Connect with us

News

Elon Musk spoke with Consumer Reports following Tesla Model 3 test results

[Credit: Consumer Reports/YouTube]

Published

on

In a recent episode of Consumer Reports’ Talking Cars, Auto Test Director Jake Fisher recounted a conversation he had with Tesla CEO Elon Musk following the release of CR’s test results for the Model 3.

While the magazine stated that there was “plenty to like” about the electric car, such as its excellent range and handling, there were several aspects of the vehicle that left much to be desired. The most prominent of the Model 3’s shortcomings were the car’s brakes, which had an average stopping distance of 152 feet from 60-0 mph — longer than any vehicle in its class. Due to its shortcomings, Consumer Reports opted not to give the Model 3 a “Recommended” rating.

Musk promptly responded to the magazine’s findings on Twitter, stating that Tesla would address the Model 3’s braking issues in an over-the-air firmware update. Musk also pledged to continuously improve the Model 3’s brakes, saying that “Tesla won’t stop until Model 3 has better braking than any remotely comparable car.”

As revealed in Consumer Reports’ recent Talking Cars episode, Musk also reached out to Auto Test Director Jake Fisher after the magazine’s test results were published. During their conversation, Musk and Fisher discussed the Model 3 and possible improvements to the vehicle.  

“He was remarkably candid about things. Honestly, he actually thanked us for bringing these things to attention, and said that we’re helping him make the car better,” Fisher said.

Fisher noted that he and Musk talked about several of the Model 3’s deficiencies, such as its controls, brakes, wind noise, rear seats, and its suspension. According to the CR Auto Test Director, Musk stated that Tesla has implemented improvements to the Model 3’s design over the past few months.

Advertisement
-

During the March-April timeframe, for one, Tesla rolled out changes to the Model 3’s glass to adjust wind noise in the cabin. Around the same time, Tesla also made modifications to the suspension, such as its shock absorbers, to make the ride more comfortable.

Musk discussed the controls of the Model 3 as well, a particular aspect of the vehicle that was considered as a weakness in Consumer Reports’ evaluation. According to Fisher, Musk threw out some ideas to make the car’s controls better.

“We talked about the vents, and he talked about ideas of, well, maybe as you move the seat, (the Model 3) would automatically adjust the vents and the mirrors to suit you,” Fisher said.

Consumer Reports recently published the results of its tests for the Model 3. [Credit: Consumer Reports/YouTube]

Musk also discussed another one of Consumer Reports’ complaints about the Model 3 — the car’s keycard. During its testing, the magazine noted that the phone key worked very well with the Model 3, but using the keycard proved cumbersome. Musk addressed this issue during his phone conversation with Fisher as well.

“He (Musk) admitted that yeah, this isn’t working too well, and we really should do something better. Again, I don’t know if they’re gonna do it or not, but he said we really need to provide a normal key to the customers of this car,” Fisher said.

The Model 3’s keycard stands as one of its differences with its larger siblings, the Model S and the Model X, both of which use Tesla’s ubiquitous electric car-shaped key fobs. The keycard, which is credit card-sized for easy storing in a wallet, is embedded with a small chip that acts as a digital signature for the vehicle.

Since the Model 3 keycard uses near field communication (NFC) technology, the card has a limited transmission range of about 4 inches, requiring owners to tap the electric car’s B-pillar to unlock the door. The card is also placed between the front seats of the vehicle to start the car.

Advertisement
-

Consumer Reports has been mixed with Tesla’s vehicles so far. The magazine dubbed the Model S as the best car it ever tested. The Model X, on the other hand, was dubbed by CR “fast and flawed,” citing the overcomplicated Falcon Wing Doors of the all-electric luxury SUV. Despite its reservations with the Model X, however, Consumer Reports nevertheless ranked Tesla as the sole American automaker in its Top 10 list for 2018.

Watch Consumer Reports’ recent episode on the Tesla Model 3 in the video below.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming

Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.

Published

on

By

Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”

Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.

The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.

Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.

The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.

Advertisement
-

The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.

Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.

Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.

This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:

With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.

This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.

Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.

Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.

The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.

Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.

For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.

Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Assisted Driving expands to tenth EU country

Published

on

Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.

Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.

The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.

Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.

In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.

Tesla starts showing how FSD will change lives in Europe

The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.

The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.

These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.

However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.

Continue Reading