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.

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.

Advertisement
-

[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.

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.

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 Robotaxi riders will face the best dilemma when booking a ride

Published

on

Credit: Joe Tegtmeyer | X

Tesla has updated its Robotaxi app so riders can pick which vehicle they want before they book. The latest in-app screens now show two options side by side: the two-seat Cybercab and the four-seat Model Y.

A screenshot circulating Thursday shows the change in practice. In Austin, a rider could choose a gold Cybercab for two people or a Model Y for four. Tesla’s updated description calls Cybercab “our first purpose-built autonomous vehicle,” designed for safety, accessibility, and comfort, and says the lineup is available only through the Robotaxi app.

The distinction is more than cosmetic, and it’s important to note that Robotaxi refers to the platform, while Cybercab refers to a vehicle.

Advertisement
-

Model Y Robotaxis have carried the service since it opened in Austin in mid-2025 and later expanded to Dallas, Houston, and parts of Florida. Those vehicles are converted production SUVs that still have steering wheels and pedals.

Cybercab is different. It has no driver controls, butterfly doors, a low seat height meant to work with wheelchairs, extra trunk space for assistive devices, and braille on the handles. Tesla has registered dozens of the two-seaters with Texas regulators in the days leading up to its September 3 Austin event.

Giving riders a choice lets Tesla match the vehicle to the trip. Most rides involve one or two people, which is where Cybercab is meant to be cheaper and more efficient to operate. Groups of three or four, or anyone who needs more space, can still request a Model Y.

The same app handles booking, payment, cabin settings, and, on Cybercab, features such as phone-based door opening and in-cabin voice controls.

Tesla Cybercab event gains steam ahead of massive launch

The update does not mean every city suddenly has both cars available. Cybercab support is listed for Austin first, and the purpose-built fleet is still small compared with the existing Model Y roster. Even so, the app change marks a shift from a single-vehicle pilot to a mixed fleet.

Advertisement
-

Riders can now choose between the compact, purpose-built robotaxi and the familiar SUV that launched the service.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Cybercab sightings broaden well outside of Austin with autonomy in focus

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Robotaxi | X

Tesla Cybercab sightings are broadening far and wide, well outside of downtown Austin, Texas, with autonomy in focus as the company plans to launch the all-electric, two-seater this evening in the Lone Star State.

Tesla is set to launch Cybercab to a small group of people this evening in a dedicated event in Austin, Texas. Public details on the event are relatively slim.

However, Tesla’s focus on Cybercab falls well outside of the downtown Austin area and is expanding well across the United States as things continue to move quickly with the company’s autonomous efforts in 2026. Today, various images of Cybercab fleets in interesting locations have started to circulate.

The most notable is a fleet of at least 20 Cybercabs at Miami International Airport in Florida. Spotted last night, the fleet is expansive and is indicative of a looming release of Cybercabs once regulatory boxes are checked off.

Tesla has already been operating the Robotaxi platform in Miami for several months, but this Cybercab fleet at the airport could be joining the ride-hailing platform as approvals arrive:

Another fleet of Cybercabs was spotted at the Devon, PA showroom just outside of Philadelphia. We have seen several Cybercab units testing around the Philadelphia Metro Area, which is interesting considering Tesla does not have any active Robotaxi geofence in Pennsylvania.

Philadelphia would be an ideal location to test ride-hailing due to its dense tourist population, large, sprawling city layout, and to compete with other ride-hailing companies that operate in the city.

Expansive fleets of Cybercabs will be popping up in and around major cities throughout the rest of the year, if we were betting on it. Tesla has made it obvious that the Cybercab rollout will be aggressive and fast-paced, but within reason. Tesla is still prioritizing safety, so these testing phases will likely go on for some period of time before more members of the public are able to snag a Cybercab for a personal chariot.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading

News

Tesla Model Y L gets suspension complaints in over odd issue China

Published

on

Credit: @TeslaNewswire/X

The Tesla Model Y L is arguably the most hyped trim of the all-electric crossover, other than the Performance configuration that comes with white-knuckle speed and sports car-level handling.

However, it is not all perfect. Tesla owners in China who took delivery of the Model Y L, denoted with an L to highlight its longer wheelbase, are experiencing what they are referring to as “collapsing” of the rear wheels, as suspension issues appear to be an issue with some of the builds.

The gap between the wheel arch and tire has narrowed to the point that “not even a single finger” could fit, according to a report from Car News China. The failures are not tied to a specific mileage, as one owner said that after just 9,000 kilometers (5,600 miles), they noticed the suspension issue when their car was fully loaded.

Advertisement
-

Another one had the issue at 30,000 kilometers (18,640 miles) and noticed that the wheel gap shrank to two fingers, so not as drastic as the person who reported a similar issue at 9,000 km.

Tesla Model Y L is gaining momentum in China’s premium segment

Along with the visual recognition of the issue, others are saying the sagging is causing abnormal wear on the inside of the tires. Extra weight and instant torque already provide additional stress on the tires in electric vehicles during normal operation, so it is no surprise that this is another complaint.

There has been no recall issued by Tesla, and the company has not yet publicly acknowledged the issue.

Some are suggesting that owners use a “finger test” to self-diagnose whether there is an issue with the suspension. There should be four fingers between the tire and the wheel well; anything less than that starts to get dicey.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading