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.
[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.
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.
Elon Musk
Tesla reveals major info about the Semi as it heads toward ‘mass production’
Some information, like trim levels and their specs were not revealed by Tesla, but now that the Semi is headed toward mass production this year, the company finally revealed those specifics.
Tesla has revealed some major information about the all-electric Semi as it heads toward “mass production,” according to CEO Elon Musk.
The Semi has been working toward a wider production phase after several years of development, pilot programs, and the construction of a dedicated production facility that is specifically catered to the manufacturing of the vehicle.
However, some information, like trim levels and their specs were not revealed by Tesla, but now that the Semi is headed toward mass production this year, the company finally revealed those specifics.
Tesla Semi undergoes major redesign as dedicated factory preps for deliveries
Tesla plans to build a Standard Range and Long Range Trim level of the Semi, and while the range is noted in the company’s newly-released spec list, there is no indication of what battery size will be equipped by them. However, there is a notable weight difference between the two of roughly 3,000 lbs, and the Long Range configuration has a lightning-fast peak charging speed of 1.2 MW.
This information is not available for the Standard Range quite yet.
The spec list is as follows:
- Standard Range:
- 325 miles of range (at 82,000 lbs gross combination weight
- Curb Weight: <20,000
- Energy Consumption: 1.7 kWh per mile
- Powertrain: 3 independent motors on rear axles
- Charging: Up to 60% of range in 30 minutes
- Charge Type: MCS 3.2
- Drive Power: Up to 800 kW
- ePTO (Electric Power Take Off): Up to 25 kW
- Long Range:
- Range: 500 miles (at 82,000 lbs gross combination weight)
- Curb Weight: 23,000 lbs
- Energy Consumption: 1.7 kWh per mile
- Powertrain: 3 independent motors on rear axles
- Charging: Up to 60% of range in 30 minutes
- Charge Type: MCS 3.2
- Peak charging speed: 1.2MW (1,200kW)
- Drive Power: Up to 800 kW
- ePTO (Electric Power Take Off): Up to 25 kW
It is important to keep in mind that the Semi is currently spec’d for local runs, and Tesla has not yet released or developed a sleeper cabin that would be more suitable for longer trips, cross-country hauls, and overnight travel.
Tesla Semi sleeper section and large side storage teased in new video
Instead, the vehicle will be initially used for regional deliveries, as it has in the pilot programs for Pepsi Co. and Frito-Lay for the past several years.
It will enter mass production this year, Musk confirmed on X over the weekend.
Now that the company’s dedicated Semi production facility in Sparks, Nevada, is standing, the timeline seems much more realistic as the vehicle has had its mass manufacturing date adjusted on several occasions.
Ferrari, the Italian supercar maker, has revealed the name, interior, and interface design of its first-ever electric vehicle project, the Luce, initiating a new chapter in the rich history of the company’s automotive books.
This is the first time Ferrari has revealed such intimate details regarding its introductory EV offering, which has been in the realm of possibility for several years.
As more companies continue to take on EV projects, and some recede from them, supercar companies like Ferrari and Lamborghini are preparing to offer electric powertrains, offering super-fast performance and a new era of speed and acceleration.
Luce – a New Chapter in Ferrari
The company said that the name Luce is “more than a name. It is a vision.” Instead of looking at its first EV offering as a means to enter a new era of design, engineering, and imagination. The company did not want to compromise any of its reputation, high standards, or performance with this new project. It sees it as simply a page turn, and not the closing of a book:
“This new naming strategy reflects how the Ferrari Luce marks a significant addition to the Prancing Horse’s line-up, embodying the seamless expression of tradition and innovation. With its cutting-edge technology, unique design, and best-in-class driving thrills, it unites Ferrari’s racing heritage, the timeless spirit of its sports cars, and the evolving reality of contemporary lifestyles. It testifies to Ferrari’s determination to go beyond expectations: to imagine the future, and to dare. Because leading means illuminating the path ahead – and Luce embodies that mindset.”
Ferrari Luce Design
Ferrari collaborated with LoveFrom, a creative collective founded by Sir Jony Ive and Marc Newson. The pair has been working with Ferrari for five years on the Luce design; everything from materials, ergonomics, interface, and user experience has been designed by the two entities.
The big focus with the interior was to offer “a first, tangible insight into the design philosophy…where innovation meets craftsmanship and cutting-edge design. The team focused on perfecting and refining every solution to its purest form — not to reinvent what already works, but to create a new, carefully considered expression of Ferrari.”
