News
I took a Ford F-150 Lightning to Tesla Superchargers: The Good and Bad
Update 4:33 pm: Charge rates updated for accuracy. FordPass statistics were incorrect. Added paragraph 7 to add detail regarding use of Ford App to charge.
Ford and Tesla unified the electric vehicle community by announcing a strategic decision to collaborate.
Last month, Ford gained access to Tesla’s Supercharger Network, giving non-Tesla EV drivers their first opportunity to charge at its piles across North America.
Ford was pleasant enough to send an F-150 Lightning to my house, drop it off, and allow me to drive it for three days. They also sent a Charging Adapter, which was necessary for using Tesla Superchargers.
The truck arrived at my house early Monday morning, and I was sure to take it for a spin to deplete some of the range before I drove it to my nearest V3 Supercharger. This was my first bit of criticism, as the closest Supercharger that would enable the F-150 Lightning to charge was around 45 minutes away. It is not the closest Tesla Supercharger to me, as there is one just ten minutes away, but its V2 capabilities would not allow me to charge a non-Tesla EV.
Ford announces Tesla Supercharger access to F-150 Lightning, Mustang Mach-E drivers
The truck was great, but that’s another story altogether.
First Impressions
I arrived at the first Supercharger on Monday evening, ready to give this a first go. I pulled into a spot in a row of unoccupied superchargers; the Lightning’s charging port is located just behind the left front tire, so you need to take up two spots, something that Tesla is working on.
I logged into the Ford app and selected the charger in front of me. This ” unlocked” the Supercharger, enabling me to grab the cable and attach the adapter. Charging was ready, and it was as simple as plugging in and sitting back in the driver’s seat, where the heads-up display told me my current percentage, and an estimated time to 90 percent state of charge.
It was super tight to get the cable to reach. I had some room to pull forward, admittedly, but I was driving a truck that I didn’t own, and I didn’t want to take the chance of scraping the underbody of the vehicle. Even with repositioning myself and trying to angle the truck in order to reach the cable comfortably, it was hard to get the cable to get to the connector.
A few extra feet would help even the most cautious drivers charge more easily, which I believe is important.
Overall, it was a good experience. My charging statistics for this session were:
- Charging Power – 106 kW
- Energy Added – 37.4 kWh
- Time Charged – 21 minutes
- Distance Gained – 96 miles
- Cost – $21.16
It was not an overwhelmingly time-consuming process. It was quick, it was easy, and it was nice to have access to a Supercharger. When I have Ford EVs, I usually have to charge at my local grocery store on a low-speed Volta charger, which will give me around 10-12 miles per hour.
Second Charging Session
My second session was much better. I was able to get into a Supercharger stall that was put on the side of the spot as it was an end space, so it was easier and much more reasonable to pull into.
There was significantly less tension on the Supercharger cable, which I think will increase longevity and keep the number of operable stalls up.
This session was smoother in terms of pulling in and charging. While longer cables will eliminate a lot of the problems I had during the first charging session, Tesla’s end-spot Superchargers are super ideal for non-Tesla EVs. This was my preferred space, and I would have used it the day prior if another vehicle wasn’t already utilizing it.
My charging stats for this session were:
- Charge Power – 106 kW
- Energy Added – 48.3 kWh
- Time Charged – 33 minutes
- Distance Gained – 115 miles
- Cost $22.08
Quality of the Adapter
The adapter Ford sent along was super quality, solid, and heavy. It felt like a piece of necessary equipment that is designed to last several years and won’t break on you due to inferior quality.
It was packaged nicely and included a nice message from CEO Jim Farley. It simply attaches to the Tesla Supercharger Cable and goes into the Ford EV, locking in place:
Forgot how much I love driving the Lightning, honestly my favorite EV to cruise around in!!
Ford overnighted me the adapter for Superchargers as well! pic.twitter.com/0VGE0AKxj6
— Joey Klender (@KlenderJoey) March 11, 2024
I was impressed by the quality of the adapter and I believe it would last years for Ford EV owners who plan to use it to access Superchargers.
Final Thoughts
Ford EV drivers are going to use Tesla Superchargers for years to come, and I think that what I experienced was a good start of the overall charging experience.
