News
Model S Scores 5-Star Rating in Euro NCAP Crash Test
Euro NCAP, the leading organization that provides independent safety and crash testing to motoring consumers across Europe awarded the Tesla Model S with a perfect 5-star rating.
The organization ranked the Model S based on safety for the following categories: adult occupant, child occupant, pedestrian, and safety assist features. Euro NCAP scored the Model S with exceptionally high scores for its side impact protection however frontal impact dummy kinematics indicated that head protection did not fare. Testing indicated that there was insufficient inflation in the airbag to prevent the head from flattening out the airbag and coming in contact with the fascia.
According to Euro NCAP, “Tesla investigated the issue and found an error in the airbag calibration software supplied by the vendor. Euro NCAP has been informed that this error has been corrected in all vehicles supplied to customers.”
See the full results of the Tesla Model S safety and crash testing below.
[learn_more caption=”Safety Test Results” state=”open”]
Tesla Model S Euro NCAP Safety Test Results:
Adult Occupant
The passenger compartment remained stable in the frontal impact. Readings from the passenger dummy indicated good protection of all body areas except the head. Analysis of the dummy kinematics showed that the airbag on the passenger side had ‘bottomed out’ i.e. there was insufficient inflation to prevent the head flattening the airbag and coming into contact with the facia, through the airbag material. Although the calculated injury parameters were not hazardous, protection of the passenger head was penalised and rated as adequate. Dummy readings indicated good protection of the knees and femurs of the driver and passenger. Tesla showed that a similar level of protection would be provided to occupants of different sizes and to those sat in different seating positions. In the side barrier test, the Model S scored maximum points with good protection of all body regions. In the more severe side pole test, dummy measurements of rib compressions indicated marginal protection of the chest. Protection against whiplash injury in the event of a rear-end collision was rated as good for the front and rear seats.
Child Occupant
The Model S scored maximum points for its protection of the child dummies in the dynamic tests. Both dummies were seated in rearward-facing restraints and showed good protection in the frontal impact. In the side impact, both dummies were properly contained within the protective shells of their restraints, minimising the risk of head contact with parts of the vehicle interior. The front passenger airbag can be disabled through the user menu, allowing a rearward-facing restraint to be used in that seating position. However, the interface is not clear in all languages about the actions being taken to set the airbag status and the system was not rewarded. All of the restraints for which the car is designed could be properly installed and accommodated with the exception of the Group I universal restraint in the rear outboard seats. While the seat could be installed, the seat cushioning made engagement of the ISOFIX probes difficult. Integral child restraints are available as an optional third row in the Model S.
Pedestrian
The Tesla is equipped with an ‘active’ bonnet. When the system detects that a pedestrian has been struck, actuators lift the bonnet to provide greater clearance to hard structures underneath. Tesla showed that the system detects all statures robustly over a range of speeds and the car was tested with the bonnet in the deployed position. Protection was adequate or marginal over most of the surface of the bonnet with poor results recorded only at the base of the windscreen and on the stiff screen pillars. The bumper offered predominantly good protection to pedestrians’ legs while the front edge of the bonnet gave good results towards the centre of the car but poor results at the outside edges.
Safety Assist
Electronic stability control is standard equipment on the Model S. A seatbelt reminder is standard for the front and rear seats, as is a lane departure warning system that met Euro NCAP’s requirements. The Model S has a speed assistance system that can recognise the local speed limit and issue a warning to the driver when that limit is exceeded. The Model S is not equipped with an autonomous emergency braking system.
[/learn_more]
ALSO SEE: [Video] Tesla Model S Drifting at Gumball 3000 Festival
A new report from Reuters claims that a transport authority in Sweden is pushing back against the approval of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite because it will travel over speed limits.
The report says the Swedish Transport Administration (TRV) recommends the European Union votes against FSD’s approval. TRV believes it should not be approved until Tesla disables FSD’s ability to speed.
TRV sent a letter to the European Union’s Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles (TCMV), which is set to meet on June 30 to discuss the potential approval of the Tesla FSD suite in the country. Tesla, which has received various approvals in Europe over the past two months, has not provided a comment.
Teslas operating on FSD do travel over the speed limit, depending on the Speed Profile that is chosen. Drivers have the ability to disengage FSD at any point; Tesla specifically states that those supervising the suite are responsible for its actions.
Let’s cut to the chase: humans operating any vehicle speed almost daily in the United States. Realistically, speed limits in the U.S. are more frequently treated as speed minimums. However, other countries are different, and driving behaviors are less aggressive.
TRV believes that “allowing automated systems to systematically exceed legal speed limits…risks undermining both the legal framework and the expected safety benefits of vehicle automation,” the report stated. It’s surprising that Tesla has not received this claim from other countries previously.
This could be a good argument to bring Max Speed back, the setting that previously allowed the driver to choose the absolute fastest the car would travel.
This would still put the responsibility of supervision in the hands of the driver. It would allow the driver to choose whether the car would travel over the speed limit or not, acknowledging that they set the speed, and if they get pulled over, there would be no ability to argue it.
However, it does not seem as if this is something Tesla will do, especially considering many U.S. drivers have requested the feature in an effort to eliminate speeding or at least tone it down. The company has not shown any interest in bringing it back.
Tesla has approvals for FSD in Europe in Estonia, Lithuania, Denmark, the Netherlands, and Belgium.
Tesla is going to let you guide Full Self-Driving with Grok in 3 months, CEO Elon Musk confirmed on X.
The response from Musk, which revealed Tesla plans to allow drivers to effectively control the car and its navigation more explicitly using Grok, puts the feature for about September.
