News
No, Tesla wasn’t “cheated” in the Model 3 headlight safety test by the IIHS
With the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s release of initial crash test information for the Tesla Model 3 came cries from many in the electric vehicle community that Tesla was “being cheated.” This isn’t entirely true as the new IIHS test removes a lot of cars out of the Top Safety Pick+ rating, the highest accolade the independent safety tester will give a car.
The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is an independent testing organization funded by insurance companies and some of the banks who back them. The IIHS purchases every car it tests–usually several of each–and tests these vehicles in their highest-available safety configuration. These crash tests usually destroy the vehicles in question, of course, but give an independent, third-party result not otherwise available.
When the IIHS’ initial safety results for the Tesla Model 3 were released, they included ratings for only two of the seven total ratings given to a vehicle. Those ratings, posted to the IIHS.org website, created a lot of response from the community regarding the failure of the Model 3’s headlamps to pass muster.
The tests so far include only the non-invasive, non-destructive tests normally conducted by the IIHS. Namely to crash mitigation systems and headlamps. It’s likely that the next test to see release on the Model 3 will be for LATCH child safety system use, another non-destructive test. From there, crash testing will begin. For that, IIHS needs to receive more Model 3 vehicles (5 in all), the rest of which are on order and expected later this year. Like any other Model 3 buyer, delays in manufacturing have put the IIHS’ ownership of the cars for evaluation on hold.
How the IIHS Conducts Headlight Tests, and Why
The IIHS conducts headlamps tests because, according to the organization, about half of all fatal crashes in the U.S. occur in the dark and many of those are on unlit roads where headlamps are the only thing illuminating whatever’s in front of the car. Although headlights are mandatory and minimum illumination requirements are required by law for all street-legal vehicles, there is a wide variance in how much (and how useful) that illumination can be. Especially with the advent of new lighting technologies.
“Headlight technology has been developing rapidly in recent years. LED and high-intensity discharge (HID) lamps have begun to replace the traditional halogen ones,” IIHS explains on its website. “Many automakers offer curve-adaptive headlights, which respond to steering and swivel according to the direction of travel. Many also offer high-beam assist, a feature that can increase the use of high beams..” These and other variables mean that headlights of the same type on one vehicle can be much worse than they can on another. Even little things like how the lights are focused, what type of light they emit, etc. can change effectiveness.
For those reasons, the IIHS instituted a headlight testing methodology in 2016. Starting this year (2018), these test results directly affect a vehicle’s eligibility for Top Safety Pick+ status. So far in 2018, only a handful of models have received TSP+ ratings. Somewhat surprising for luxury and high-end car buyers is the fact that almost all of those TSP+ vehicles are lower-end vehicles from makes like Hyundai and Subaru.
Testing for headlamps is conducted using a multi-part evaluation using a hypothetical, clear, two-lane road. The tests include measurements in a straightaway, measuring both the length and amount of illumination as well as the amount of glare the lights create for oncoming drivers. Then a gradual left- and right-hand turn and a steeper left- and right-hand curve are measured for a total of five directions in all.
Results are taken from varied distances at 10 inches high and 3-feet, 7-inches high (from the ground) to mimic where the driver is looking (out and down) and where oncoming vehicle drivers are seeing from (higher up). Ratings are then assigned according to how these measurements line up with a hypothetical ideal headlight system. Both low and high beams are tested the same way with the low beams being weighted for scoring as they are used most often in the real world. Vehicles with automatic high beam systems are given more points as the high beams will be used more often.
The Controversy Surrounding the IIHS Headlight Test
The inherent weakness in this IIHS test is similar to that of most of its advanced testing: it’s only tested on the ideal vehicle trim level and options. In other words, the testing is most likely happening on the most expensive model being sold, not necessarily on the most mainstream version of the vehicle. This becomes obvious when the bulk of the Top Safety Pick+ list is comprised of vehicles like the 2018 Subaru WRX.
The WRX is a great car, sure; a personal favorite in fact. But its winning of a TSP+ badge is a little misleading. The volume-selling model WRX is the mid-tier Premium trim, which doesn’t include the LED headlights or the automatic high beam control tested by the IIHS. To get those, one has to go up to the more expensive Limited trim point and add the EyeSight system. That latter point can only come if the buyer of this driver’s car is willing to drop their manual transmission for a CVT. That’s another sticking point as the WRX has a large percentage of buyers who want to shift the gears themselves.