RELATED:
Ferrari CEO compliments Tesla for shaking up the automotive industry
The company also said:
“Ultimately, the design of the Ferrari Luce’s interior is a synthesis of meticulous craftsmanship, respect for tradition, and thoughtful innovation. It offers a new choice for Ferrari enthusiasts – one that honours the past while embracing the future, and exemplifies the brand’s enduring commitment to quality, performance, and cultural significance.”
The appearance of the elements that make up the interior are both an ode to past designs, like the steering wheel, which is a reinterpretation of the iconic 1950s and 1960s wooden three-spoke Nardi wheel, and fresh, new designs, which aim to show the innovation Ferrari is adopting with this new project.
Interior Highlights
Steering Wheel
The Ferrari Luce is a shout-out to the Nardi wheel from the 1950s and 60s. It is constructed of 100% recycled aluminum, and the alloy was developed specifically for the vehicle to “ensure mechanical resistance and a superb surface quality for the anodisation process.”
It weighs 400 grams less than a standard Ferrari steering wheel:
Credit: Ferrari
It features two analogue control modules, ensuring both functionality and clarity, Ferrari said. The carmaker drew inspiration from Formula One single-seaters, and every button has been developed to provide “the most harmonious combination of mechanical and acoustic feedback based on more than 20 evaluation tests with Ferrari test drivers.”
Instrument Cluster and Displays
There are three displays in the Luce — a driver binnacle, control panel, and rear control panel, which have all been “meticulously designed for clarity and purpose.”
The binnacle moves with the steering wheel and is optimized for the driver’s view of the instrumentation and supporting driver performance.
-
- Credit: Ferrari
-
- Credit: Ferrari
Displays are crafted by Samsung and were specifically designed for the car, using a “world first – three large cutouts strategically reveal the information generated by a second display behind the top panel, creating a fascinating visual depth that captures the eye.”
Samsung Display engineers created an ultra-light, ultra-thin OLED panel for the vehicle.
Credit: Ferrari
Pricing is still what remains a mystery within the Luce project. Past reports have speculated that the price could be at least €500,000, or $535,000.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk pivots SpaceX plans to Moon base before Mars
The shift, Musk explained, is driven by launch cadence and the urgency of securing humanity’s long-term survival beyond Earth, among others.
Elon Musk has clarified that SpaceX is prioritizing the Moon over Mars as the fastest path to establishing a self-growing off-world civilization.
The shift, Musk explained, is driven by launch cadence and the urgency of securing humanity’s long-term survival beyond Earth, among others.
Why the Moon is now SpaceX’s priority
In a series of posts on X, Elon Musk stated that SpaceX is focusing on building a self-growing city on the Moon because it can be achieved significantly faster than a comparable settlement on Mars. As per Musk, a Moon city could possibly be completed in under 10 years, while a similar settlement on Mars would likely require more than 20.
“For those unaware, SpaceX has already shifted focus to building a self-growing city on the Moon, as we can potentially achieve that in less than 10 years, whereas Mars would take 20+ years. The mission of SpaceX remains the same: extend consciousness and life as we know it to the stars,” Musk wrote in a post on X.
Musk highlighted that launch windows to Mars only open roughly every 26 months, with a six-month transit time, whereas missions to the Moon can launch approximately every 10 days and arrive in about two days. That difference, Musk stated, allows SpaceX to iterate far more rapidly on infrastructure, logistics, and survival systems.
“The critical path to a self-growing Moon city is faster,” Musk noted in a follow-up post.
Mars still matters, but runs in parallel
Despite the pivot to the Moon, Musk stressed that SpaceX has not abandoned Mars. Instead, Mars development is expected to begin in about five to seven years and proceed alongside the company’s lunar efforts.
Musk explained that SpaceX would continue launching directly from Earth to Mars when possible, rather than routing missions through the Moon, citing limited fuel availability on the lunar surface. The Moon’s role, he stated, is not as a staging point for Mars, but as the fastest achievable location for a self-sustaining off-world civilization.
“The Moon would establish a foothold beyond Earth quickly, to protect life against risk of a natural or manmade disaster on Earth,” Musk wrote.
Tesla reveals major info about the Semi as it heads toward ‘mass production’
Ferrari Luce EV: Italian supercar maker reveals interior and interface design
