Connect with us

News

Tesla Model S, X with “Hardware 3” for Full Self-Driving now in production, inventory codes indicate

Published

on

Tesla has begun producing Model X and Model S vehicles with the latest Autopilot hardware to support Full Self-Driving capabilities. Dubbed “HW3”, the new hardware is Tesla’s next iteration of its semi-autonomous driving-assist feature that includes Navigate on Autopilot, Advanced Summon, Auto Lane Change, Autopark, and the ability to respond to traffic lights.

Looking at the source code behind Tesla’s New Inventory site, we’re able to see that recently produced Model S and Model X with Autopilot have been given an “APH4” options code, signifying that these vehicles are equipped with the latest Full Self-Driving hardware. Tesla uses the option code sequence “APHx” to denote the type of Autopilot hardware installed in its vehicles. APH2 indicates HW2 and APH3 = HW2.5 (Autopilot 2.5). Thus, APH4 is HW3.

Here’s a side-by-side comparison of two 2019 Model S with and without the new Hardware 3 for Autopilot.

Source: Tesla New Inventory listing

The tip comes to us from Tesla Info and Inventory, a web site which compiles inventory data for Tesla vehicles around the world, noted that internal vehicle “option codes” indicated a change from Hardware 2.5 to Hardware 3. The site pulls source data directly from Tesla’s car listing pages and analyzes the “config” data embedded in the HTML to determine this information.

This discovery aligns with the schedule for the HW3 installs previously set forth by Tesla CEO Elon Musk. Last October, Musk estimated a 6-month wait before the the new chips would be installed in all new production cars, meaning an April showing.

Advertisement
-

Musk has touted HW3 as the “world’s most advanced computer designed specifically” for the purpose of self-driving functionality, with Tesla holding a notable lead in the field overall. “If you add everyone else up combined, they’re probably 5% — I’m being generous — of the miles that Tesla has. And this difference is increasing,” Musk said in Tesla’s 2018 Q4 earnings call.

For vehicles without HW3 installed at the time of manufacture, Musk has stressed the simplicity of the upgrade process in Tesla’s 2018 Q2 earnings call. “We take out one computer and plug in the next. That’s it. All the connectors are compatible and you get an order of magnitude, more processing and you can run all the cameras at primary full resolution with the complex neural net.”

The simple upgrade to HW3 does require Tesla cars to have HW2 as the equipment needed for its functionality was included in those vehicles. The software uses an array of 8 cameras, 12 ultrasonic sensors, and a forward-facing radar paired with Tesla’s vision and neural net system.

2019 Tesla Model X with Hardware 3

The first features of the Full Self-Driving suite were included in the Version 9 software released in October. “Navigate on Autopilot”, an active guidance feature with Autosteer for highway driving (with driver supervision) came soon after with the release of HW2.5. Improvement in performance from software Version 8.1. to 9.0 was increased by about 400% in useful operations per second; however, the difference between V9.0 and HW3 will make a difference of 500-2000%, according to Musk. Tesla has been releasing iterative over-the-air updates over the last year in preparation for the coming HW3 and complete FSD capabilities.

The current iteration of Tesla’s FSD capabilities includes core highway navigation, autopark, and Summon for car retrieval in parking lots. Recognition of traffic signs and signals as well as city street driving are expected to be coming later this year.

Advertisement
-

Now that HW3 is on its way to current and future Tesla customers, Full Self-Driving certainly feels right around the corner. However, the biggest obstacle to full implementation still sits on the regulation side, a time-consuming yet necessary part of the consumer vehicle industry, especially when a company is handing over responsibility to a computer. Tesla’s Autopilot page still references full self-driving capabilities as something “in the future” that may happen after regulatory approval which “may take longer in some jurisdictions.”

Tesla’s dominance in the all-electric market will most likely work in its favor to overcome the legal hurdles in the way of autonomous driving. As sales continue to rise with the growing number of customers now able to meet more affordable price points, Tesla will keep accumulating useful data to hone its FSD software and make the case for its much-safer-than-humans capabilities. Other companies may have long been battling the same regulatory demons Tesla is now up against, but the electric car was also “killed off” prior to their very influential arrival on the market. In “Musk World”, there is improbable, but not often impossible.

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Advertisement
-

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading

News

NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way

NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.

Published

on

By

Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.

The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.

Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.

The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.

Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.

Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:

“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”

The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.

Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.

His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.

Advertisement
-

Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.

That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.

Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading