Tesla has been pretty open about the idea that its next-generation of vehicles and its 20 million EV target for 2030 would rely on its ability to scale its 4680 battery production. This task, at least according to experts, has proven to be especially challenging.
Unveiled during Battery Day nearly two years ago, 4680 cells are expected to provide Tesla with substantial manufacturing cost reductions and efficiencies. According to statements from several experts in the field, the use of larger cells and a dry-coat electrode process could enable Tesla to halve the cost of a Model Y battery.
Twelve experts who are reportedly close to Tesla, or at least familiar with the company’s new battery technology, shared their insights with Reuters. Among the 12 experts, nine reportedly have close ties to Tesla, while three have examined the company’s previous battery technology thoroughly through an extensive teardown.
According to the publication’s sources, Tesla is only halfway towards its goal of successfully rolling out its 4680 cells. While the EV maker already sees benefits from the use of larger cells, Tesla is still reportedly seeing challenges with scaling its dry-coat electrode process.
This, according to the experts, was because Tesla’s dry-coat electrode process is so new and unproven that the company is still having trouble scaling its operations to the point where savings become substantial. Still, the publication’s sources have stated that Tesla would probably still be able to fully implement its 4680 cells’ dry coat electrode process next year.
2019 Nobel laureate and lithium-ion battery pioneer Stan Whittingham believes that Tesla would ultimately solve the challenges associated with its 4680 battery production ramp, though he also noted that Elon Musk might have been too optimistic with his target timeframe for the next-generation batteries’ rollout. “I think he will solve it, but it won’t be as quick as he likes. It’s going to take some time to really test it,” Whittingham said.
Reuters‘ sources noted that if all the potential efficiencies from the use of 4680 batteries are realized, the manufacturing cost for the Model Y’s 4680 structural battery could fall to just about $5,000-$5,500 — roughly half the cost of a 2170 pack. So far, Tesla is reportedly seeing about $2,000 to $3,000 worth of cost savings, mainly due to its use of bigger cells.
With Tesla’s 2170 battery packs, the company reportedly uses about 4,400 cells for the Model Y. The 2170 packs also require 17,600 points that need to be welded — about four welds per cell — to create a battery that can be integrated into the all-electric crossover. This is reduced significantly with the use of 4680 cells. The experts noted that Tesla only needs 830 cells for its Model Y 4680 structural pack, and since there are only two weld points for each cell, the total weld points per vehicle drops to just 1,660 points.
But while Tesla has made tons of headway with its 4680 batteries, and while the company already sees savings due to its use of larger cells, the EV maker still needs to master and scale its dry electrode process. Once that’s done, Tesla could effectively attain the holy grail of its next-generation batteries. “Bulking up the battery cell helped a lot in boosting efficiency, but pushing for 50% cost savings for the cell as a whole is another matter. That will depend on whether Tesla can deploy the dry-coating process successfully in a factory,” one of Reuters‘ sources said.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.

The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.