Connect with us

News

Tesla driving test hell: How DMV examiners’ biases are inhibiting the EV transition

(Credit: Andres GE and Wiimedia Commons)

Published

on

The Professor was looking forward to getting a new US driver’s license. After moving from the East Coast to teach at the University of California, it became pertinent for the 38-year old engineer and scientist to have his own driver’s license again. The coming school year would be different from the last, after all, and with face-to-face classes likely starting again, it was important for the Professor to have the capability to drive the family’s Tesla Model 3 when needed. 

Having extensive driving experience overseas before moving to the United States, the Tesla owner (name witheld as requested) was fairly optimistic that he could pass the Department of Motor Vehicles’ standards. His family certainly looked forward to it, so his wife, who also teaches at the University of California, and their two kids — a 4-year-old and a 3-month old baby — headed over to the Santa Ana DMV. Unfortunately for the Professor, he made a grave mistake.

He drove a Tesla. 

Driving Tests from Hell

It is no stretch to state that California is the heart of the US’ electric vehicle transition. It’s home to Tesla’s headquarters and the company’s Fremont Factory, where vehicles like the Model 3 and the Model Y are produced. The Professor was then surprised when the DMV examiner, after what appeared to be an uneventful drive, told him that he had failed his driving test. As related to Teslarati, the DMV examiner reportedly informed the Tesla owner that he failed because the “technology in the car was not off.” When asked for more explanation, the examiner explained that the Model 3’s acceleration should have been on “Chill Mode” and the steering settings in “Comfort.”

This was inconvenient, but the Professor figured that he should probably just try again. The Model 3 owner ultimately opted to try his hand at another test in the LA DMV, especially since Teslas are extremely common in Los Angeles. For the second time, the family of four headed over to the LA DMV in their Model 3 for another test. The Professor then drove away with his examiner, but not before ensuring that the Model 3 was in Chill Mode and its steering was set in Comfort. But just like his previous attempt, the DMV examiner informed the Tesla owner that he had failed because of the Model 3’s “automatic engage.” Explaining further, the examiner stated that she could feel the brakes even when the physical brake pedal was not being pressed. 

Credit: Teslarati

This set off alarms in the Professor and his wife, as regenerative braking is a feature that is very common among electric vehicles. It is also not in any way connected to a Model 3’s automated features. As they addressed their concerns with the DMV, the manager of the LA office told the Model 3 owners that there was no way for Teslas to disable their automated features. When the Tesla owners asked where she got her information from, the manager stated that she heard it from a customer who visited the DMV a few weeks prior. The manager then extended an offer, telling the Tesla owner that he could retake the exam that same day if he could rent a traditional car. 

This was an unexpected turn for the family, but they were eventually able to secure a Toyota Camry from a rental car company an hour away. But upon presenting the vehicle to the DMV, the LA office rejected the Camry since it was not under the Professor’s name. Ultimately, the Tesla owner was not allowed to take his driving test in the rental car, though he was given the option of renting one from the LA DMV office instead for $140, $40 more than the Camry that the family had initially rented. Unfortunately for the Professor, he was given a failing score once more, despite the DMV examiner acknowledging that he seemed to have a lot of experience driving cars. 

Advertisement
-

DMV Policies and Customer Advice 

In a later message, the Professor’s wife stated that her husband would most definitely try to get his driver’s license once more, though they would probably wait some time before trying again. The last three tries were quite exhausting, and by the third driving test, the Model 3 owner stated that some DMV staff were already irate. This was not that unusual, of course, considering that the DMV is one of America’s least-liked agencies. It was just quite surprising that in the first two tests, it was the Model 3’s features that caused the examiner to fail the Tesla owner. 

In a response to a Teslarati inquiry about the Model 3 owners’ experience, the CA DMV Public Affairs Office confirmed that there is no policy that prevents customers from taking their driving test in a Tesla. The office added that while the DMV currently has no specific criteria for features like regenerative braking in EVs, it is working to ensure that examiners have an understanding of the function and how it impacts driving. That being said, the agency advised that those who wish to take their driving test in a Tesla should speak to a manager first to avoid issues. 

“In the event (that) a customer has questions about taking a driving test in a particular vehicle, they should ask to speak with a manager before the test. DMV employees who give behind-the-wheel tests receive updated training as necessary,” the DMV Public Affairs Office noted. 

It should be noted that California is arguably the US state that is friendliest to electric vehicles. The state still offers clean vehicle rebates, and there is still a Zero Emission Vehicle (ZEV) mandate for automakers. It is then no surprise that Teslas are very popular in the state. In 2015, California accounted for 43% of Tesla’s new vehicle registrations, as per data from IHS Markit. This percentage has since decreased as Tesla started selling its cars to more territories — but its California stake is still no joke. In 2020 alone, Tesla still sold 37% of its vehicles in California, despite the pandemic and the company no longer having any access to the $7,500 federal tax credit enjoyed by competitors like the Ford Mustang Mach-E and the Volkswagen ID.4. 

