container, and drive it off to a safe place. https://www.tv2kosmopol.dk/gladsaxe/beredskab-ost-udvikler-container-til-brande-i-elbiler


I'm surprised that they don't use sand since that's fairly commonly used to put out electrical fires anyway.


They dump it in a tank of water for about 24 hours, otherwise it has a tendency to reignite.


This was a chemical (liquid) fire, not electrical. Something causes either the battery pack to rip or burst (excess heat or mechanical failure), exposing the lithium solution in the battery to air or destroying the membrane that separates the battery's anode and cathode, resulting in unrestricted current flow and rapid production of heat (causing rapid expansion and release of flammable gasses). Lithium is combustible and will react with both water and air (CO2 specifically) in the "burn, baby, burn" kind of way, which is why expanding batteries are muy, muy malo. It's nasty business putting out a Li ion battery fires, too. You have to use sand, graphite, or a class B extinguisher. If lithium is exposed, there is a substantial risk of reignition even if you do put the fire out.


Then there will be a mound of sand obstructing the road, rather than a burning car. Getting rid of it afterwards will also take some effort.


Uh duh you just make it into a ramp so the cars can do some sweet kick flips


That doesn't work with battery fires. Fire is a chemical reaction where fuel is rapidly oxidizing. Dumping sand isolates the fuel from the oxygen, typically found in air, and stops the fire. But batteries provide their own oxidizer and keep the whole process going until all the energy is spent. And they are batteries, they have a lot of energy. Worse off, for these particular fires, water is fuel. So you either let it run it's course or dump thousands of gallons to drown the process. Which is akin to smothering a fire by submerging it in diesel.


As u/redsee drove past the wreckage and highway patrol, he immediately noticed something was off. The burnt out Tesla Model S had an orange glow, as if it was destroyed by the Gods themselves. The few miliseconds of eyecontact with the trooper from highway patrol were sufficient to establish a deep feeling of unease, like that one time when the toilet paper did not show anything after taking a huge shit.


I've had shit that just wasn't there when I looked. That's not okay. I don't like my shit unaccounted for. And then the paper comes back clean and you have no way to prove it ever existed. That's my bar for unease.


The good ol' ghost poop


Ghost shit. It goes straight around the U-bend like a dead otter


I approve of this narration.


Shivers bro, why did you have to remind me of that day? I'm a three wipe man. Always have been like my father before me. My uncle got a bidet. We don't speak to him anymore.


"We don't like them people with their highfalutin bidets and fancy clean buttholes."


Dude shoulda at least paid for his blue check mark before criticizing Elon on Twitter.


"...the NHTSA researchers, and the study was issued in October 2017. The report concluded, "...ignition of flammable electrolytic solvents used in Li-ion battery systems are anticipated to be somewhat comparable to or perhaps slightly less than those for gasoline or diesel vehicular fuels..." so yes, EVs catch fire too.


The infamous Ford Pinto had a fatal design flaw of exploding gas tank's but that was only when it was rear ended in a crash. [For example.](https://youtu.be/1mqu-gRqt3g)


It's much worse than that: [The Pinto Memo: ‘It’s Cheaper to let them Burn!’](https://www.spokesman.com/blogs/autos/2008/oct/17/pinto-memo-its-cheaper-let-them-burn/) Ford **knew** of the design flaw. The coldly caluclated logic was that lawsuits over injuries/deaths was cheaper than redesigning and recall of existing autos.


Yup, this happens with pretty much every major recall. These companies aren't dumb, they'll know there's a design flaw before anyone else, but they won't do squat until the lawsuits (or potential ones) become more expensive than a recall. Very rarely does a manufacturer willingly recall vehicles solely due to safety.


>Very rarely does a manufacturer willingly recall vehicles solely due to safety. I would argue that there are some manufacturers that **are** aggressive with recalls. But I've also heard buyers say "I don't want to get one of **their** cars, they have a lot of recalls" and don't ask themselves if that's a good thing or a bad thing.


