Xiaomi SU7 faces quality concerns, some owners sue the company
Despite impressive sales figures, the Xiaomi SU7 is not getting any praise for quality. The 2025 Q1 China Automobile Quality Ranking for large battery electric sedans placed the SU7 last among 29 Chinese models. This ranking, compiled by the state-run China Automobile Quality Network, indicates a higher risk of potential defects and a greater number of owner complaints relative to sales for the Xiaomi EV.
The China Automobile Quality Network, a platform overseen by the China Market Supervision Administration, tallies reports from car owners detailing vehicle faults and issues. These reports are then converted into penalty points, with a higher score signifying lower quality.
The Xiaomi SU7 received a concerning 239 penalty points, a full 56 points above the average for its segment. In contrast, the GAC Hyptec GT sedan topped the ranking with 149 points, followed by the Voyah Passion (152 points) and the Avatr 12 (153 points). Even established European-bound EVs like the Nio ET7 and ET9 scored significantly better, landing in the middle of the list with 183 points. Other models ranking higher than the SU7 include the Zeekr 001 (185 points), Lotus Emeya (185 points), BYD Han (194 points), and the Denza Z9 GT (214 points).
New reports of over 400 Xiaomi SU7 Ultra owners banding together to sue the company are only adding to the trouble Xiaomi faces. These owners have allegedly pooled RMB 3,000 (approximately $415) each to cover legal expenses. As always, the authenticity of online chat records detailing this action is tricky to prove, but the development shows growing dissatisfaction among owners of Xiaomi's premium electric sedan. The core of the dispute centers on an optional carbon fiber front hood priced at RMB 42,000 (around $5,830). This component was marketed as featuring functional "dual air ducts" designed to improve aerodynamics and cooling.
However, owners suggest that these claims are misleading. Videos showing the hood's internal structure reveal no difference from the standard aluminum version. Some owners have conducted tests using air blowers and tissue paper, which indicated no airflow through the purported ducts. Thermal imaging results shared by these owners showed no significant cooling benefits from the carbon fiber hood.
Xiaomi issued an apology on May 7th, acknowledging that the product descriptions were unclear. The company offered affected customers 20,000 loyalty points and the option to exchange their carbon fiber hood for a standard aluminum one. Many owners have reportedly rejected this offer, blaming lengthy wait times for the replacement parts, estimated to be between 30 and 40 weeks. They also perceive the offer as insufficient compensation for what they believe to be a performance-enhancing feature.
The legal challenge is particularly sensitive for Xiaomi's automotive division. On May 10th, Xiaomi Auto founder and CEO Lei Jun described the preceding weeks as the most challenging since the company's inception, alluding to both personal and professional difficulties. Industry analysts have drawn parallels to past instances involving other Chinese EV manufacturers, such as Avatr, which addressed similar concerns through public testing.
These comparisons have led to calls for Xiaomi to conduct independent verification of the carbon fiber hood's claimed functionality. Legal experts suggest that if third-party assessments confirm the ducts are non-functional, Xiaomi could face penalties under China's strict advertising laws for misleading promotion.
The issue goes beyond financial reimbursement for many affected customers. One clearly disappointed owner said online: "We purchased what was advertised as a performance feature. Xiaomi should either prove the ducts work or take responsibility if they don't."
This controversy could potentially affect the launch of the Xiaomi YU7 SUV and the company's growing ambitions. Industry observers believe that the outcome of this situation could significantly influence how automakers market optional performance-related components in the future.
Reader comments
Nothing yet. Be the first to comment.