News
Tesla Autopilot is now a ‘distant 2nd’ to GM Super Cruise: Consumer Reports
Tesla’s Autopilot may have the best performance, capabilities, and ease of use in Consumer Reports’ recent ranking of active driving assistance systems, but it remains “a distant second” to GM’s Super Cruise nonetheless. This was according to the testing organization on Wednesday.
The results echo Consumer Reports’ findings in its first-ever ranking of active driving assistance systems back in 2018, which also ended with GM Super Cruise taking the top spot and Tesla Autopilot taking second place. This time around, the testing organization tested 17 systems from various carmakers, as opposed to the four that were evaluated in 2018. Needless to say, the results were quite interesting.
Each of the active driving assistance systems in this year’s test was evaluated under the following metrics: Capability and Performance, Keeping the Driver Engaged, Ease of Use, Clear When Safe to Use, and Unresponsive Driver. Tesla’s Autopilot aced two of these metrics, specifically Capability and Performance as well as Ease of Use. Autopilot earned an impressive score of 9/10 in Capabilities and Performance and a 7/10 for Ease of Use.
According to Consumer Reports, Autopilot performed the best among the 17 systems it tested in its lane-keeping assist tests. Autopilot was also deemed the best when it comes to how easy it is to use. Kelly Funkhouser, CR’s head of connected and automated vehicle testing, noted that systems that score well in Ease of Use usually require non-complex input from drivers. “One of the last things you want in a system that is supposed to assist the driver is to make things overly complicated,” Funkhouser said.
Unfortunately for Tesla, Autopilot was rated poorly by Consumer Reports when it came to the Keeping the Driver Engaged metric. For this metric, Tesla’s driver-assist system earned a paltry 3/10 score due to Autopilot’s alleged lack of driver monitoring systems. In contrast, GM’s Super Cruise, the highest-ranking system in this metric with a 7/10 score, was praised for its camera-based driver monitoring system that uses eye-tracking technology.
Super Cruise was also the top-ranked system with an 8/10 score in the Clear When Safe to Use metric, since the system could only be used on areas where the driver-assist suite could perform safely. “Cadillac stood out in this category because Super Cruise can be used only on pre-mapped, divided highways. Plus, Super Cruise will even warn the driver in advance when there is an upcoming lane-merge or complex situation that requires extra attention.,” Consumer Reports noted.
Tesla Autopilot earned a 2/10 score in Clear When Safe to Use, due to the system being accessible in areas that are not low-risk. “Active driving assistance systems should only be able to be activated in low-risk driving environments, void of pedestrians and tricky situations, such as intersections and complicated traffic patterns,” Funkhouser said.
Tesla Autopilot earned a 6/10 score for Consumer Reports’ Unresponsive Driver metric. This metric, as noted by the testing organization, evaluates systems based on their capability to operate vehicles safely in the event that the driver falls asleep or encounters a medical emergency. Systems were evaluated based on their escalation process for warnings, steering control, and speed control.
Overall, GM Super Cruise earned a total score of 69 from the testing organization, while Tesla Autopilot earned a total score of 57. Following closely was Ford Co-Pilot 360 at 52 and Audi Pre Sense at 48. Funkhouser, for her part, noted that Super Cruise’s driver monitoring system remains a difference-maker. “Even with new systems from many different automakers, Super Cruise still comes out on top due to the infrared camera ensuring the driver’s eyes are looking toward the roadway,” the head of connected and automated vehicle testing said.
Consumer Reports’ discussion of its recent active driving assistance suite rankings could be accessed here.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk explains why Tesla’s 4680 battery breakthrough is a big deal
Tesla confirmed in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter that it is now producing 4680 cells whose anode and cathode were produced during the dry electrode process.
Tesla’s breakthroughs with its 4680 battery cell program mark a significant milestone for the electric vehicle maker. This was, at least, as per Elon Musk in a recent post on social media platform X.
Tesla confirmed in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter that it is now producing 4680 cells whose anode and cathode were produced during the dry electrode process.
Why dry-electrode matters
In a post on X, Elon Musk stated that making the dry-electrode process work at scale was “incredibly difficult,” calling it a major achievement for Tesla’s engineering, production, and supply chain teams, as well as its partner suppliers. He also shared his praise for the Tesla team for overcoming such a difficult task.
“Making the dry electrode process work at scale, which is a major breakthrough in lithium battery production technology, was incredibly difficult. Congratulations to the @Tesla engineering, production and supply chain teams and our strategic partner suppliers for this excellent achievement!” Musk wrote in his post.
Tesla’s official X account expanded on Musk’s remarks, stating that dry-electrode manufacturing “cuts cost, energy use & factory complexity while dramatically increasing scalability.” Bonne Eggleston, Tesla’s Vice President of 4680 batteries, also stated that “Getting dry electrode technology to scale is just the beginning.”
