News
SpaceX will host Hyperloop Pod Competition next week, Jan 27-29, 2017
Get ready to see Hyperloop concept pods fire through the 1-mile test track located outside of SpaceX and Tesla’s Design Studio in Hawthorne, California, next week between January 27-29. Elon Musk and SpaceX first unveiled the idea for a new high-speed ground transport system called the Hyperloop on August 12, 2013 with the publication of a white paper, the Hyperloop Alpha Preliminary Design Study. SpaceX’s sponsored Hyperloop Pod Competition is an incentive prize competition created to inspire university students and independent engineering teams to design and build a subscale prototype transport vehicle (a “Hyperloop pod”) that will demonstrate technical feasibility of various aspects of the high speed transportation concept. To support this competition, SpaceX has constructed a test track outside of its headquarters which we had the opportunity to see during early construction last year.
There are three judging phases in the Hyperloop Pod competition: a design competition that was held in January 2016 and an on-track competition to be held January 27–29, 2017 (Competition Weekend I), followed by a Summer 2017 (Competition Weekend II). The original specification for the Competition Basic for the Design Weekend and the competition Weekend I, though no longer available at SpaceX, can still be found online.
DESIGN WEEKEND
The Design weekend was held in January 2016 at Texas A&M University. Awards were given in three categories:
SUBSYSTEM
Best Overall Subsystem Award: Auburn University | Auburn University Hyperloop Team.
DESIGN ONLY
Top Design Concept Award: Universitat Politècnica de Valencia | Makers UPV Team
DESIGN AND BUILD CATEGORY OVERALL
Massachusetts Institute of Technology | MIT Hyperloop Team
MIT Hyperloop Team’s design was awarded the “Best Overall Design Award”, among the 23 designs selected to move to the prototype stage. The design proposes a 250 kg (551 lb) pod with a carbon fiber and polycarbonate sheet exterior. It is elevated by a passive magnetic levitation system comprising 20 neodymium magnets that will maintain a 15 mm (0.6 in) distance above the track. The team says with air pressure at 140 Pascals, the pod could accelerate at 2.4 G and have 2 Newton aerodynamic drag when traveling at 110 m/s. The design includes a fail-safe braking system that automatically halts the pod should the actuators or computers fail, and low speed emergency drive wheels that can move the pod 1 m/s. Delft Hyperloop received a “Pod Innovation Award”, while Badgerloop at University of Wisconsin, Madison, Hyperloop at Virginia Tech, and HyperXite at UC Irvine each received a “Pod Technical Excellence Award.” The full list of Awards and news clips from the Design Weekend can be found at the Texas A&M University Engineering web site. Besides the winning teams, several other teams were invited to compete in the upcoming Competition Weekend I from the Design and Build category:
- rLoop (Non-student team)
- University of Waterloo | uWaterloo Hyperloop
- University of Washington | UWashington Hyperloop
- University of Toronto | University of Toronto
- University of Maryland and Rutgers University | RUMD Loop
- University of Florida | GatorLoop
- University of of Colorado, Denver | Team HyperLynx
- University of Cincinnati | Hyperloop UC
- University of California, Santa Barbara | UCSB Hyperloop
- University of California, Berkeley | bLoop
- Texas A&M University | TAMU Aerospace Hyperloop
- Technical University of Munich | WARR Hyperloop
- Purdue University | Purdue Hyperloop Design Team
- Oral Roberts University | Codex
- Lehigh University | Lehigh Hyperloop
- Keio University | Keio Alpha
- Drexel University | Drexel Hyperloop
- Carnegie Mellon University | Carnegie Mellon Hyperloop
In February 3, 2016 eight more teams advanced to Competition Weekend I.
- Cornell University + Harvey Mudd College + University of Michigan + Northeastern University + Memorial University of Newfoundland(Canada) + Princeton University | OpenLoop
- Louisiana State University | Bayou Bengals
- New York University | NYU Hyperloop
- RMIT University | VicHyper
- John’s High School | HyperLift
- University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign | Illini Hyperloop
- University of Southern California | USC Hyperloop
- University of Wisconsin, Milwaukee | Mercury Three
In the end, 30 of the 115 teams that submitted designs in January 2016 were selected to build hardware to compete in Competition Weekend I. There were more than 1,000 applicants at earlier stages of the competition.
JUDGING CRITERIA
Originally, the second Phase of the competition was supposed to involve competitive runs in the Hyperloop test track to be awarded based on various classes (fully functional pod, susbsystem test pod, etc.) and pod mass. This phase of the competition was renamed“Competition Weekend I,” when SpaceX added a third phase of the competition, Competition Weekend II. The original SpaceX Hyperloop Pod Competition – Rules and Requirements for Weekend I can be seen at the end of this article. We’ve embedded a copy of the original document from SpaceX.
