[hef19898]

A failure while driving is very different from a recall. Especially if the brand in question knows about the issues for years!

Edit:

From your own links:

>> Jeep Grand Cherokee SUVs Recalled Because Suspension Parts Might Fall Off

Might =|= did fall off, pro-active =|= waitimg for four years until being forced to do a recall

>> Honda is recalling nearly 564,000 of its older model CR-V sport utility vehicles because road salt can cause the frame to rust and rear suspension parts to come loose.

Emphasis on older, rust and can cause -> recalled before suspension parts broke, and definitely not on brand new cars

>> Subaru is recalling nearly 875,000 cars and SUVs in the U.S. because the engines can stall or a rear suspension part can fall off.

Again, can, and not did fall off.

Sometimes it seems reading comprehension, or the lack thereof is directly linked to technical understanding, or again lack thereof.

[chris222]

If you read into these recalls all of them obviously affected safety of cars on the road which is why the recall was initiated.

Carmakers often know of issues for years prior to a formal recall. This is standard.

[hef19898]

Not if the recall is safety relevant, the don't. Because there is only one car maker out there that intentionally plays with the lives of its customers and everyone who happens to be around one their cars.

[belltaco]

> Because there is only one car maker out there that intentionally plays with the lives of its customers and everyone who happens to be around one their cars.

Do you mean GM or Honda?

> On September 17, 2015, General Motors entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the United States Department of Justice, in which GM admitted that "from in or about the spring of 2012 through in or about February 2014, GM failed to disclose a deadly safety defect to its U.S. regulator ... It also falsely represented to consumers that vehicles containing the defect posed no safety concern."[5] As part of the Deferred Prosecution Agreement, GM agreed to forfeit $900 million to the United States.[5][51] GM gave $600 million in compensation to surviving victims of accidents caused by faulty ignition switches.[52][53]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_ignition_switch....

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/09/12/business/air-bag-flaw-lon...

Or one of the dozens of carmakers that hid faults that resulted in actual deaths?

I can Google all day and find dozens of such issues with other automakers, but you seem hell bent on hating on Tesla so nothing will change your mind.

[hef19898]

I mean all of them, but only one has made it a habit, a design philosophy even. And only one went so far to charge customers a premium for those features.

[belltaco]

Recalls happen because of failures during driving. Why would anyone recall cars if there are no failures during driving?

[hef19898]

Recalls happen because a safety and / or quality issue is identified. Than this issue is remedied by a rwcalk: either forced or voluntary one.

Cars are recalled because a part might fail during operation, worst case that risk is found once the part did fail.

Only a bunch of incompetent frauds would:

a) ignore their own data and wait four years to recall, and then only in one market

b) need years to find a solution, as it seems, still isn't good enough

c) issue a policy to blame these failing parts, well known and identified internally, on their customers