Zunjie V800 "brake door": From product safety dispute to "hatred of the country" debate

On Saturday (October 17), the Economic Daily, a newspaper directly under the Central Committee of the Communist Party of China, once again commented on the Huawei Zunjie V800 brake pedal breakage incident, criticizing the evaluation platform "Know Car Emperor" for having a "role conflict" and lacking credibility, triggering a new round of discussion.

BBC Chinese previously reported that on October 8, ByteDance’s car review account Dangchedi released a video showing that the brake pedal of the Zunjie V800 jointly launched by Huawei and JAC Motors broke during testing. After the release of the video, public opinion was in an uproar, and JAC's stock price fell to its limit. In the following week, the attitude of the Chinese media turned from questioning to silence, until the People's Daily published an article criticizing the "crash train" on October 11, which was considered to be the first official characterization of this round of controversy. Subsequently, the media turned to demand for the release of test results, and the focus was always on whether Zunjie V800 had any safety hazards.

On the evening of October 15, Tesla of the United States released the new Roadster, demonstrating that the vehicle uses compressed gas thrusters to briefly lift off the ground, flip over and land. Some Chinese netizens immediately discussed the Zunjie controversy together with the competition between the Chinese and American automobile industries. "We can't even guarantee the brake pedal, but their cars can already fly?" It became one of the most widely circulated comments at the time. On Saturday, the Economic Daily published an article to change the direction of the trend, saying that the automobile manufacturing process is extremely complex and product defects are inevitable. It said that the media should not use this controversy to attach the label of "quick car" to this model, "or even belittle the entire Chinese new energy automobile industry."

The background of this discussion is that Huawei has been gradually included in the national brand narrative in recent years, and its automotive business has also been given a symbolic meaning beyond the product itself. A debate that originally centered on product safety eventually evolved into a confrontation about the strength of China's new energy vehicles, national brand image and public opinion orientation.

From brake pedal to "crash car"

On October 13, Zunjie Auto released a third-party test report stating that all indicators of Zunjie V800 meet national standards. Many netizens still question: The pedal broke during the actual vehicle test, but the product still complies with the current standards. Does this mean that the existing test standards fail to cover some actual use scenarios?

Industry insiders, automotive engineers and "car experts" later pointed out that the report used a static test on a bench, but the video involved showed the dynamic emergency braking conditions of the actual vehicle, and the stress conditions of the two are different. Therefore, this report cannot directly deny the test results of the car expert, nor can it explain why the three test vehicles broke at similar locations.

On the evening of October 15, three departments including the Ministry of Industry and Information Technology established a joint investigation team to launch an investigation into the Zunjie V800 incident.

As the incident unfolded, many disputes over the quality of new energy vehicles were resurfaced. The rear axle detachment accident of Chery OMODA 5 and the clip of door failure in the early launch of Zunjie V800 were regarded by some netizens as warning signs of the Chinese automobile industry's pursuit of rapid iteration and scale expansion. The term "quick ride" has been widely circulated on social platforms.

"Crash car" is not a new term that emerged due to the Zunkai incident. In August this year, the People's Daily published an article criticizing some car companies for excessively pursuing research and development speed and questioning whether the necessary testing processes have been completed for vehicle development. After the braking incident, "People's Daily" published "Say No to "Crash Cars"" on October 11, calling for respect for automobile research and development rules and safety verification procedures.

However, as the Zunjie controversy continues to ferment, the relevant discussions gradually go beyond the product itself. When some netizens began to use the term "quick car" to summarize the quality problems of China's new energy vehicles and linked it to issues such as China's overseas automobile export and industrial competitiveness, the discussion in some Chinese media also changed accordingly. During discussions, media such as "Observer.com" and Huxiu began to emphasize that this label may damage the overseas image of Chinese automobile brands.

Tesla's new car ignites controversy over "hatred of country"

Tesla released a video of the new Roadster at this time, showing the technology that allows the car to briefly lift off, flip and land. While it shocked the market, it was also compared with the noisy brake pedal incident by Chinese netizens.

Some netizens lamented: "It's hard to imagine that the Roadster 2 and the brake failure were products of the same period." Others compared the current technological gap to the impact faced by Li Hongzhang, an official of the late Qing Dynasty, when he visited the United States.

Another voice then emerged. Some commentators believe that admiration for Tesla goes beyond the product level and is essentially a denial of the Chinese automobile industry. People who hold such views are even labeled as "haters of the country."

The focus of discussion has shifted from whether the brake pedal is safe to national industry, technological confidence and national identity.

Official media resets tone: Assessment should not be "weaponized"

After that, the official media also began to change. An article published by the Economic Daily on October 17 titled "'Brakegate' Is Not Just a Question of Quality and Safety" pointed out that there was a conflict of interest in the evaluation process. The article stated that it is "difficult to build credibility" for someone who knows how to do car reviews while relying on car company advertisements and clues for guidance. He is a "referee" and an "athlete" all in one.

The article also alluded to the fact that in the braking incident, "there is no evidence that the videos, pictures and texts that disappeared online were caused by the company, but it can easily give rise to bad associations among the media and netizens." The article also emphasized that the media should not take advantage of this turmoil to arbitrarily attach the label of "quick car" to this model, "or even belittle the entire Chinese new energy vehicle industry."

The article also pointed out that China is moving from a major automobile country to a powerful automobile country. This cannot be achieved by "a few test videos and the use of traffic advantages to detonate online opposition", nor can it be achieved by car companies talking about themselves. The article warns: "Weaponizing evaluation will cause a certain brand to be hit today, a company to be hit tomorrow, and ultimately the ecology of the Chinese automobile industry to be harmed."

After the article was published, it was quickly reprinted by many official media, and The Paper and others followed up with multiple reports on the same day. These reports affirm the integrity and delivery capabilities of China's new energy vehicle industry, and the core message is that the public should not "take advantage of each other": affirming Tesla's innovation does not mean denying China's large-scale installation and delivery capabilities of new energy vehicles. The report also directed public opinion towards the "involvement" problem of auto companies that is difficult to hold accountable, rather than the overall quality of the industry.

Another Chinese media said that "Knowing Car Emperor's kick has caused very direct losses to Chinese cars going overseas." They pointed out that many overseas media have followed up and reported on the recent quality problems of China's new energy vehicles due to their evaluation, which has affected the entire Chinese automobile industry.