Recently, a number of new energy vehicles have spoken out, questioning that the winter test of Chedi is unscientific, not rigorous, unprofessional and unfair. There are even automobile associations that speak out and disagree with the evaluation of a public **. thinks that there is a suspicion of misleading users, especially the companies that are ranked lower, and they are naturally dissatisfied.
For users, what they want to see is also a relatively fair evaluation or data. Especially when combined with user Xi usage assessments, this is a relatively common expectation. For a company, whether it can afford to carry so many vehicles and models of evaluation, as well as the data acquisition of a single vehicle, and whether it can use relative fairness, will inevitably become the focus of doubts. However, because from the user's point of view, the manufacturer's test identity is not high, relatively speaking, it is still more meaningful for some ** evaluations, which may also be a reason why new energy vehicle companies are more concerned about this kind of evaluation and speak out in time.
In addition to Huawei, Great Wall, Geely and other car companies, Tesla also spoke out and expressed its disagreement with the evaluation of Chedi. As soon as the evaluation of Chedi was announced, Yu Chengdong, CEO of Huawei Device BG and chairman of Intelligent Vehicle Solution BU, posted on his personal circle of friends, saying that the winter test of Chedi was "misleading to the public". Subsequently, this test of understanding Chedi was publicly questioned by many car companies.
As Tesla has also joined the "discussion", there have been 6 new energy vehicles that have expressed different opinions on the evaluation of Chedi. The technical department of the China Automobile Association said in an interview that the influence should not be abused, and the test should follow and refer to the relevant standards, if the test is not scientific, unprofessional, rigorous, and unfair, it will mislead consumers. In response to the doubts of the outside world, Chedi did not flinch at all, and said that all items in the 2023 winter test use unified test standards, which are in line with the user's car use scenario in the extremely cold environment in winter, and there is no discrimination.
Obviously, understanding the car emperor is tested according to user Xi, not with the industry standard, so the sense of use and user perspective of the test may be more focused, so the test data brought by the user may be recognized, but the manufacturer does not recognize. The focus of this discussion was on December 11, when the company released its "winter test" results on the pure electric range achievement rate of about 20 hybrid models, which attracted widespread discussion and attention in the industry because the difference in the results was not small.
After the results were announced, Huawei, Great Wall, Geely, and others questioned the rules and results of the winter test of Chedi. Yu Chengdong, Chairman of Huawei's Intelligent Vehicle Solution BU, said: "The test of pit people misleads the people!Science and rigor are the basic rules that should be followed. AITO Auto issued a document saying that the relevant tests "under the conditions of severe cold and continuous heating of air conditioners, the windows and doors were opened for a long time for many times, which seriously deviated from the real use scenarios of users". Great Wall Motor plans to hold a "Question Communication Meeting on the Winter Test Standards of the Car Emperor" at 15:00 on December 14. Yang Xueliang, vice president of Geely Automobile Group, said: "I also think that the evaluation process is unscientific, not rigorous, and the conclusions are not convincing, which not only misleads consumers, but also hurts the credibility of the car emperor itself." ”
The doubts of car companies are due to dissatisfaction with the corresponding scores. In the face of the doubts of car companies, the car emperor also chose to be tough. The company responded that it would use a unified standard for all vehicles participating in the winter test, which was in line with the user's winter car use scenario, and there was no discrimination, and said that the winter test would be carried out normally. Understand the car emperor released a notice: "The road to truth, not afraid of the cold, understand the car emperor winter test open day sincerely invites on-site observation." It is scheduled to be held on December 14 in Mohe, Heilongjiang Province, located at -40°C, saying that it welcomes the extreme cold test challenge of 50+ new energy vehicles.
It can be seen that understanding the car emperor is to organize their own evaluation from the perspective of the user's needs, and the evaluation understood by the car company is still different, in fact, you can understand the evaluation of the car emperor as a test of user experience, from the professional aspect of the evaluation, it is estimated that there are still some technical differences, the use of the evaluation, there is a certain Xi inertia, arbitrariness and the user's own perception of the difference, which and the real professional evaluation should still be a gap. For users, it may be the experience in use, which is a bit similar to the third-party platform where we pay attention to buyers' reviews, unless it is "childcare", otherwise buyers' reviews are more referential. Users still agree with this "user feeling".
Industry insiders believe that although the third-party evaluation of automobile performance is different from the test carried out in the process of automobile product access or product development, it should also follow and refer to the standards recognized by relevant countries or industries. For example, industry expert participation, technical demonstration, experimental verification and public consultation to ensure the scientificity, rationality and fairness of the test standards and processes. He also pointed out that the test may be more entertaining, ornamental and story-like, and more able to attract the attention of consumers, but it often lacks the participation and supervision of professional institutions, and does not carry out the test according to industry-recognized standards, and its fairness and professionalism will inevitably be questioned.
AITO Auto also re-issued a statement on its official Weibo that the starting point and end point of any test should serve the real experience of consumers. "We hope to see more scientific, professional, rigorous and fair tests to bring real value to the development of the industry, and welcome more consumers to visit our stores and user centers across the country to understand the experience of real car owners. ”
In fact, to a certain extent, this is a kind of use of comparative data in extreme weather conditions, if it is presented or released from this perspective, the user's understanding will be more direct. Of course, there will be differences with car companies' doubts about public testing and the fairness of the conclusions.