News
Ford commits to electric F-150 pickup truck as legacy auto buckles under EV pressure
During a presentation at the Deutsche Bank Global Automotive Conference in the MGM Grand in Detroit, Jim Farley, Ford’s president of global markets, made a blockbuster announcement. After more than 40 years in the market, and amidst the impending arrival of vehicles like the Tesla pickup truck and the quad-motor Rivian R1T, the beloved Ford F-150 is going electric.
“We’re going to be electrifying the F-Series — battery electric and hybrid,” Farley said.
The Ford executive later noted that the company’s decision to move the F-Series franchise to all-electric and hybrid power is a way for the automaker to “future-proof” its most successful and lucrative vehicles. Farley dubbed the F-Series franchise as a “global juggernaut,” a statement that carries no exaggeration considering that the F-150 has been one of America’s best-selling pickup trucks for decades.
Needless to say, Ford’s announcement surprised some of Detroit’s veterans. The F-150, after all, is pretty much the quintessential symbol of fossil fuel-powered workhorse. John McElroy, a longtime auto industry observer and the host of Autoline This Week, noted to the Detroit Free Press that Ford’s announcement represents an apparent change in the legacy carmaker’s strategies.
“When he says ‘battery electric,’ what I’m taking that to mean is a battery electric vehicle. Pure electric. They’ve said they would have a hybrid plug-in version of the F-150. But this is different than what they’ve talked about in the past,” McElroy said.
The Autoline host added that an electric F-150 provides some protection for Ford, considering that players in the electric car market are starting to take an interest in the segment. Tesla CEO Elon Musk, for one, has openly stated that he is looking forward to building a pickup truck. Last November, Rivian Automotive also took the wraps off its R1T pickup truck, a refined, production-ready vehicle that provides a balance between ruggedness and luxury. For McElroy, the entrance of these vehicles presents a legitimate threat to Ford’s most lucrative business.
-
- (Photo: Rivian)
-
- Rivian unveils its R1T all-electric pickup truck. [Credit: Teslarati]
Ford faces stiff competition from automakers like Rivian as it looks to adapt its 100-year old business to an industry that’s shifting toward electric mobility
“Tesla is talking about coming out with an electric pickup. And look what Tesla has done in the luxury segment. They’ve clobbered just about everybody. You can’t pooh-pooh that people won’t be interested in an electric pickup. Rivian Automotive is coming out with an all-electric pickup. These are the crown jewels for Ford Motor Co., the F-Series. Ford has got to react to competitive threats,” the Autoline host said.
-
- (Photo: Rivian)
-
- Rivian unveils its R1T all-electric pickup truck. [Credit: Teslarati]
Looking at the specs of the competition, McElroy’s statement does ring true. The Rivian R1T, for one, is a powerhouse, equipped with four electric motors and a 180 kWh battery pack that gives more than 400 miles of range per charge. Thanks to its all-electric design, the R1T is a champion of utility as well, with numerous storage spaces that competitors would be challenged to match.
Tesla, on the other hand, has not revealed any official details about its pickup truck, though Elon Musk has stated that the vehicle would be so loaded with tech, it would not be out of place in the Blade Runner franchise. Musk has also teased some features for Tesla’s pickup truck, such as four-wheel steering and the capability to tow up to 300,000 pounds.
That said, credit must be given to Ford for seeing the writing on the wall. The auto industry is transitioning away from fossil fuel-powered transportation. Headed by vehicles like the Tesla Model 3, electric cars are starting to become mainstream. If Ford wants to thrive in this transition, offering an electric version of its most successful vehicle definitely seems to be the correct strategy.
With this update from Ford, it is not too difficult to imagine Tesla CEO Elon Musk feeling some form of gratification. Musk, after all, has made it a point to state that Tesla’s purpose is to accelerate the world’s transition to sustainable energy. In this sense, Ford’s upcoming all-electric F-150 pickup truck is actually a pretty big step towards Tesla’s overall goal.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