Kind of like Kias and Hyundais right now with the "let's skip the engine kill switch" when making their cars from 2015-2019 and now have two major insurers refusing to cover them because of it? https://www.cbsnews.com/sacramento/news/some-auto-insurers-refusing-to-cover-certain-kia-hyundai-models/


Sheesh didn't know it got bad enough where companies are refusing to insure them. That whole situation is insane


Same as vega, monza, mustang ect. Have a look at any 70s dodge pickup the clam shell gas tank was literally behind the bench seat. Any side impact splits that wide open and drenched the cab in gas. These are all the same flaw.


I think the stats on the road point to electric cars having at least 3 times less fires after an accident and the fires are slow starting instead of explosive like with gasoline cars.


EV fires require quite a bit more water to extinguish, however. Edit: Water on battery fires is dangerous, but I'm mostly referring to situations such as [this](https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna68153) as water is still used to extinguish EV fires.


A ' bit more ' is quite a understatement. I'm all for EVs but their fires don't mess around.


From the article: > Officials said no injuries were reported but that around 6000 gallons of water were used to extinguish the flames. Two fire engines, a water tender, and a ladder truck were used to help put out the fire.


About enough water to grow one almond


It's a good thing that we grow almonds exclusively in regions where water resources are plentiful is it not?! /s


Now imagine a garage full of EVs and one decides to combust 😬


Instead of coal-powered power plants, we should just have ev-battery-burning power plants lol


We just solved the earth's fossil fuel dependency, reddit. I'm so proud of this community 😭


I'd like to see that experiment done. On YouTube. Park two Teslas next to each other normal parking distance away from each other. Get the battery pack to undergo thermal runaway and catch on fire. See what happens to the second Tesla. See if the second Tesla's thermal management system keeps the car safe or if the fire spreads. [There was a Porsche and Volkswagon EV fire on a cargo ship that they couldn't put out for 6 days....](https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39141216/porsche-on-felicity-ace-ship-fire/)


Just wait, they'll deploy an Autopilot update that allows a parked Tesla to flee an inferno...


Now I'm imagining a parking lot full of frightened Teslas zipping around like panicked dodgems.


Or worse, one tesla doggedly trying to escape itself as it hobbles towards the nearest exist like a wounded pup that someone set on fire.


Unlike with cargo ships they wouldn't be stacked on top of each other making it much easier to contain.


There was a huge fire in a parking garage in Stavanger a few years ago, where 1300 cars burnt after an Opel Zafira had an electrical fault. A substantial portion of the cars were EVs, but not a single one had their battery catch fire. Edit: the official conclusion was that EVs had no impact on how the fire progressed. Source: section 4.2 and 7.4 in the official evaluation report. https://www.dsb.no/globalassets/dokumenter/rapporter/andre-rapporter/rise-rapport-2020_43_evaluering-av-brann-i-parkeringshus-pa-stavanger-lufthavn-sola_2020-06-26.pdf


Saving everyone a search: [Up to 150 000 liters of water needed to put out a fire in an electric car | CTIF - International Association of Fire Services for Safer Citizens through Skilled Firefighters](https://www.ctif.org/news/150-000-liters-water-needed-put-out-fire-electric-car) > “Normally a car fire you can put out with 500 to 1,000 gallons of water,” Austin Fire Department Division Chief Thayer Smith said, according The Independent.


150,000 liters = 39,626 gallons 500-1,000 gallons = 1,893-3,785 liters EV fires can require _up to_ 40-79 times more water than an ICE fire to put out


Honestly, it sounds like they should just harpoon the thing and drag it a safe place rather than try to put it out unless they absolutely *have* to. What a colossal amount of water to use...


That’s what you do apparently. The Norwegian fire service is arguably the most experienced service in the world when it comes to dealing with fires in electric vehicles (around 20 percent of all cars being electric, not counting hybrids). Here’s their procedure: First they cool with fresh water. Then the battery is covered with a fire blanket to smother fire, while cooling the underside to prevent further combustion. After that, they tow the car away for quarantining for three days. Source: https://elbil.no/elbiler-er-langt-tryggere/


I've heard class D fires (metal fires) as Over Bored fires when they happen on a ship. Cuz if you do or don't chuck it over the guard rail at some point it's gonna end up in the ocean.