Tesla’s 4680 battery program
Tesla first introduced the dry-electrode concept at Battery Day in 2020, positioning it as a way to eliminate solvent-based electrode drying, shrink factory footprints, and lower capital expenditures. While Tesla has produced 4680 cells for some time, the dry cathode portion of the process proved far more difficult to industrialize than expected.
Together with its confirmation that it is producing 4680 cells in Austin with both electrodes manufactured using the dry process, Tesla has also stated that it has begun producing Model Y vehicles with 4680 battery packs. As per Tesla, this strategy was adopted as a safety layer against trade barriers and tariff risks.
“We have begun to produce battery packs for certain Model Ys with our 4680 cells, unlocking an additional vector of supply to help navigate increasingly complex supply chain challenges caused by trade barriers and tariff risks,” Tesla wrote in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
News
Even Tesla China is feeling the Optimus V3 fever
As per Tesla China, Optimus V3 is “about to be unveiled.”
Even Tesla China seems to have caught the Optimus V3 fever, with the electric vehicle maker teasing the impending arrival of the humanoid robot on its official Weibo account.
As per Tesla China, Optimus V3 is “about to be unveiled.”
Tesla China hypes up Optimus V3
Tesla China noted on its Weibo post that Optimus V3 is redesigned from first principles and is capable of learning new tasks by observing human behavior. The company has stated that it is targeting annual production capacity of up to one million humanoid robots once manufacturing scales.
During the Q4 and FY 2025 earnings call, CEO Elon Musk stated that Tesla will wind down Model S and Model X production to free up factory space for the pilot production line of Optimus V3.
Musk later noted that Giga Texas should have a significantly larger Optimus line, though that will produce Optimus V4. He also made it a point to set expectations with Optimus’ production ramp, stating that the “normal S curve of manufacturing ramp will be longer for Optimus.”
Tesla China’s potential role
Tesla’s decision to announce the Optimus update on Weibo highlights the importance of the humanoid robot in the company’s global operations. Giga Shanghai is already Tesla’s largest manufacturing hub by volume, and Musk has repeatedly described China’s manufacturers as Tesla’s most legitimate competitors.
While Tesla has not confirmed where Optimus V3 will be produced or deployed first, the scale and efficiency of Gigafactory Shanghai make it a plausible candidate for future humanoid robot manufacturing or in-factory deployment. Musk has also suggested that Optimus could become available for public purchase as early as 2027, as noted in a CNEV Post report.
“It’s going to be a very capable robot. I think long-term Optimus will have a very significant impact on the US GDP. It will actually move the needle on US GDP significantly. In conclusion, there are still many who doubt our ambitions for creating amazing abundance. We are confident it can be done, and we are making the right moves technologically to ensure that it does,” Musk said during the earnings call.
Elon Musk
Tesla director pay lawsuit sees lawyer fees slashed by $100 million
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
The Delaware Supreme Court has cut more than $100 million from a legal fee award tied to a shareholder lawsuit challenging compensation paid to Tesla directors between 2017 and 2020.
The ruling leaves the case’s underlying settlement intact while significantly reducing what the plaintiffs’ attorneys will receive.
Delaware Supreme Court trims legal fees
As noted in a Bloomberg Law report, the case targeted pay granted to Tesla directors, including CEO Elon Musk, Oracle founder Larry Ellison, Kimbal Musk, and Rupert Murdoch. The Delaware Chancery Court had awarded $176 million to the plaintiffs. Tesla’s board must also return stock options and forego years worth of pay.
As per Chief Justice Collins J. Seitz Jr. in an opinion for the Delaware Supreme Court’s full five-member panel, however, the decision of the Delaware Chancery Court to award $176 million to a pension fund’s law firm “erred by including in its financial benefit analysis the intrinsic value” of options being returned by Tesla’s board.
The justices then reduced the fee award from $176 million to $70.9 million. “As we measure it, $71 million reflects a reasonable fee for counsel’s efforts and does not result in a windfall,” Chief Justice Seitz wrote.
Other settlement terms still intact
The Supreme Court upheld the settlement itself, which requires Tesla’s board to return stock and options valued at up to $735 million and to forgo three years of additional compensation worth about $184 million.
Tesla argued during oral arguments that a fee award closer to $70 million would be appropriate. Interestingly enough, back in October, Justice Karen L. Valihura noted that the $176 award was $60 million more than the Delaware judiciary’s budget from the previous year. This was quite interesting as the case was “settled midstream.”
The lawsuit was brought by a pension fund on behalf of Tesla shareholders and focused exclusively on director pay during the 2017–2020 period. The case is separate from other high-profile compensation disputes involving Elon Musk.
Elon Musk explains why Tesla’s 4680 battery breakthrough is a big deal
Even Tesla China is feeling the Optimus V3 fever