Everything was high-quality, fast, effective, and easy to use. It felt nice to roll into a Tesla Supercharger and gain adequate of range in a short period of time, and it was something that I feel a lot of EV drivers will appreciate, even if it is a tad pricey at this point in time.
I think that the lengthening of Supercharger cables will pay dividends, but I also think that Tesla could build new Supercharger stations with mandatory end spot positioning. This enables easier access to the Superchargers for non-Tesla EVs.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
Cybertruck
Tesla Cybertruck is officially the safest pickup, IIHS says
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) has awarded the 2025-2026 Tesla Cybertruck crew cab pickup its highest honor: Top Safety Pick+. This marks the Cybertruck as the only full-size pickup to achieve this distinction in recent evaluations.
The award applies specifically to vehicles built after April 2025, following structural upgrades including front underbody reinforcements and footwell modifications.
These changes enabled strong performance in updated crash tests. The Cybertruck earned “Good” ratings in the small overlap front (driver and passenger sides), updated moderate overlap front, and updated side tests—core requirements for the Top Safety Pick+ designation.
It also secured acceptable or good headlights across trims and a “Good” rating for its standard front crash prevention system in pedestrian scenarios, along with acceptable or good performance in vehicle-to-vehicle testing.
The Cybertruck avoided every single pedestrian collision, including:
- Daytime child crossing
- Nightitime adult crossing
- Night parallel adult
In IIHS pedestrian front crash prevention tests, @Cybertruck avoided every single collision – daytime, nighttime & different angles
It was also the only pickup to earn Top Safety Pick+ (highest award) in 2026https://t.co/BNPqT9TbsW pic.twitter.com/M6nwDisBFK
— Tesla (@Tesla) June 24, 2026
In the large pickup category, competitors such as the Toyota Tundra received only a standard Top Safety Pick, while the Ford F-150 and Ram 1500 did not qualify for either award. This positions the Cybertruck as a standout in occupant protection and crash avoidance among its peers.

Credit: IIHS
Ironically, the same vehicle celebrated for superior U.S. safety performance remains banned from public roads in the United Kingdom and much of Europe. Regulators there cite the Cybertruck’s sharp external edges and highly rigid stainless-steel construction as failing pedestrian-protection standards. European and UK rules require rounded surfaces on protruding parts to minimize injury risk in collisions with vulnerable road users.
Critics also point to the truck’s substantial weight and unyielding body structure, which some argue could transfer more force to other vehicles or pedestrians rather than absorbing it.
Tesla’s engineering philosophy underpins the Cybertruck’s strong IIHS results. The vehicle features a distinctive stainless-steel exoskeleton made from ultra-hard 30X cold-rolled stainless steel. This provides exceptional structural rigidity and a robust safety cage that resists deformation in side impacts and rollovers.
Engineers designed integrated load paths to channel crash forces away from the occupant compartment while allowing controlled energy absorption in key zones. Post-April 2025 refinements to the front underbody further optimized performance in overlap crashes.
Complementing the passive structure is Tesla’s advanced active safety suite, including the standard Collision Avoidance Assist system with automatic emergency braking. This contributed directly to the vehicle’s strong front crash prevention scores. The skateboard platform and low center of gravity also enhance stability and handling, reducing the likelihood of certain crashes.
The IIHS recognition highlights how Tesla’s combination of high-strength materials, structural innovation, and software-driven safety systems can deliver top-tier protection in rigorous testing. While global regulatory differences on design and pedestrian interaction continue to limit the Cybertruck’s availability outside North America, its U.S. safety credentials set a new benchmark for full-size pickups.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s newest Starmind will make earth data centers obsolete
Elon Musk confirmed Starmind as SpaceX’s AI satellite constellation name, targeting one million orbital compute nodes.
Elon Musk confirmed that Starmind will be the official name of SpaceX’s planned AI satellite constellation, following a trademark filing by xAI that surfaced earlier this week. Starmind is what’s being described to the FCC as a constellation of up to one million AI satellites
It’s worth noting that SpaceX’s Starlink communication satellite and Starmind are built on the same orbital infrastructure concept but serve entirely different purposes. Starlink is a connectivity network, with satellites receiving and relaying data between points on Earth, and functioning as a high-speed internet backbone in space. The satellites themselves do not process or think, and move information from one place to another, the same function a fiber cable performs underground.
SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history
Starmind, on the other hand, is something completely different, and tather than moving data, its satellites would compute data through artificial intelligence and directly in orbit using onboard processors powered by large solar arrays. Where a Starlink satellite is essentially a very fast pipe, a Starmind satellite is a server. The practical implication is that Starmind would allow AI models to run inference, process queries, and generate outputs from space, then beam results down to users anywhere on Earth within milliseconds, and without the data ever needing to travel to a terrestrial data center.
Starship will be able to carry 30 to 50 AI1 satellites per launch, delivering the equivalent of dozens of server racks per flight, with no land acquisition, no power grid approval, and no cooling infrastructure required on the ground.
SpaceX is pursuing this new technology as terrestrial data centers are running into hard limits such as lack of physical space, community opposition, and power and water consumption at a scale that is increasingly difficult to permit. Space has unlimited solar power, natural vacuum cooling, and no zoning boards. Musk said in a June 8 video presentation that he expects space to become the lowest-cost location to deploy AI compute within two to three years. Two AI1 prototypes are scheduled to launch in early 2027, with volume production targeted for the end of that year at a new facility called Gigasat.
The real world applications Starmind enables extend well beyond powering Grok. A constellation of orbiting AI processors could run inference workloads for any paying customer, anywhere on Earth, with latency measured in milliseconds rather than the seconds associated with ground-based cloud routing across continents. Starmind, if it scales as described, would make SpaceX the landlord of AI compute the same way Starlink made it the landlord of satellite internet.
News
Tesla pushes back against unfair reporting of accidents
Tesla is pushing back against the unfair reporting of accidents involving its vehicles. Many media outlets were quick to jump to conclusions about a fatal accident involving a Tesla in Katy, Texas, that happened recently.
The driver of the vehicle, which slammed into a brick house and killed a woman inside, stated the car was operating on Autopilot. Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy both challenged that claim, with Elluswamy revealing last night that the system was overridden by the driver, who pressed the accelerator pedal “all the way to 100%.”
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
The car reached a speed of 73 MPH during the crash, Elluswamy detailed, and stated that the accelerator pedal was even pressed after the crash.
The story has been spread throughout the media with either incomplete or incorrect reporting, with some stories still not updated nearly 24 hours after Musk and Elluswamy posted answers about the crash on X.
The reporting has been a thorn in the side of Tesla for several years. Vehicle accidents involving Teslas are usually reported with the manufacturer’s name in the headline, while other companies are free of criticism when their cars are involved in accidents.
Here’s an example of that:
So you don’t report the vehicle’s make when it isn’t a Tesla, but you do report it when it is a Tesla?
The vehicle in your post above is a Hyundai Ioniq 5 EV. pic.twitter.com/4WT3sZ2DHm
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) February 17, 2026
Many media outlets stated the car was in “self-driving mode” or “Autopilot mode” when the car crashed. The truth is, now that Tesla has chimed in, that the driver had manually overriden the system by pressing the accelerator. Elluswamy commented on the unfair reporting:
“This blatantly irresponsible reporting does more harm to people than they realize.
Using Tesla self-driving is far safer than manual driving, and this was measured over 10B miles.
Planting such FUD in the minds of general public, who might not know the all the facts, might prevent them from using this technology that makes them safer.”
This blatantly irresponsible reporting does more harm to people than they realize.
Using Tesla self-driving is far safer than manual driving, and this was measured over 10B miles.
Planting such FUD in the minds of general public, who might not know the all the facts, might…
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
The damage these headlines do to Tesla and the self-driving car movement is unexplainable. Most people do not realize the safeguards that are in place with Tesla’s self-driving functions; many people who have used it know the car would never travel at that speed in a residential area, not even on the most aggressive “Mad Max” setting.
It is important to remember that Tesla Full Self-Driving is not autonomous, and the company never claimed it was. Drivers are still responsible for paying attention and remaining vigilant. They must be able to take over at all times.