The Judging Criteria are listed in the document, and involve scoring in 4 different categories, for a maximum overall total of 2500 points.
- Category 1: Final Design and Construction (500 points)
- Category 2: Safety and Reliability (500 points)
- Category 3: Performance in Operations (500 points)
- Category 4: Performance in Flight (1000 points)
Competition Weekend I Judging Criteria – Source: SpaceX
HYPERLOOP TEST TRACK
AECOM, a company that has designed and built some of the world’s most impressive transportation systems, was selected to design and build the world’s first Hyperloop test track as part of the pod competition hosted by SpaceX
SpaceX Hyperloop Test Track (Jan.7, 2017) [Source: Teslarati via Marco Papa]
The track is a straight one-mile run on Jack Northrop Avenue, between Crenshaw Blvd. and Prairie Ave. The SpaceX Hyperloop test track — or Hypertube — was designed in 2015 and was constructed in the fall 2016, reaching its full length of one mile by October 2016. The test track’s six-foot diameter steel tube includes a non-magnetic sub-track and said to be capable of achieving 99.8 percent vacuum. The test track itself is also a prototype, where SpaceX anticipates learning from the design, build process and evaluates how to apply automated construction techniques to future Hyperloop tracks.
The Hypertube test track is designed to enable competitors who implement a wide array of designs and build pods that will test a variety of subsystem technologies that are important to new vehicle transport systems. This will include Hyperloop-specific pods—with air-bearing suspension and low-pressure compressor designs—as well as wheeled vehicle and magnetic levitation rail designs that will support a wide array of vehicle technologies to be tested. While the Design Weekend held at Texas A&M University was open to the public, it is unclear if the Competition Weekend I will be as well, or if it will be an invitation only event like many of the SpaceX and Tesla events. Several inquiries for tickets posted to the Twitter account of the Hyperloop Pod Competition went unanswered. The Official SpaceX Hyperloop Pod Competition page does not shed any light on who will be able to attend either.
HYPERLOOP POD COMPETITION II
According to SpaceX, “based on the high-quality submissions and overwhelming enthusiasm surrounding the competition, SpaceX is moving forward with a second installment of the competition: Hyperloop Pod Competition II, which will culminate in a second competition in Summer 2017 at SpaceX’s Hyperloop test track. Hyperloop Competition II will be focused on a single criterion: maximum speed. The second competition is open to new student teams interested in competing on the test track, as well as to existing student teams who have already built and tested Pods to further refine their designs.” The Competition Weekend II event will be held in the Summer 2017 at the same SpaceX Hyperloop test track.
[pdf-embedder url=”http://www.teslarati.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/spacex-hyperloop-competition-rules.pdf”]
News
Tesla Cybercab gets crazy change as mass production begins
Tesla has officially kicked off mass production of its groundbreaking Cybercab robotaxi at Giga Texas, and the first units rolling off the line feature a striking transformation that’s turning heads across the EV community.
Tesla Cybercab has evidently received a pretty crazy change from an aesthetic standpoint, as the company has made the decision to offer an additional finish on the vehicle as mass production is starting.
Tesla has officially kicked off mass production of its groundbreaking Cybercab robotaxi at Giga Texas, and the first units rolling off the line feature a striking transformation that’s turning heads across the EV community.
VIN Zero—the very first production Cybercab—showcases a vibrant champagne gold exterior with a high-gloss finish, a dramatic departure from the flat, matte-wrapped prototypes that debuted at the 2024 “We, Robot” event.
Presenting VIN Zero — the very first production Cybercab built at Giga Texas. pic.twitter.com/8bXo4CJAlr
— TechOperator (@TechOperator) April 23, 2026
This glossy sheen is a pretty big pivot from what was initially shown by Tesla. The company has maintained a pretty flat tone in terms of anything related to custom colors or finishes.
A specialized clear coat or process delivers the deep, reflective gloss without conventional painting. The result is a premium, mirror-like shine, and it looks pretty good, and gives the compact two-seater a more luxurious and futuristic presence than the subdued matte prototypes.
Photos shared by Tesla community members reveal VIN Zero in a showroom-like setting at Giga Texas, highlighting refined panel gaps, large aero wheel covers, and the signature no-steering-wheel, no-pedals interior optimized for full autonomy.
The open frunk in some images offers a glimpse of practical storage, while the overall build quality appears more polished than that of test mules.
This glossy evolution aligns with Tesla’s broader production ramp. After the first unit in February 2026, the company has shifted to volume manufacturing, with dozens of units already spotted in outbound lots. CEO Elon Musk and the team aim for hundreds per week, paving the way for unsupervised FSD robotaxi networks that could slash ride costs to pennies per mile.