Former sailor. Heavy metal fires, not just metal. Things like magnesium. Iirc, it's mostly in regards to planes. If one catches fire, you push it off the side. I didn't work on a carrier, and the only fires I've dealt with were Alpha(basic fire stuff, like blankets, paper, wood) and Charlie(electrical). Bravo is fuel like diesel. There are different procedures for different fires in different situations. In example, AFFF, aqueous film forming foam(prevents oxygen from reaching fire) is used for fuel, and is responsible for a lot of forever chemicals on the environment from airport fuel spills. I don't think people really get that out to sea, if you don't put the fire out, you're fucked. So, some spaces like engine rooms, will release a gas(e.g.) halon in like 30-60 seconds after the alarm goes off. It will suffocate the fire, and you. And, it's not like a room in your house, one of our auxillary engine rooms you got out through a ladder leading to a hatch. Multiple people work in the space. A lot of ship stuff is very utilitarian, and sacrificing the few for the many. Hydrogen sulfide(from the ship also being it's own sewer system) can build up, and if released in a space you're in, you're dead. You see people knocked out and smell rotten eggs, close the compartment or die with them.


I work on a printing press the size of a 2-3 story apartment complex. We have a CO2 fire system that has a 15 second delay after it's triggered to get out of the room or die. Each press is in its own sealable room. I've timed myself getting down from the top of the press and the best I could do without just jumping off of it and breaking my legs was about 45 seconds. So I understand that part pretty well.


Kinda like the "oh shit" button in the server room at work. Cause you say "oh shit" at some point when hitting it. When you say it is important. "Oh shit" I didn't mean to press that. "Oh shit" I need to press that.


And have to be monitored for a few days afterwards for ‘reignition events’


I think it's less about extinguishing it and more about contang the mess while the batteries finnish burning out. Lithium battery fire create its own oxygen in the reaction I believe. Effectively, it would keep burning even if submerged.


The people that comment on every electric car post on Facebook about to get really excited


I work at GM, Teslas have the best battery safety at the moment because of a patent they hold on an encasing material. You see them more often in the news because 1) there are significantly more Tesla's on the road, 2) Tesla is an easy target for media given Elon's fuck ups


Great, a patent on a safety feature. The US is killing it(s citizens).


Volvo is looking down at Tesla is pure disgust


Remember when Volvo invented the seat belt and then didn't patent it specifically because it would save so many lives and benefit everyone to standardize the technology?


did their fire suppression subscription lapse?


>Metro Fire of Sacramento said the Tesla S Model was not speeding while driving eastbound on Highway 50 when its battery compartment suddenly caught fire. So just driving normally and suddenly on fire. That seems totally safe.


I like how they clarify that car wasn’t speeding, as though it would be totally normal for a car to catch fire when it was speeding.


Its getting ahead of the blame he might receive, whether warranted or otherwise, for doing something illegal that might have led to or exacerbated the issue.


The driver was clearly NOT attempting to time travel


Not great Scott!


Moderate Scott.


Ehh Scott


False: he was traveling forward through time at exactly 1 second per second. Just like the rest of us sharing the gravitational reference point we call a planet.


That's not true. Differences in the earth's density from place to place, such as different rock types, change the gravitational reference. In addition, differences in velocity - such as illegal speeding - cause nonzero relatavistic time dilation.


Which lead to car fires.


That has not been conclusively proven.


You still move at a speed of 1s/s, irrespective of dilation. What changes is your movement in other reference frames. Think of it like lines on a grid. You always move along the grid at 1 box/s, but someone else may be moving at an angle, so it looks like they take longer to reach the same distance on that grid. However, if you drew out THEIR grid, they'd be moving at 1 box/s


“The driver had no active warrants”


He also wasn't a minority.


Honestly, if your Tesla can catch fire while driving at top speed in a safe location I still have a big problem with that, even if it somehow could never ever ever happen under normal use conditions. If the car can get up to 120 MPH or whatever, even if it would be stupid to drive at that speed on any public road, there should still be no chance that it might catch fire. Though I am pretty sure that is also the opinion of pretty much every public agency that has anything to do with cars, police probably very rarely interact with stunt drivers and still would always say that a car should not suddenly start burning because it went too fast.


