Tesla CEO Elon Musk with a prototype Model S.

This report has been updated to include a response from Tesla to a request for details on how reporters were advised to drive to maximize range between Washington, D.C. and Boston.)

Mea culpa? Sort of.  The New York Times is acknowledging that one of its veteran reporters may not have used “especially good judgment” in how he reviewed an extended drive in the Tesla Model S battery-electric sedan. But the paper of record, as it likes to view itself, insists that the automaker’s CEO “is at fault, too.”

The widely publicized dust-up was triggered by a recent story filed not by someone on the NY Times’ Wheels blog or Autos page but by veteran political correspondent John Broder.  He was given a chance to drive a new Model S equipped with what Tesla calls a 300-mile battery pack from Washington, D.C. to Boston. Along the way, Broder planned to plug in for quick recharges at two of Tesla’s so-called Supercharger stations. But he failed to make the second one, he reported, running out of power early and needing a lift on a flatbed to get there.

That triggered a response from Tesla’s never-shy founder and CEO Elon Musk. The South African-born executive initially called Broder to apologize but then issued a series of tweets, including one declaring the Times story a “fake.” As the brouhaha over battery range amped up, Tesla then released the log from the vehicle’s onboard data recorder which, it revealed, had secretly been recording the technical details of the drive.

The dust-up generated wide coverage in part due to the unusual decision to make a dispute with the Times so public but also because it raised the possibility, no matter who eventually conceded the debate, that potential buyers would have doubts raised about the viability of the Tesla Model S, the maker’s first mainstream battery-electric vehicle.

According to the logs released by Tesla, Broder appears to have taken a number of steps that could have seriously reduced range and made it more likely he wouldn’t make his destination.  But a number of analysts reviewing the Tesla chart pointed out that Musk often made apples-to-oranges comparisons that didn’t really fault Broder as much as the executive wanted to imply.

Nonetheless, the Times’ editor Margaret Sullivan issued an unusually strong concession in the paper, conceding the drive “did not go well,” in part because Broder did not use “especially good judgment along the way.” The reporter, she acknowledged, “left himself open to valid criticism by taking what seem to be casual and imprecise notes along the journey.”

That said, Broder “took on the test drive in good faith, and told the story as he experienced it,” Sullivan stressed, taking a few parting shots at Tesla’s CEO by insisting Musk’s data logs were presented in potentially misleading ways that were not necessarily an accurate portrayal of what happened, either.”

Both sides in the debate have attracted their fair share of supporters and detractors.  The Atlantic magazine’s newswire, for example, asserted that, “Not all of Musk’s data is entirely convincing.”

What made the case more problematic for the Times, however, was the fact that Tesla quickly invited other media outlets to make the same journey, as did a number of early Model S owners.  CNN and others found they could make the trip without running out of power.

But they also followed strict guidelines set out by Tesla in terms of where and how the battery car could be driven. That often meant operating below speed limit and perhaps not passing slower vehicles. In the case of Broder’s drive, the extreme temperature appeared to require more energy for cabin heating, a problem the more recent drives did not experience.

TheDetroitBureau.com has made repeated attempts to get Tesla officials to provide the specific guidelines they issued to those attempting to make the Washington to Boston drive.  Tesla has just responded with the following comments:

“We always tell every reporter the same things – that climate control, acceleration, and speed have the most effect on range. (same is true for ICE vehicles, so it’s not a new concept, really), said spokeswoman Shanna Hendricks in an e-mail response, adding that, “The route was predefined based on his goal to hit the Superchargers and get to Boston”

It is highly likely Musk and Tesla will now promote their seeming victory in the electrifying war of words but that doesn’t mean the dispute hasn’t raised some troubling concerns. It, if anything, underscores that despite the fact that the Model S offers an optional battery pack large enough, it claims, to go 300 miles on a charge, that is less likely in real world long distance driving.

And by laying down strict groundrules, potential Tesla customers need be aware that even with the expanding network of high-speed Supercharger stations the vehicle still cannot be driven in the relatively transparent fashion of conventional, gas or diesel-powered vehicles. Detours along the way may not be possible, and simply trying to maintain the speed limit in some parts of the country could result in running out of power prematurely.

Tesla hopes to improve the situation by adding still more Superchargers, especially along the East and West Coasts, but rather than taking sides, those following the debate need to understand the nuances of what it reveals.