A Tesla owner said that Full Self-Driving is great, but owners should be able to “converse with Grok like we can with an Uber driver.” She then used examples like, “Grok, turn right here,” and “Drop us off right here, we’ll walk due to traffic,” and finally,” Drop at entrance first, then park far away.”
Coincidentally, the final piece of dialogue would also mean features like Banish are potentially on the way soon.
This functionality will be there in about 3 months or so
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) June 18, 2026
Banish is also referred to as “Reverse Summon,” and would enable the car to self-park while dropping occupants off at their destination.
This would be a great way to improve the overall experience while supervising FSD. Navigation is already a major painpoint that many owners complain about. Manual overrides when a maneuver is requested or canceled (like using the turn signal stalk to override a navigation route), do not always work.
The feature could be especially useful in street parking scenarios in a city, where spots are sometimes tough to come by. Many of us who grab dinner in a more populated area will park a street or two over from wherever we’re going, because sometimes you know that’s the best you will get. If a driver using FSD could say, “Hey Grok, turn right here on Queen St. and park in that open spot on the right,” it could save a lot of confusion FSD might have on its own.
Musk teased that a similar feature was “coming” back in February:
Tesla Full Self-Driving set to get an awesome new feature, Elon Musk says
It is certainly surprising that Tesla is doing it at this point. The company’s more recent moves have been more evident of taking control and inputs away from humans and putting them in the AI’s hands more frequently. The biggest example of this was taking away Max Speed in AI4 cars, giving us Speed Profiles, and not having any input on the fastest speed the car will travel.
Of course, giving navigation preferences to Grok is availble already in Teslas, but not at the drop of a hat. Instead, you can suggest a certain route at the beginning of your drive.
Here’s an example of that from December:
🚨🏈 I am taking my parents and Fiancee to the @Ravens game next weekend and asked @Grok to help me route my @Tesla through a specific neighborhood to reach the correct Lot we will park in.
This is a great example of the new @grok nav integration with the Tesla Holiday Update: pic.twitter.com/rPp4I7q8Yv
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) December 13, 2025
Finally, the original post that Musk responded to mentioned a parking preference after dropping off the occupants, which describes the Banish feature that Tesla has teased for years.
We’re not sure if Musk was responding more to the ability to guide the car with Grok, or whether he also was including Banish in the three-month prediction timeframe.
A close-up image of a Cybercab engineering vehicle in Peabody, Massachusetts, reveals a compact triangular side repeater camera housing equipped with an integrated washer mechanism.
This seemingly small hardware addition could prove to be one of the most critical components for achieving reliable, unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) — not just for the dedicated Robotaxi but potentially for existing AI4-equipped vehicles as well.
The washer system’s importance cannot be overstated in Tesla’s vision-only autonomy approach. Cameras are the sole sensory input for the neural networks powering FSD, constantly interpreting the environment for safe navigation. In real-world conditions, however, lenses quickly accumulate rain, snow, mud, dust, or road spray.
Many of us Tesla owners, especially those who deal with any sort of winter weather at all, know the all-too-common alert that pops up when cameras are obstructed:
Even brief obstructions can drop perception confidence, trigger safety disengagements, or force the vehicle to pull over, although these are relatively rare. Instead, most of the time, the camera will need a wipe from the owner next time they stop the car.
But unlike human drivers who can manually clear their view, a Robotaxi operating 24/7 without a steering wheel or mirrors must maintain pristine vision autonomously. The Cybercab’s side repeater washer delivers targeted cleaning bursts precisely where needed for merging, lane changes, and blind-spot monitoring — functions that demand uninterrupted visibility from the external cameras:
And this is how the side camera and washer look like on a Cybercab. This is from an Engineering vehicle in Peabody MA. pic.twitter.com/Re8VknpmLM
— Tobias Goebel (Unsupervised) (@tpgoebel) June 17, 2026
This hardware directly tackles a known pain point in current FSD deployments. Owners frequently report camera-related alerts during inclement weather, which is understandable, but needs to be solved for a true autonomous experience.
For a production Robotaxi fleet aiming for high utilization and minimal downtime, robust washer systems represent a foundational reliability upgrade; essentially, they’re a must-have. Early sightings suggest the design may extend to rear cameras as well, creating a comprehensive cleaning architecture that keeps the entire vision suite operational in harsh environments.
Without it, even the most advanced neural nets struggle when their “eyes” are compromised.
What Does This Mean for AI4 Cars?
This Cybercab detail raises timely questions for AI4 cars already on the road. While Hardware 4 delivers superior compute and camera resolution compared to earlier versions, production models typically lack dedicated side and rear washers. Tesla has included them on Model Y robotaxis that it is using in the fleet:
Tesla Robotaxi has a highly-requested hardware feature not available on typical Model Ys
As Tesla refines unsupervised FSD for broader release, the gap in environmental resilience becomes evident. Software improvements can help mitigate issues, but they cannot fully replace physical cleaning in heavy rain or muddy conditions. Analysts and owners increasingly speculate that AI4 vehicles may eventually require similar washer retrofits — or a future AI4.5 variant — to match the Cybercab’s all-weather readiness and support the same level of autonomy.
As testing progresses, the Cybercab’s washer mechanism highlights Tesla’s pragmatic focus on real-world robustness. It may well become the hardware piece that determines how quickly and reliably FSD scales from prototypes to everyday vehicles.
Tesla faces Full Self-Driving pushback in EU over ‘speeding’
Tesla teases greater Grok FSD integration and ‘Banish’ feature ‘in about 3 months’