The Cybercab holds Tesla’s grand ambitions of operating a full-service ride-hailing service without any drivers in its grasp. Tesla has yet to solve autonomy, but is well on its way, and although its timelines are usually a bit off, improvements often come through the Over-the-Air updates to the Full Self-Driving suite.
Tesla has confirmed today that its steering wheel-less and pedal-less Cybercab, the vehicle geared toward launching the company’s autonomous ride-hailing hopes, has officially entered production at its Giga Texas production facility outside of Austin.
The Cybercab is a sleek two-door, two-passenger coupe engineered from the ground up as an electric self-driving vehicle. It features no steering wheel or pedals, relying instead on Tesla’s advanced vision-only Full Self-Driving system powered by multiple cameras and artificial intelligence.
Purpose-built for autonomy
Cybercab in production now at Giga Texas pic.twitter.com/Y9qG3KyWBa
— Tesla (@Tesla) April 23, 2026
The minimalist cabin centers on a large display screen that serves as the primary interface for passengers, creating an open, futuristic space optimized for comfort during unsupervised rides. A compact 35-kilowatt-hour battery pack delivers exceptional efficiency at 5.5 miles per kilowatt-hour, providing an estimated 200-mile range.
Additional innovations include inductive charging compatibility and a lightweight design that enhances aerodynamics and performance.
Production at Giga Texas builds on earlier prototypes and initial units completed earlier in 2026. The facility, already a hub for Model Y and Cybertruck assembly, now ramps up dedicated lines for the Cybercab.
This shift to volume manufacturing reflects Tesla’s strategy to scale affordable autonomous vehicles rapidly.
By focusing on a dedicated platform rather than adapting existing models, the company aims to keep costs low while prioritizing safety and reliability through continuous AI improvements.
The Cybercab’s debut in production carries broad implications for urban mobility. As the cornerstone of Tesla’s Robotaxi network, it promises on-demand, driverless rides that could slash transportation expenses, reduce traffic accidents caused by human error, and lower emissions through its all-electric powertrain.
Accessibility features, such as space for service animals or assistive devices, further broaden its appeal. Regulators and cities worldwide will soon evaluate its deployment, but the vehicle’s design already addresses key hurdles in scaling unsupervised autonomy.
Challenges persist, including full regulatory clearance and building charging infrastructure. Yet this production launch signals momentum. With Cybercabs poised to roll out in increasing numbers, Tesla edges closer to a future where personal ownership meets shared fleets of intelligent vehicles.
The start of Cybercab production is more than just a new vehicle entering mass manufacturing for Tesla, as it’s a signal autonomy is near. Being developed without manual controls is such a massive sign by Tesla that it trusts its progress on Full Self-Driving.
While the development of that suite continues, Tesla is making a clear cut statement that it is prepared to get its fully autonomous vehicle out in public roads as it prepares to revolutionize passenger travel once and for all.
News
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 began rolling out to some owners earlier this week, and there are some notable improvements that came with this update.
There were two new lines of improvements in the release notes: one addressing Actually Smart Summon (ASS), and another that now allows drivers to choose a reason for an intervention via a small menu during disengagement.
Overall operation saw a handful of slight improvements, especially with parking performance, which has been the most notable difference with the arrival of FSD v14.3. However, there are still some very notable shortcomings, most notably with region-specific signage and navigation.
Tesla Assisted Smart Summon (ASS) improvements
There are noticeable improvements to ASS operation, which has definitely been inconsistent in terms of performance. Tesla wrote in the release notes for v14.3.2:
“Unified the model between Actually Smart Summon, FSD, and Robotaxi for more capable and reliable behavior.”
As recently as this month, I used Summon with no success. It had pulled around the parking lot I was in incorrectly, leaving the range at which Summon can be operated and losing a signal while moving in the middle of the lot.
This caused me to sprint across the lot to retrieve the vehicle:
It was pouring when I left the gym so I tried to Summon my Model Y
It turned the opposite way and drove out of range, stopping here and forcing me to walk even further across the lot in the rain for it 🤣
One day pic.twitter.com/iD10c8sriB
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 5, 2026
Unfortunately, Summon was not dependable or accurate enough to use regularly. It appears Tesla might have bridged the gap needed to make it an effective feature, as two tests in parking lots proved that Summon was more responsive and faster to navigate to the location chosen.