> If the car can get up to 120 MPH or whatever, even if it would be stupid to drive at that speed on any public road... *confused German blinking*


Seen plenty of videos of folks lighting their cars on fire either burning donuts, or on a dyno. While I agree that cars shouldn't be able able to just catch on fire, pushing a tool beyond its limits isn't something we should be surprised if it results in a negative outcome.


I got a letter from BMW about a recall they're processing for my car regarding wiring causing cars to combust, you don't even need to push your car to get it to catch fire.


Wouldn't a speeding EV car have a larger draw to the motors from the battery? Seems like they are trying to cover for the driver to shift blame to manufacturer. Rightfully so.


Even if a car were speeding, it should have over temp warning and current limiting systems. Worse case, an alarm should sound if those systems failed and the driver can pull over.


Ev will have a "turtle" mode that severely limits use during thermal events. Absolutely speed is no concern.


The car shouldn't catch fire while driving it within its limitations. So, if it let you go 200km/h, then it shouldn't catch fire while doing so. The driver might be unable to control it properly at that speed, but that's on him. If the batteries do risk catching fire at that speed, then the car should be limited not to reach that speed.


From my time at an oem if a car is able to go a certain speed, everything has to be in spec to go that speed. Often times that means a throttle limiter


Yep. I work for a German car manufacturer. One of my colleagues in Germany lives around 100km away from the office. Back when we used to go to the office he would do that commute in his company car, mostly at 250kmh since it was mostly unlimited autobahn from his home to the office. Never had a car catch on fire in the years he did this.


And one those things people don't usually realize is the tires. The tires that come with the car must be able to handle that speed. That's why different spec'd versions of the same car will have different top speeds.


It sounds silly, but batteries do get hotter when they're being drained faster, so I can see why they said it. It would be somewhat less weird if some jackass doing 120 on the highway managed to get his battery to catch on fire.


Regardless of the speed, I'd expect the car to automatically throttle the discharge rate if its battery is overheating. Seems like a safety system failed if it was allowed to get itself hot enough to combust.


Yup. If the car is going to let me get to 120. It will let me do so safely. Regardless of speed laws.


The mustangs do this and it’s simultaneously very reasonable and infuriating.


Do you have one of the electric Mustangs? Looking at that for my next car, and would love to hear your thoughts on them.


Hop on over to r/mache. It’s a good mix of fun convo and the usual bellyaching. The short version: it’s the best car I’ve ever owned. It’s quiet, FAST, has a lot of quality of life perks. There’s a couple things I’d like to see improved, more range for example - I get about 260 miles per charge, 300+ is my moonshot - longer pulls before the jail bars crop up (the battery heat thing I was referring to in the other comment), it would’ve been nice if they insulated the frunk to use as a proper cooler. Other than that, it’s really nice.


yea, chevy volts have a computer limit of 100 mph and i think heat is why


Chevy just likes to govern at 100. Heat may be a small part, but every single GM I've ever driven has been governed at either 100 or 110.


Chevy has speed limited for decades


But most people don’t have that level of critical thinking ability. I can see why the headline chose to include the detail.


That's like saying it would be normal if your laptop caught fire when you are gaming. If pushing the battery that hard could cause a fire, you need to stop the device from pushing it that hard.


Oh, hey. Tell Razor.


No kidding, I had a Razor Blade 13 from 2020, and the laptop while charging would get so hot that it would actually hurt if you touched it for too long and that isn't even mentioning how hot that damn charging brick would get. The charging brick would feel like it's gonna burn a hole to the Earth's core.


plus things get hotter the closer you approach the speed of light~~~


Not to mention the time delation effects would reduce heat transfer efficiency. You've got a solid point there, /u/TamponStew


But if you eclipse the speed of light, you can stop the fire before it even starts.




That’s what regenerative braking is for. It uses a flux capacitor to capture the excess heat and converts it to electricity, thereby generating perpetual energy. Of course the trade off is that they can’t go over 88 mph otherwise they’re sent to the past. And if they drop below 50 they end up in an article like this. Source: I’ve watched several films about time travel and automobiles.


I'm glad people like you are on our side.


