Tesla has some of the most technologically advanced and sustainable vehicles consumers can buy on the market today. However, as Tesla Raj notes in one of his newest videos, his Tesla Model 3, along with other vehicles in the company’s lineup, are missing some of the most basic features that are available on models from other companies that are several years old. This begs the question: Would Tesla vehicles be even better with the five basic features Raj requests?
Cross-Traffic Alert System
One of the most important features that Raj lists is the Cross-Traffic Alert System. Noting that his wife’s 2016 Toyota RAV4 Hybrid has the system, which is highly effective in alerting the driver of an oncoming obstacle that is out of sight, Raj said his Model 3 lacks this somewhat basic safety feature.
While the Model 3 does offer wide-angle views from both rear quarter panels that could assist in a little more of a view, it still does not utilize any sort of system to sense objects, people, or vehicles that may be moving toward the Model 3. In a crowded Supermarket parking lot, Cross-Traffic Alert Systems are highly effective in keeping the driver vigilant as others look for a spot or shoppers head in or out of the store, perhaps with a heavy cart full of food. This simple addition could keep the car undamaged and could even save a life. Raj’s daughter, who was riding a scooter in the demonstration, was below the vehicles on either side of the Tesla. She was impossible to see until she entered the vehicle’s repeater camera view, which would likely give the driver a fraction-of-a-fraction of a second to stop.
As you can see in the pictures below, smaller obstacles, like shopping carts, as well as small children, are hidden by the vehicles parked next to Raj’s Model 3. A child is not seen until they are right behind the vehicle. These would be solved with basic sensors, which Tesla already has installed in their vehicles.
-
- The Tesla Model 3’s rear-view cameras lack a Cross-Traffic Alert System, which would help drivers see smaller obstacles that could be hidden by nearby vehicles (Credit: Tesla Raj)
-
- The Tesla Model 3’s rear-view cameras lack a Cross-Traffic Alert System, which would help drivers see smaller obstacles that could be hidden by nearby vehicles (Credit: Tesla Raj)
360-Degree Camera Views
Raj’s wife’s 2016 RAV4 Hybrid also equips a 360-degree camera, which the Model 3 also lacks. In October 2020, Tesla CEO Elon Musk confirmed that a Birds-Eye, 360-degree view of the vehicle would be coming with Full Self-Driving. It has not been released with the current iteration of Tesla’s semi-autonomous driving program, but Musk may have meant that the feature would not be released until FSD is actually complete, which would activate the company’s plans for a Robotaxi Fleet. However, so many vehicles have this feature already, which would activate full-range views of every obstacle around the car. The wide-range perspective would even help complement the previously-mentioned Cross-Traffic Alert System.
Vector-space bird’s eye view coming with FSD
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) October 3, 2020
Tesla does offer those repeater cameras to help with a wider view of the car. However, they do not show a Birds-Eye angle, nor do they show the sides of the car.
Apple Music + CarPlay
If you follow Raj and Elon Musk on Twitter, you will know that Raj has requested the Tesla CEO to add this feature on many occasions, and for good reasons. While Tesla does currently offer Spotify, the world’s largest streaming platform for music and podcasts, and Tidal, another streaming app, the cars do not feature Apple Music support. Spotify does offer high-quality streaming, granted you are connected to a network that can support high download speeds. Tesla’s sound system, which has been noted as high quality by many, including Musk himself (surprise, surprise), is not getting used to its full capabilities without high-quality streaming services.
Apple Music supports Dolby Atmos’ spatial audio, which allows for high-quality streaming.
It would also support a lot of Tesla owners, as a poll Raj conducted showed 74 percent of the 2,292 votes received came from Apple owners utilizing iOS.
Tesla Owners what operating system is on your phone?
— Tesla Raj (@tesla_raj) July 28, 2022
Apple’s CarPlay is also highly intuitive, easy to use, and is supported by most automotive brands. I’m not sure if this comes down to some tech-based rivalry or just the fact that Tesla is not willing to license Apple’s software, but it would be a huge upside if these features were compatible with the vehicle.
Ease of Access to the Frunk
The lack of an engine in electric vehicles allows the Frunk – or Front Trunk – to exist. It gives owners just a little bit more room to store things like luggage or groceries, and it varies from vehicle to vehicle. The F-150 Lightning, for example, has a sizeable Frunk, basically adding a sedan-sized trunk to the already large bed area.
Ford F-150 Lightning unveiled: Price, Release date, Range, Features and more
The Model 3 Frunk is not easy to access, at least in Raj’s opinion. He would like to see an exterior Frunk access button or sensor that could remove the need to open the hood with the Tesla App or from the interior touch screen. Some vehicles have a sensor for trunks located underneath the rear bumper. It can be tapped with a foot to open and comes in handy when your hands might be full of groceries.
Tesla Model 3 frunk cargo space [Source: PTFI via Twitter]
The Frunk is one of the most underrated parts of an electric vehicle, in my opinion. It should be easier to access, and you should not need a screen to do so.
Fleet-based User Generated Content
This is perhaps one of the most practical ideas Raj included in his video and is something that navigation apps like Waze and Apple Maps have included in their platforms. Alerting other drivers of hazards, police, accidents, stoppages, and other important occurrences on the road would be ideal to share between Tesla drivers. Reporting things like road debris or an officer shooting radar would most certainly be advantageous to the safety of drivers. It has allowed people to communicate with road conditions and is constantly updated by asking future drivers whether the hazard or obstacle is still present.
Credit: Apple
What do you think about Tesla Raj’s list? Be sure to let him know on Twitter @tesla_raj, and be sure to comment your thoughts below.
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