It also did so without hesitation, confidently, and at a comfortable speed. I was able to test it twice at different distances:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 ASS testing part 1
This was a significant improvement than recent tries using ASS. The parking lot was pretty empty but getting it to come to my location in one singular motion and maneuver was encouraging. https://t.co/vF7TS48GGV pic.twitter.com/sYt8tyHgNn
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.2 ASS testing part 2 https://t.co/lxfWfnLUxf pic.twitter.com/2R0r3ohI3M
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
I plan to test this more thoroughly and regularly through the next few weeks, and I avoided using it in a congested parking lot initially because I have not had overwhelming success with Summon in the past. I wanted to set a low baseline for it to see if it could simply pull up to the place I pinned in the Tesla app.
It was two for two, which is a big improvement because I don’t think I ever had successful Summon attempts back-to-back. It just seems more confident than ever before.
New Disengagement Categories
This is a really good idea from Tesla, but there are some issues with it. The categories you can select are Critical, Comfort, Preference, and Other.
I think the reasons why people choose to take over would be a better way to prompt drivers, like, “Traveling Too Fast,” “Incorrect Maneuver,” “Navigation Error,” would be more beneficial.
I say this because it seems that how we each categorize things might be different. For example, I shared a video of an intervention because the car had navigated to an exit to a parking lot and put its left blinker on, despite left turns not being allowed there.
I disengaged and chose Critical as the reason; it’s not a comfort issue, it’s not a preference, it’s quite literally an illegal turn, and it’s also dangerous because it cuts across several lanes of traffic and is 180 degrees.
I chose to label this Navigation error as “Critical” while testing FSD v14.3.2
Here’s why:
✅ This intervention wasn’t “preference,” as the maneuver FSD routed was illegal
✅ If a police officer saw this maneuver, it would result in a ticket https://t.co/znhHb4haAo pic.twitter.com/bZOiLwWmQa— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Some said I should not have labeled this as Critical, but that’s the description I best characterized the disengagement as.
Categorizing interventions is a good thing, but it’s kind of hard to determine how to label them correctly.
Inconsistency with Regional Traffic Patterns
Tesla Full Self-Driving is pretty inconsistent with how it handles regional or local traffic patterns and road rules. The most frequent example I like to use is that of the “Except Right Turn” stop sign, which has become a notorious sighting on our social media platforms.
In the initial rollout of v14.3, my Model Y successfully navigated through one of these stop signs with no issues. However, testing at two of these stop signs yesterday proved it is still not sure how to read signs and navigate through them properly.
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 attempts the “Except Right Turn” stop sign: https://t.co/W5MjAybaNK pic.twitter.com/P6oeUsk4PN
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Off camera, I approached another one of these signs and felt the car coming to a stop, so I nudged it forward with the accelerator pedal pressed.
This helped the car go through the sign without stopping, but I could feel the bucking of the vehicle as the car really wanted to stop.
Musk said on the earnings call earlier this week that unsupervised FSD would probably be available in some regions before others, including a state-to-state basis in the U.S.
“It’s difficult to release this like to everyone everywhere all at once because we do want to make sure that they’re not unique situations in a city that particularly complex intersection or — actually, they tend to be places where people get into accidents a lot because they’re just — perhaps there’s — and like I said, an unsafe intersection or bad road markings or a lot of weather challenges. So I think we would release unsupervised gradually to the customer fleet as we feel like a particular geography is confirmed to be safe.”
This could be one of those examples that Tesla just has to figure out.
Highway Operation
Full Self-Driving is already pretty good at routine roadway navigation, so I don’t have too much to report here.
However, I was happy with FSD’s decision-making at several points, including its choice not to pass a slightly slower car and remain in the right lane as we approached the off-ramp:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 highway operation: generally happy with the performance here, especially behavior near the exit
Love that the car got over in the right lane after its final pass, and stayed there as the off ramp was approaching https://t.co/qVRVhg6XGR pic.twitter.com/1ELwHf2XKS
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
Better Maneuvering at Stop Signs
Many FSD users report some strange operations at stop signs, especially four-way intersections where there is a stop sign and a line on the road, and they’re not even with one another.
I experienced this quite frequently and found that FSD would actually double stop: once at the stop sign and again at the line.
This created some interesting scenarios for me and I had many cars honk at me when the second stop would happen. Other vehicles that had waved me on to proceed through the intersection would become frustrated at the second stop.
FSD seems to have worked through this particular maneuver:
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.2 with a singular stop at the correct spot
No double stopping anymore in my experience https://t.co/Wd0TaNjc1R pic.twitter.com/CdQPvJHaAM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) April 23, 2026
FSD should know to go to the more appropriate location (whichever provides better visibility), and proceed when it is the car’s turn to move. The double stop really ruined the flow of traffic at times and generally caused some frustration from other drivers.
Tesla Cybercab gets crazy change as mass production begins
Tesla confirms Cybercab with no steering wheel enters production