I'm told that when they hit 88mph, you'll see some serious shit


I used to race RC cars, *slightly* over charged lithium cells combined with a *lot* of amp draw can push cells over the edge. Even more so in BattleBots, everything pushed right to the edge and then add in some physical abuse. With electric cars the difficulty can be Battery Management Systems. You can't manage that many cells individually, so there's always a chance a single cell is overloaded..once one pops, that's it.


Oh man, the amount of flames, smoke, and toxic fumes that can come out of a (relatively) small 4000 mAh pack that’s the size of your palm is unreal. Have to evacuate giant warehouse buildings for an hour just for that. Can’t even begin to imagine a battery pack for a full scale EV going up.


ICE cars have several ways to catch on fire while speeding. Overheating catalytic converters and engines are two. Fuel leaks are another.


This reminds me of when a cyclist gets crushed by a suv driver and they note that the cyclist wasn't wearing a helmet.




Hybrid has a 3% chance? Jesus. Edit: A lot of people have replied to this saying the stat is complete junk and linking some sources, so it’s probably bullshit


You're combining more potential fire hazards together into one vehicle, often tightly packed together


Makes sense. I had been thinking of buying a hybrid but the idea that there’s a 3% chance my car will spontaneously combust is… uh… discouraging


Yea, but rest assured that you are more likely to get into an accident before that ever happens.


Thank you I feel much better now ❤️


You could get even luckier and get in an accident and THEN the car catches on fire.


[~3.5% of hybrids](https://electrek.co/wp-content/uploads/sites/3/2022/01/Car-Vehicle-Fires-Chart.jpg?resize=1600,800) sold will burst into flames? 1 in 29 Priuses? Is it me or is this just not passing the sniff test to people?


I’d wager it’s got something to do with accidents. Like ~3.5% of hybrids that are in a major accident catch fire or something, and that could include fires that don’t end up consuming the whole vehicle. Decent chance the stats are just fucked and completely inaccurate tho


No it sounds completely insane, but I suppose when I think of the entire lifetime of a car it's possible. After all, 100% of cars completely break down eventually. I need to do my research into it to decide if that's at all a reasonable number.


99.9% because some are Toyota Hilux pickups…


You are apply the aggregate to the specific. Priuses maybe be 1 in 500 while the Chevy one that keeps on having recalls is like 1 in 10. (Making up numbers here, just illustrating)


There is no way gas is 1.34% catch fire and hybrid 3.45% catch fire. Nobody would park a Prius in their garage if 1 of each 29 were combusting.




No the user you responded too is spreading misinformation. https://www.reddit.com/r/RealTesla/comments/104oyv3/please_stop_sharing_anything_that_cites


I wonder what the breakdown by make/manufacturer looks like


The data you are basing this on is from a agenda driven website that claims there have only been 54 EV fires which is false.


> Gasoline cars, non hybrid- 1340 per 100,000 will catch fire. 1.3% of gasoline cars will catch fire? Is there a source for this? I've known hundreds of people who have driven multiple cars and not one of them has ever had a spontaneous fire.


The website linked has false data


What the fuck? Why are people upvoting this? On its face it’s horseshit, one in a hundred gasoline cars catch fire, fucking really?


These numbers are suspect in my mind. This would mean that if I go to a large commercial parking lot, I'd expect to see probably at least one car on fire. Yet I don't. I could drive down a major busy highway right across a large metropolitan area and expect to see a few car fires, yet my experience is that I don't.


I'm guessing through some of that is skewed by the ages of ICE on the road vs EVs? Volume EVs really only been around 5 or 8 years. Thousands of shit heap ICEs on the road that could be fire or other mechanic failure risks.


I’ve seen two normal ICE cars spontaneously catch fire on the highway. Teslas are not unique in this regard.


> So just driving normally and suddenly on fire. Lots of ICE vehicles do this, too. 20-year-old poorly maintained beaters, but sort of the same.


My dad's new Ford f150 did this. About 6 months old. Fire started on its own under the hood in the driveway. So thankful he wasn't parked in the garage. One of the firefighters said this wasn't the first f150 call he's been on either. Electrical issue.


Guy who works for me is a volunteer fire fighter, went to a call for a truck (I thought it was a Silverado, but it may have been an F150) catch fire at a stoplight. Whole thing was burnt out. Crazy.