What all of this means is that the 2018 WRX is a great car, but it’s not likely to be purchased in the configuration which the IIHS used to test its headlamps with. Other cars on the TSP+ list are much the same.
The interesting note here is that unlike actual crash tests, the slightly more subjective headlamp tests of the IIHS fall into the non-destructive tests for other safety equipment that, while respected, are also flawed for the same reason: only top-end models tend to have all of that equipment on them. Unlike those other safety items, however, the headlamp tests can hurt higher-end models while lower-end options would ace them. Why? Because LED headlamps, which consistently appear to fail most of the glare testing that the IIHS does, are generally only found on top-end models or luxury vehicles. There could be a lot of reasons for that, but my personal theory is that it has to do with automakers having to find a median between maximum safe illumination and glare due to how reflective LED lamps are designed.
The current IIHS Top Safety Pick+ list includes no midsize luxury cars (which the Model 3 is considered), though the overall midsize car category has five entries. All of them with caveats as to what must be included (usually top trim point items or options). Last year, under the old rules, most midsize and midsize luxury cars made the TSP+ list and Tesla’s Model S failed to make the list in part, again, for headlights.
It’s difficult to say what will happen with the Insurance Institute’s testing going forward. Likely manufacturers will come up with solutions to receive better scores on the headlamps test, perhaps by changing LED lighting designs or gaming the IIHS tests (as they have in the past with the small front overlap).
Tesla has some smart engineers and could probably figure out a way to remedy the lighting problem that’s kept their vehicles from rating high on IIHS tests in recent years. With a mainstream attempt like the Model 3, that could become a very important goal as buyers in the midsize sedan category tend to be safety conscious consumers.
News
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.
Tesla is reportedly bracing for the integration of Apple’s well-known iOS automotive platform, CarPlay, into its vehicles after the company had avoided it for years.
However, now that it’s here, owners are more than clear that they do not want it, and they have their theories about why it’s on its way. Some believe it might have to do with the EV tax credit, or rather, the loss of it.
Owners are more interested in why Tesla is doing this now, especially considering that so many have been outspoken about the fact that they would not use it in favor of the company’s user interface (UI), which is extremely well done.
After Bloomberg reported that Tesla was working on Apple CarPlay integration, the reactions immediately started pouring in. From my perspective, having used both Apple CarPlay in two previous vehicles and going to Tesla’s in-house UI in my Model Y, both platforms definitely have their advantages.
However, Tesla’s UI just works with its vehicles, as it is intuitive and well-engineered for its cars specifically. Apple CarPlay was always good, but it was buggy at times, which could be attributed to the vehicle and not the software, and not as user-friendly, but that is subjective.
Nevertheless, upon the release of Bloomberg’s report, people immediately challenged the need for it:
Everyone thinks they need it. I would think that too if I didn’t know how good Tesla’s interface was. CarPlay is a crappy layer on top of crappy info-navs, and people think it’s an imperative because it provides a level of consistency from car to car. They have no clue how much…
— Rich Stafford (@r26174_rich) November 14, 2025
How can it not be when the best engineers choose Tesla over Apple and Tesla’s core focus is auto vs Apple being mobile. It’s what Tesla does every day. It’s a side project for Apple. Still Apple is much better than any other auto OEM who attract lesser talent and make digital…
— Emu (@confessedemu) November 14, 2025
Some fans proposed an interesting point: What if Tesla is using CarPlay as a counter to losing the $7,500 EV tax credit? Perhaps it is an interesting way to attract customers who have not owned a Tesla before but are more interested in having a vehicle equipped with CarPlay?
“100%. It’s needed for sales because for many prospective buyers, CarPlay is a nonnegotiable must-have. If they knew how good the Tesla UI is, they wouldn’t think they need CarPlay,” one owner said.
Tesla has made a handful of moves to attract people to its cars after losing the tax credit. This could be a small but potentially mighty strategy that will pull some carbuyers to Tesla, especially now that the Apple CarPlay box is checked.
@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
Investor's Corner
Ron Baron states Tesla and SpaceX are lifetime investments
Baron, one of Tesla’s longest-standing bulls, reiterated that his personal stake in the company remains fully intact even as volatility pressures the broader market.
Billionaire investor Ron Baron says he isn’t touching a single share of his personal Tesla holdings despite the recent selloff in the tech sector. Baron, one of Tesla’s longest-standing bulls, reiterated that his personal stake in the company remains fully intact even as volatility pressures the broader market.
Baron doubles down on Tesla
Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Baron stated that he is largely unfazed by the market downturn, describing his approach during the selloff as simply “looking” for opportunities. He emphasized that Tesla remains the centerpiece of his long-term strategy, recalling that although Baron Funds once sold 30% of its Tesla position due to client pressure, he personally refused to trim any of his personal holdings.
“We sold 30% for clients. I did not sell personally a single share,” he said. Baron’s exposure highlighted this stance, stating that roughly 40% of his personal net worth is invested in Tesla alone. The legendary investor stated that he has already made about $8 billion from Tesla from an investment of $400 million when he started, and believes that figure could rise fivefold over the next decade as the company scales its technology, manufacturing, and autonomy roadmap.
A lifelong investment
Baron’s commitment extends beyond Tesla. He stated that he also holds about 25% of his personal wealth in SpaceX and another 35% in Baron mutual funds, creating a highly concentrated portfolio built around Elon Musk–led companies. During the interview, Baron revisited a decades-old promise he made to his fund’s board when he sought approval to invest in publicly traded companies.
“I told the board, ‘If you let me invest a certain amount of money, then I will promise that I won’t sell any of my stock. I will be the last person out of the stock,’” he said. “I will not sell a single share of my shares until my clients sold 100% of their shares. … And I don’t expect to sell in my lifetime Tesla or SpaceX.”
Watch Ron Baron’s CNBC interview below.
@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
News
Tesla CEO Elon Musk responds to Waymo’s 2,500-fleet milestone
While Tesla’s Robotaxi network is not yet on Waymo’s scale, Elon Musk has announced a number of aggressive targets for the service.
Elon Musk reacted sharply to Waymo’s latest milestone after the autonomous driving company revealed its fleet had grown to 2,500 robotaxis across five major U.S. regions.
As per Musk, the milestone is notable, but the numbers could still be improved.
“Rookie numbers”
Waymo disclosed that its current robotaxi fleet includes 1,000 vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Area, 700 in Los Angeles, 500 in Phoenix, 200 in Austin, and 100 in Atlanta, bringing the total to 2,500 units.
When industry watcher Sawyer Merritt shared the numbers on X, Musk replied with a two-word jab: “Rookie numbers,” he wrote in a post on X, highlighting Tesla’s intention to challenge and overtake Waymo’s scale with its own Robotaxi fleet.
While Tesla’s Robotaxi network is not yet on Waymo’s scale, Elon Musk has announced a number of aggressive targets for the service. During the third quarter earnings call, he confirmed that the company expects to remove safety drivers from large parts of Austin by year-end, marking the biggest operational step forward for Tesla’s autonomous program to date.
Tesla targets major Robotaxi expansions
Tesla’s Robotaxi pilot remains in its early phases, but Musk recently revealed that major deployments are coming soon. During his appearance on the All-In podcast, Musk said Tesla is pushing to scale its autonomous fleet to 1,000 cars in the Bay Area and 500 cars in Austin by the end of the year.
“We’re scaling up the number of cars to, what happens if you have a thousand cars? Probably we’ll have a thousand cars or more in the Bay Area by the end of this year, probably 500 or more in the greater Austin area,” Musk said.
With just two months left in Q4 2025, Tesla’s autonomous driving teams will face a compressed timeline to hit those targets. Musk, however, has maintained that Robotaxi growth is central to Tesla’s valuation and long-term competitiveness.
@teslarati :rotating_light: This is why you need to use off-peak rates at Tesla Superchargers! #tesla #evcharging #fyp ♬ Blue Moon – Muspace Lofi
-
News1 week agoTesla shares rare peek at Semi factory’s interior
-
Elon Musk1 week agoTesla says texting and driving capability is coming ‘in a month or two’
-
News6 days agoTesla makes online ordering even easier
-
News6 days agoTesla Model Y Performance set for new market entrance in Q1
-
News1 week agoTesla Cybercab production starts Q2 2026, Elon Musk confirms
-
News5 days agoTesla is launching a crazy new Rental program with cheap daily rates
-
News1 week agoTesla China expecting full FSD approval in Q1 2026: Elon Musk
-
News1 week agoTesla Model Y Performance is rapidly moving toward customer deliveries
