News
Lincoln unveils Star Concept EV with plans for three fully electric vehicles by 2025
Lincoln unveiled its Star Concept EV earlier this week to showcase its “captivating, dynamic new face – revealing the brand’s vision for connected, electrified vehicles.” The Star Concept EV, which officially debuted on Wednesday, brings fresh design ideas and concepts to Lincoln’s brand language, which prepares to partially transition to electric powertrains with three full EVs by 2025.
“This is a shining example of what happens when we combine Lincoln luxury with flexible electrical architecture to create unimaginable experiences for customers,” Ford CEO Jim Farley said. “We can truly revolutionize how people engage with the brand and scale it across an exciting lineup of products that catapult Lincoln into the digital, connected age.”
Despite its futuristic design, the Star Concept encapsulates a new design language with Lincoln’s tenets of beauty, human, gliding, and sanctuary on full display. These design tenets will help Lincoln navigate a tough transition to EVs, as it plans to have three models powered by electric powertrains by 2025. An additional model is expected the following year.
Rivian's partnership with Ford will bring Lincoln its first luxury electric vehicle
“As Lincoln enters the next chapter in our transition to a zero-emissions future, the Lincoln Star Concept will lead the way for our portfolio of fully electric vehicles,” Lincoln President Joy Falotico said. “It is an excellent example of how we are redefining luxury for the next generation as we work to transform the vehicle into a third space – a true place of sanctuary – for our clients.”
How the Star Concept will lead Lincoln’s EV Efforts
The Lincoln Star Concept EV delivers modern aesthetics with intelligent features, but the company truly planned to make the vehicle “the ultimate sanctuary for clients.”
“Electrification is removing many traditional vehicle design constraints, allowing us to reimagine what a vehicle can be,” Chief Design Officer for Ford Motor Company Anthony Lo said. “The Lincoln Star is a study of experiences and themes that push the boundaries of Lincoln design – and it’s just the start.”
-
- Lincoln Concept vehicle. Not available for purchase.
-
- Lincoln Concept vehicle. Not available for purchase.
A hat-tip to Lincon’s evolving design language, the new Star Concept EV combines sleek and dynamic silhouette features with an immersive experience that is truly one-of-a-kind. Lincoln said that the vehicle, “whether stationary or in motion, the concept uses design, light, displays, scents, and sounds to create an immersive experience for clients. Intelligent technology that enhances comfort, productivity, and entertainment is deployed throughout to bring the romance of travel back in a uniquely Lincoln way.”
Electric vehicles in today’s market are more like smartphones than like automobiles, in a way. Lincoln highlights its focus on an intelligence system to capture the essence of a “digital assistant.” These assistive techniques and ideas for a more in-depth ownership experience will enable features like “connected vehicle-to-vehicle and infrastructure capabilities, as well as next-generation leading driver-assist features such as Help Me See and Park for Me,” Lincoln said.
A Sanctuary Vehicle
An increased focus on luxurious feel and comfort was obviously dialed in by Lincoln before releasing images of the Star Concept EV. The interior is partitioned into first and second-row areas, with premium, spacious, wraparound seating that offers comfortable reclined lounge posture and individual leg rests, providing a truly unmatched interior experience only seen in the most premium luxury vehicles. Horizontal display screens seamlessly integrated into the vehicle’s interior provide a unique and modern experience.
-
- Lincoln Concept vehicle. Not available for purchase.
-
- Lincoln Concept vehicle. Not available for purchase.
-
- Lincoln Concept vehicle. Not available for purchase.
Lincoln is also introducing “rejuvenation moods:”
“Three rejuvenation moods join a new Lincoln Embrace sequence harmonizing audio, scenting and lighting throughout the cabin. A symphonic orchestration with crisp, high-resolution animations on the displays creates an immersive digital sanctuary. Whether stuck in traffic or just enjoying a few quiet moments after work, the rejuvenation moods provide a true sanctuary in a third space:
- Coastal Morning uses gentle, oceanic sounds, a fragrance of sea mist and the soft, warm glow of the sun with dynamic lighting throughout to replicate a stroll on the beach at sunrise
- Mindful Vitality is meant to reenergize the senses, with invigorating, upbeat audio, dynamic abstract artwork, soft, glowing lighting and a flowery fragrance throughout
- Evening Chill mirrors dusk using a calming night soundtrack coordinated with night sky video and an evergreen fragrance”
“The Lincoln Star Concept has been a true labor of love for our team and provides us with a platform to share and test our experiences and design philosophy with clients as we evolve our Quiet Flight DNA,” Kemal Curic, Lincoln’s Global Design Director, said. “Signifying transcendence through both space and time, the concept creates a sense of peace and serenity within an electric experience and previews what is to come from Lincoln.”
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.
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