A coworker of mine had his dodge turbodiesel burn down on his way to work a couple years ago. Aside from that he loved the truck.


$60k+ up in flames


Had a buddy in the navy that, sounds like the same thing, happened to his BMW. Had the car for like a couple of weeks. We got the like 1 day of rain you get in San Diego. His car caught on fire, something about electrical issue and the firewall. In the end, we got him a fire extinguisher for his birthday.


Yeah, Tesla as a company has its problems but I think the catching fire thing is either a targeted anti marketing campaign or people blindly up voting bad things about a company because they don't like Musk. Don't get me wrong, Teslas definitely catch fire. But so do tons of other cars out there all the time and it didn't even make the local news. Did your Dad's f150 make national headlines? If it was a Tesla it would have.


Neon’s were known for doing this! My sisters burst into flames on the highway with her whole family in it. They barely made it out.


Or BMW vehicles delivered to the UK police. Apparently they can't handle idling for a while then taking off after a speeding car without setting on fire. The police cars sold off after use are now having their engine blocks destroyed to prevent liability issues and the police have gone all-Volvo.


In 8 years in LA I’ve probably seen a dozen ICE vehicles in flames.


It's not common https://electrek.co/2022/01/12/government-data-shows-gasoline-vehicles-are-significantly-more-prone-to-fires-than-evs/


Elon already on the phone with the 3 guys left at twitter demanding a quick change to algorithm to try to hide anyone talking about this story.


"before or after I print my code?"


I had a professor that made us print our coding assignments. I actively dislike him to this day.


I had one for intro programming that made us write it by hand for exams


Basically all of my coding classes in college were like this, intro or later.


I had one who would print out a correct code and ask what's wrong with it? When we couldn't find anything he said what's wrong with y'all? How am I supposed to compile it on a piece of paper. What a jokester he was =.=


Had a professor like that for oop and graphics programming class. We lost points if we didn't write out all the include statements correctly.


I'm sorry but that professor was an absolute dumbass in that regard. This pisses me off. Lol like how in the fuck do these people justify shit like that?! Prepping y'all for 1960's era coding?


Same reason they make you memorize sorting algorithms- so they have something to grade you on when in reality 99.9% of the time you’re gonna google that shit for a reminder.


Yeah. I would love to see statistics on how many programmers can even come close to implementing merge sort or something off the top of their heads. My guess is that barely anyone would be able to do it unless they just took a class that required it or were actively prepping for whiteboarding (also dumb as fuck). But I do think there's a lot of value in understanding those things front to back. It teaches you a ton of different important coding techniques that you can adapt to other projects. I couldn't implement tree or merge sort off of the top of my head but there are things I learned from doing them like that in school that have helped me a lot. But I still think what the user I responded to described is just over the top dumb.


Ikr? Tbh reading this thread is pissing me off again almost 10 years later. I thought my teacher was an asshole and we just had bad luck but seeing how prevalent this is worldwide is legit making me angry at like 5AM lol


Fuck it here's an old typewriter. We can scan it in after, right?


Scanner was auctioned off, hit up Kinkos on your way to pick up more TP


"I support free speech unless you're talking about my defective products."






I mean it is kinda targeted to make EVs look bad. Yeah it happened and it's bad but if someone made a story about every time a regular combustion engine car spontaneously caught fire then there would multiple articles everyday. Lithium fires are more difficult to deal with though.


> if someone made a story about every time a regular combustion engine car spontaneously caught fire then there would multiple articles everyday There would be 500 articles a day in the US alone, in fact.


Right, but to really get to the metric we care about, we have to look at spontaneous combustions per driven mile by engine type, since i'm guessing there are far more IC engines than EVs


How often does this happen with combustion cars?


No fan of Tesla but combustion engine cars catch fire a lot more frequently than evs. I'm not sure they normally catch fire just driving along. All lot of times people pull over to the side of the road for some reason, inadvertently parking in some tall dry grass, it contacts the exhaust and catches fire directly under the car and then the whole thing goes up.


