Connect with us
Bond skepticism Bond skepticism

News

No, Tesla wasn’t “cheated” in the Model 3 headlight safety test by the IIHS

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

[Credit: Parker Smith via YouTube]

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

Aaron Turpen is a freelance writer based in Wyoming, USA. He writes about a large number of subjects, many of which are in the transportation and automotive arenas. Aaron is a recognized automotive journalist, with a background in commercial trucking and automotive repair. He is a member of the Rocky Mountain Automotive Press (RMAP) and Aaron’s work has appeared on many websites, in print, and on local and national radio broadcasts including NPR’s All Things Considered and on Carfax.com.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Model Y becomes first-ever car to reach legendary milestone

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Manufacturing

The Tesla Model Y became the first-ever car to reach a legendary Norwegian milestone, surpassing 100,000 new registrations after gaining a reputation as one of the most popular vehicles in the country and the world.

As of May 20, Norwegian authorities have registered 100,224 units of the electric SUV, according to data from local outlet Opplysningsrådet for veitrafikken (OFV).

By population, roughly one in every 29 passenger cars on Norwegian roads is now a Model Y, underscoring its rapid rise as a national favorite.

Since the first deliveries in August 2021, the Model Y has transformed from a newcomer to a staple in Norwegian traffic.

Advertisement

Tesla back on top as Norway’s EV market surges to 98% share in February

Geir Inge Stokke, the Managing Director of OFV, described the achievement as “remarkable,” noting that few single models have gained such traction so quickly. “Tesla Model Y has hit the Norwegian market spot on, and the numbers illustrate how fast the EV market has developed here,” Stokke said.

The Model Y’s success reflects Norway’s aggressive push toward electrification. Nearly nine out of ten units, 87.6 percent, to be exact, are privately registered, with the remaining 12.4 percent on company plates. Owners span the country, from major cities to smaller municipalities, proving it is no longer just an urban or niche vehicle but a true “people’s car.

Who is Buying Tesla Model Ys in Norway?

Typical Model Y drivers are men in their early 40s. The average registered user age is 44, with 83 percent male and 17 percent female. Stokke noted that household usage often extends beyond the primary registrant, broadening the vehicle’s real-world appeal.

Advertisement

Geographically, adoption concentrates in urban centers with strong charging infrastructure. Oslo leads with 16,861 registrations (16.82 percent of the national total), followed by Bergen (7,450), Bærum (4,313), and Trondheim (4,240).

The top five municipalities—Oslo, Bergen, Bærum, Trondheim, and Asker—account for 35,463 units, or about 35 percent of all Model Ys. Yet the vehicle’s presence outside big cities highlights its broad acceptance.

Growth Trajectory and Popularity

Tesla built a lot of sales momentum in a short amount of time. In 2021, registrations closed out at 8,267, but more than doubled to more than 17,000 units in 2022 and more than 23,000 units in 2023. 2025 was the company’s strongest year yet, as Tesla managed to record 27,621 registrations.

Through 2026, Tesla already has 7,036 registrations.

Advertisement

Tesla’s Global Success with the Model Y

Tesla has tasted so much success with the Model Y; it has been the best-selling car in the world three times, it has dominated EV sales in numerous countries, and contributed to a mass adoption of electric vehicles across the planet.

As Stokke emphasized, the Model Y’s journey from newcomer to icon mirrors Norway’s broader success story. With robust incentives that push sales, excellent infrastructure, and consumer eagerness to transition to sustainable powertrains, the country continues setting global benchmarks in sustainable mobility.

The Tesla Model Y stands as a shining example of how quickly change can happen when conditions align.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

SpaceX reveals what Anthropic will pay for massive compute deal

Published

on

Rendering of Elon Musk overlooking a Starship fleet (Credit: Grok)
Rendering of Elon Musk overlooking a Starship fleet (Credit: Grok)

SpaceX has disclosed the full financial details of its groundbreaking agreement with Anthropic, confirming that the AI company will pay $1.25 billion per month for dedicated high-performance computing resources.

The revelation came through SpaceX’s latest securities filing in preparation for its initial public offering, shedding light on one of the largest compute deals in the artificial intelligence sector to date. The prospectus was released last night, as SpaceX is heading toward its IPO.

