Tesla’s Battery Day is coming tomorrow after the electric car maker’s 2020 Annual Shareholder Meeting. During the event, Tesla is expected to discuss the details of its next-generation battery cells, as well as their role in the world’s acceleration in sustainable energy. Actual details about Battery Day have been pretty scarce save for a few potential leaks, but that has not stopped the Tesla community from speculating about what the highly-anticipated event would involve.
A concise summary of the current expectations for Battery Day was recently shared by Tesla Daily’s Rob Maurer, who compiled a list of topics that the electric car maker could cover during the event. Following then is a list of expectations about what Tesla could discuss tomorrow, as the company finally shows the world what it has been working on with regards to its battery technology.
A New Cell Design
Tesla has been teasing that it would be going into the production of battery cells. So far, leaks suggest that the company is about to adopt a larger form factor for its batteries, similar to how Tesla introduced the 2170 cells for the Model 3, which were larger than the 18650 cells used in the Model S and Model X. Leaks have pointed to Tesla’s new cells possibly adopting a 54×98 form factor, which has about 10x the volume of a 2170 cell.
With larger form factors, the electrons and the ions travel larger distances as they move around in the cell, generating more friction and heat. This is a huge downside to larger cells, but Tesla’s tabless battery patent may hold the key to solving this issue. With a tabless battery cell design, the distance traveled by electrons and ions is largely reduced, limiting the disadvantages inherent among large cells. Such a design has several advantages, including better energy density and a more efficient manufacturing process.
Battery Chemistry
Speculations are abounding that Tesla may discuss the amount of silicon that it is using in the anode of its next-generation cells. The more silicon that is used, the better the energy density. However, the utilization of silicon usually results in cracked anodes over time, reducing battery performance and life. Introducing more silicon into the anode is something that battery researchers have been attempting to accomplish for a while now, so it would be quite interesting if the electric car maker would announce some headway into its silicon use as well.
Tesla may also discuss Maxwell’s technology and how it is being used for the company’s electric cars and energy storage devices. Maxwell has developed numerous innovations prior to its acquisition by Tesla, though the most relevant part of the company’s work in relation to the electric car maker is arguably its dry battery electrode tech. Considering that traditional lithium-ion batteries produce their electrodes in a wet slurry format (a rather lengthy process), dry electrode technology could vastly improve not only the energy density of Tesla’s cells, they could improve the production output of the batteries themselves as well.
Cell-to-Pack Innovations
Tesla’s battery packs today feature cells that are packed into modules that are then packed into a battery pack. Back in the days of the original Roadster, battery modules were used as a means for the company to take out parts of the battery that may need to be replaced without taking out the entire pack. That was 12 years ago, however, and much has happened since then. Tesla has transitioned from a budding niche electric car maker to the manufacturer of the market’s best-selling EVs.
As Elon Musk noted in the past, battery modules today are pretty much just an extra step, taking up weight without really serving a legitimate purpose. Musk then stated that the future is cell to pack without modules, suggesting that the company’s next-generation batteries will be using a cell-to-pack design. Such an innovation gives numerous benefits to Tesla, from lower production costs to possibly even better energy density.
Battery Manufacturing and the Roadrunner Line
Elon Musk has always been pretty transparent about Tesla’s mission, which is to accelerate the advent of sustainable energy. Having enough batteries to enable such a transition is key to this goal. With this in mind, the potential innovations that Tesla will be discussing in Battery Day — a larger form factor that would allow the company to produce fewer cells to get the same amount of energy; a tabless cell design that could make production easier; dry electrode tech that could greatly increase the production capacity density of each battery; and a cell-to-pack design that should allow the production of batteries with less equipment at less cost — could ultimately pave the way for electric vehicles and energy storage products that are significantly better than the industry standard today.
The Roadrunner project in Fremont is expected to be a central component of Tesla’s battery manufacturing plans, with attendees to the event being shown just how fast the company could produce its battery cells using its in-house production process. Elon Musk seems to be hyping the Roadrunner line recently on Twitter as well, when he made references to a game called “Factorio,” which happens to be a title focused on growing and maintaining advanced, efficient factories.
The Million-Mile Battery
The million-mile battery has been heavily speculated for Battery Day. Tesla’s electric cars are already capable of lasting long despite heavy use, but with batteries and powertrains that could last a million miles, the company could create a generation of vehicles that are designed to be always operational for an extended period of time. Million-mile batteries are then crucial for Tesla’s plans to roll out a Robotaxi service, which involves vehicles traveling long distances every year.
The Plaid Powertrain
With Tesla’s battery innovations in mind, speculations are high that the company would unveil its first vehicles that would carry its next-generation cells on Battery Day. Among Tesla’s ongoing projects, the Roadrunner cells seem to be a perfect match for cars like the Plaid Model S, Plaid Model X, and next-generation Roadster. All three vehicles have been confirmed by Elon Musk to feature the company’s upcoming “Plaid Powertrain,” which is something that has been heavily teased for some time now. Interestingly enough, updates on Tesla’s Plaid vehicles have been pretty scarce lately, making an announcement on Battery Day somewhat likely.
Watch Rob Maurer’s full Tesla Battery Day predictions in the video 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