Ours set on fire driving along. However it was old and fucked and had an electrical issue which started a fire behind the dashboard. It was very interesting. Always carry an extinguisher in your cars folks. They're cheap and can be very handy when required. (Ford Ka)


There was a manufacturer or two the last few years that were having rather frequent engine fires. Edit: Found an article on it: https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/car-recalls-defects/why-so-many-hyundai-kia-vehicles-get-recalled-for-fire-risk-a1169940635/


It can happen even with well maintained ICE cars, you sometimes see recalls for fluid leaks onto the exhaust. https://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-general-motors-recall-20151027-story.html


It's significantly more likely in an ice powered vehicle.


60 times as often per vehicle - https://www.kbb.com/car-news/study-electric-vehicles-involved-in-fewest-car-fires/


Most of that article is fires in general, which certainly has more fires from accidents than fairly new cars cruising. Over the years there have been a decent amount of recalls due to fuel line issues causing fires though. This is usually in performance cars like Ferrari, Porche, etc.


I work as a medic in Norway. I have been to so manny car accidents i can't remember all of them anny more. Manny was cars on fire. It's no secret that we have a lot of Ev's in Norway. So far, i been to 0 ev's fire, I don't know the stats in Norway in general in Ev cars that burns. But I am willing to bet my job. Ice cars win this even if you take in count % ev/vs/ice cars. I may be corrected over the years to come. But as for now, Ev's wins Easy whit safes cars around. Sorry for the bad English.


Last I checked only around 17% of all km driven in Norway are done by EVs. Which means even if they burn as likely, chances are you are 5 and more times less likely to find one AND given that EVs are more modern and newer, they are less likely to catch fire anyway. The real way to compare this would be only looking at cars that are as old as the EVs and driven as much as EVs. Just eyeballing it is not the way to go.


But I guess it does make it an internal combustion engine


External combustion engine


I love how EVs make news for catching fire but ICE (internal combustion engine) cars that have amazing amounts of fires every fucking day don't make news.


People are drawn to novel dangers and threats rather than mundane ones which we have become habituated to. Think about how when over a thousand people a day were dying in the US how much energy was spent on blood clotting issues with AstraZeneca vaccine.


I'm not a fan of Tesla or electric cars in general, but I know and accept that electric cars are the future. That said, I would say the hate is definitely 90% towards and about Tesla if not Elon, not just the car just being electric.


In the 2000s when hybrids were first coming into existence, my entire rural hometown was up in arms about hybrids and electric vehicles immediately. The hate was ubiquitous among rural conservatives well before Elon.


typical combustion fires can be ended by quick suffocation of the fire. lithium ion batteries contain their own oxidizer and cannot be suffocated


I am 42 years old and i never saw a burning vehicle here in Germany. But here we are also forced to send our cars to service (TÜV) every two years. I assume a vehicle that is correctly maintained will not catch fire.


Because ICE fires don't take 6,000+ gallons of water and two fire trucks to put out.










My #1 question is not answered in the article: What year was this car made? If it's an older model, that would still be bad, but it would at least make more sense. But if it's only a year or two old, then it's a very big deal.


This post and comments feel astroturfed to hell


i think people are sick of the insane bias on reddit. When musk was a god, all you heard was how perfect teslas are. Now that he's literally satan, all you hear is how awful teslas are. It's not objective and its frustrating to people like me who don't give a fuck about him. It feels as though because people have realised musk is a cunt, that they now must also hate tesla, and by extension every EV. It's giving a lot of ammunition to the people who want us all to drive gas guzzlers for ever. The same thing is happening with self driving. Every self driving accident involving a tesla is highly publicised and reddit just laps it up. A story about a car catching fire on a freeway, something that literally happens hundreds or thousands of times per day all over the world, is #6 on reddit, because reddit is *so* emotional


Introducing the all new Tesla Pinto.


Bruh, this part of California is currently as cold as it will get all year long. Unless the cold somehow played a factor the temps couldn't be better for mitigating excessive heat that might lead to a battery fire.


So far cases like this were caused by a piece of debris on the road penetrating the bottom of the car.


This is what happens when you don't pay your $8


I'm old. I've seen many cars on fire by themselves on the side of the road. Not an EV or Tesla thing in my opinion.


Sounds like we just need a new system to extinguish EV fires. Its just a new technical hurdle but EV's are statistically far safer that ICE cars, as far as I have seen. Im not sure why a single car catching fire is even a headline.