This arrangement underscores the fierce demand for specialized infrastructure as frontier AI models require unprecedented levels of processing power to train and operate effectively. Industry analysts see the disclosure as a significant milestone, highlighting how top AI labs are locking in massive capacity to stay ahead in a rapidly accelerating field.

For SpaceX, it feels like a massive move that pushes its perception as a company from space exploration to artificial intelligence.

Advertisement

SpaceX is following in Tesla’s footsteps in a way nobody expected

The comprehensive deal grants Anthropic exclusive access to SpaceX’s Colossus clusters, encompassing Colossus I and the substantially expanded Colossus II, which together deliver hundreds of megawatts of power along with more than 200,000 NVIDIA GPUs.

Payments extend through May 2029, totaling nearly $45 billion overall; capacity is scheduled to ramp up during May and June 2026 at an initial discounted rate to facilitate seamless integration. Both companies retain the option to terminate the agreement with ninety days’ notice, so there is definitely some flexibility for both.

This pact not only enhances Anthropic’s ability to scale usage limits for Claude users but also injects substantial recurring revenue into SpaceX, bolstering its expansion into advanced data center operations and future orbital computing initiatives.

Advertisement

Observers describe the collaboration between the two companies as strategically advantageous because it gives Anthropic cutting-edge AI development the opportunity to collaborate with SpaceX’s expertise in rapid, large-scale infrastructure deployment.

This disclosure arrives at a pivotal moment when computing resources have become the primary bottleneck for AI progress.

As leading organizations compete to build more powerful systems, securing reliable, high-density facilities has emerged as a key differentiator.

SpaceX’s sites, such as those in Memphis, offer superior power availability and advanced cooling solutions that set them apart from conventional providers. For Anthropic, the added capacity is expected to deliver tangible improvements, including extended context windows, quicker inference times, and innovative features that appeal to both enterprise clients and individual users.

Advertisement

Looking ahead, the partnership paves the way for ambitious joint projects, including potential space-based AI compute platforms designed to overcome terrestrial limitations on energy and thermal management. Such efforts could redefine sustainable computing at massive scales.

Financially, the deal solidifies SpaceX’s diverse revenue profile ahead of its public market debut, extending beyond traditional aerospace activities. The massive check SpaceX will cash each month opens up the idea that additional

While some experts question the sustainability of these enormous expenditures given ongoing efficiency gains in AI architectures, the commitment reflects a strong belief in sustained demand growth.

The agreement also exemplifies productive synergies across sectors, with aerospace engineering insights optimizing AI hardware performance. As global attention on technology concentration increases, arrangements of this nature may help shape equitable access to critical resources.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX just filed for the IPO everyone was waiting for

SpaceX filed its public S-1, revealing $18.7 billion in revenue and billions in losses.

Published

on

By

SpaceX-Ax-4-mission-iss-launch-date

SpaceX publicly filed its S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission on May 20, 2026, making its financial details available to the public for the first time ahead of what could be the largest IPO in history.

An S-1 is the formal document a company must submit to the SEC before going public. It includes audited financials, risk factors, business descriptions, and how the company plans to use the money it raises. Companies are required to file one before selling shares to the public, and it must be published at least 15 days before the investor roadshow begins. SpaceX had already submitted a confidential draft to the SEC in April, which allowed regulators to review the filing privately before it went public.

The S-1 reveals that SpaceX generated $18.7 billion in consolidated revenue in 2025, driven largely by its Starlink satellite internet division, which posted $11.4 billion in revenue, growing nearly 50% year over year. Despite that growth, the company lost about $4.9 billion in 2025 and has burned through more than $37 billion since its founding.

SpaceX just forced Verizon, AT&T and T-Mobile to team up for the first time in history

Advertisement

A significant portion of those losses trace back to xAI, Elon Musk’s artificial intelligence company, which was recently merged into SpaceX. SpaceX directed roughly 60% of its capital spending in 2025 to its AI division, totaling around $20 billion, yet that division lost billions and grew revenue by only about 22%.

SpaceX plans to list its Class A common stock on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX, with Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, and Bank of America leading the offering. The dual-class share structure means going public will not meaningfully reduce Musk’s control, as Class B shares he holds carry 10 votes per share compared to one vote for public Class A shares.

The company is targeting a raise of around $75 billion at a valuation of roughly $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO ever. The investor roadshow is reportedly planned for June 5.

Advertisement
Continue Reading