Credit: Tesla Inc.

Insights from CA’s Clean Air Protectors

The California Air Resources Board (CARB), which is charged with protecting the public from the harmful effects of air pollution and developing programs to fight climate change, is among the agencies that are helping push the transition to sustainable transportation. With this in mind, it seemed appropriate to get the agency’s take on the Tesla Model 3 owners’ experience with the Santa Ana and LA DMV. After all, it would be quite challenging to fully adopt electric vehicles in California if some driving examiners or DMV offices were still unfamiliar with how EVs work, or their features for that matter. 

CARB Communications Specialist John Swanton informed Teslarati that while driving tests are not CARB’s area of responsibility, the agency could work together with the DMV if there are widespread issues that could impede the greater goals of California’s transition to Zero-Emission vehicles. That being said, Swanton remarked that driver-assist technologies are becoming more and more common in modern cars, and they are widely accepted as features that enhance safety. 

“While the driver’s license test is not our area of responsibility, we can say that we are not aware of any serious concerns that DMV has with the routine features found in a very wide range of vehicles equipped with driver-assistance technologies. As you are probably aware, these are in use in both EV and combustion-powered vehicles, and are widely accepted to enhance vehicle safety. These systems not only meet state requirements; they are fully certified for use nationwide by the US National Highway Traffic Safety Administration,” Swanton said.

Advertisement
-

The CARB Communications Specialist further stated that specific features like regenerative braking have long been proven to be very efficient, driver-operated controls that have been utilized since the early days of hybrid vehicles like the Toyota Prius. In this light, at least, it appears that the DMV examiner’s statements about the Model 3’s regenerative braking being an automated feature seems misinformed at best or biased at worst. “Their operation is not unlike the use of an automatic transmission. So it’s safe to say that these are not autonomous features, but rather simply part of modern automobile controls. I think this complaint may be a situation with an individual examiner that DMV management will need to speak to or clarify policy,” Swanton remarked. 

(Photo: Andres GE)

Behind the Times

There is something ironic about the idea of a Tesla driver in California failing a driving test because of the electric vehicle’s basic functions. Numerous driving schools across the globe, after all, are already embracing electric vehicles fully. Los Angeles-based Drivers Ed Direct currently operates an all-electrified fleet of cars for its students. Defensive Driving School, which was founded in 1945, actually offers a “specialty course” on Model 3s called “The Tesla Experience.” These programs suggest that driving schools across the country are already aware that sustainable vehicles are inevitable, and it is in everyone’s best interest to ensure that drivers of the future are fully acquainted with the features and behavior of electric cars. 

And it’s not just the United States either. In Germany, a country famous for its mastery of carmaking, schools like Die Fahrschule have made it their mission to ensure that the next generation of drivers is properly prepared for the era of electric vehicles. In an interview with noted EV advocate Ove Kröger, one of the German driving school’s instructors, Alexander Erler, stated that there are actually advantages to teaching in an EV like a Model 3, since the vehicles provide a calm atmosphere. Remarkably, Erler noted that the presence of Model 3s in the school’s fleet actually helped dispel misinformation about electric vehicles, especially when younger drivers take their EV-skeptical parents along for their lessons. 

Even oil-rich Dubai is no different. Electric vehicles are still a niche product in the Middle Eastern city, but prominent driving schools like Emirates Driving Institute (EDI) are already investing in electric vehicles. The school purchased a Model X to be part of its premium driving fleet in 2018, and since then, the vehicle has been received well. In a conversation with Teslarati, EDI Marketing Executive Disha Bhatia explained that the addition of electric vehicles to the school’s fleet is fully supported by the government. This is a big vote of confidence in EVs, since Dubai mandates all drivers to attend a formal driving school before attempting a driving test. 

“It becomes important for them to also know that if tomorrow, electric cars are the future, then how would driving be any different than that of regular cars? So when (the students) learn on Teslas, they would understand the differences between a normal car versus an electric car. However, they also need to understand that driving is the same. They still need to focus on the same points… the same (focus on safety)… We’ve received great responses from a lot of our customers who are very interested to drive in a Tesla, and they’re very happy to get their licenses,” she said. 

So what exactly happened in the case of the Model 3 owner? It would be very difficult to determine exactly what caused the examiners to fail the Tesla owner, though it appears that a lack of proper information is the prominent culprit. Teslas are ultimately cars, after all, and they serve the same purpose as regular vehicles. They just happen to be more advanced, and in more ways than one, safer, than traditional vehicles. With this in mind, it seems to be a bad idea to be misinformed about Teslas, especially since the vehicles are practically everywhere in the state. 

Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up. 

Advertisement
-

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Grok Bot users hit with weekly limits early, Elon Musk explains what happened

Published

on

Credit: Grok Bot

Elon Musk said weeks ago during SpaceX’s third-quarter earnings call that the company’s Grok Bot, its autonomous AI Agent platform, was showing “the fastest growth of a product” that he’d ever seen in his life.

Now, SpaceXSI is scaling back Grok Bot users’ weekly limits, much to the surprise of those who have relied on it to take away monotonous tasks in their lives.

Elon Musk’s terse November 1 reply on X captured a sharp tension in the early days of agentic AI. Responding to a user who asked for a Grok Bot usage reset after hitting 100 percent with four days still left on the weekly cycle, Musk wrote: “The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue.”

The post arrived amid a wave of similar complaints from paying subscribers whose meters had jumped unexpectedly toward or to the limit, sometimes overnight and with little corresponding activity. It also stood in clear contrast to statements Musk had made only days and weeks earlier.

On the SpaceX third-quarter earnings call in mid-to-late October, Musk had described Grok Bot in almost the opposite terms. He called it “the fastest growth of a product that I’ve ever seen in my life” and said he had “never seen anything grow this fast.”

Company figures put paid weekly users at roughly 800,000 earlier in the month, more than doubling over the prior period. Daily active users had climbed from under 100,000 in early September to over 600,000 by late October.

Musk emphasized that the product has no free tier and that users appear to be getting real value beyond what they pay. In other remarks, he noted that usage per user was rising rather than declining, the opposite of the usual decay pattern for new software.

Grok Bot, launched around August, functions as an always-available agent with its own persistent cloud computer; it can schedule, research, shop, browse, and execute multi-step workflows even after the user steps away. Access is bundled into X subscription tiers (roughly $30, $100, and $200 per month) and certain Cursor plans, drawing from shared weekly usage pools whose exact sizes have not been publicly detailed.

The economics of that model are what Musk’s November 1 post put in the spotlight. Agentic systems burn far more compute than ordinary chatbot exchanges. Each task can trigger repeated model calls, tool use, web actions, and sustained background work.

When growth is as rapid as Musk celebrated, the absolute compute bill scales quickly even if average revenue per user stays fixed under flat monthly subscriptions. Industry observers noted the opportunity cost as well: the same GPUs can be rented to other AI labs at higher rates.

A simple back-of-the-envelope comparison circulating after the post illustrated the gap: if every reported daily user paid the top tier, annualized subscription revenue would still be modest relative to the scale of compute infrastructure SpaceX is building and leasing to companies like Anthropic.

Some users also reported possible dashboard anomalies around the same period, though Musk’s framing treated the underlying cost-revenue imbalance as the core issue rather than a pure metering glitch.

The juxtaposition is the core of this exchange. Within roughly two weeks of publicly framing Grok Bot as an unprecedented success with strong unit economics and no free tier, Musk acknowledged that serving the same product had become unsustainable relative to the revenue it generates.

For the broader industry, the episode underscores a structural challenge of the agent era: demand is real and growing faster than many expected, yet the cost of fulfilling that demand through always-on, multi-step agents can outrun subscription pricing before companies can adjust limits, introduce metered billing, or raise prices.

Musk’s reply did not promise an immediate reset or higher allowances; it simply stated the constraint. In doing so, it supplied a rare, explicit public data point on the unit economics of a high-profile AI agent just as adoption numbers were still being celebrated as the fastest in Musk’s experience.

The tension between rapid, paid growth and the compute required to deliver it is now on the record.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla owners who tap Emergency Drive Away for fun are in for a surprise

Tapping Activate on Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away reportedly triggers a $539 service bill without moving.

Published

on

By

Tesla owners who press Activate on Emergency Drive Away may be on the hook for a service bill even if their car never leaves the Supercharger stall.

Yaro, who posts about Tesla service cases on X as @Tutrifour, said a customer called after tapping Activate while still plugged into a Supercharger. The owner was about to pull away, remembered the cable was still connected and stopped. The car never moved, but the touchscreen showed a red alert reading “Emergency Drive Away has been activated” with “Service is required” underneath. A Service Mode screenshot showed the active alert BMS_a228_EmergencyDriveAwayServiceRequired, which Yaro said only Tesla Service can clear.


The cost of clearing it was the bigger surprise. “Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch,” Yaro wrote.  The $539 figure comes from that single case, and Tesla has not published a set price for the inspection or commented on the post. Yaro also noted that the car would still charge with the alert on screen.

Tesla launched Emergency Drive Away on October 1 with software update 2026.38.3, letting drivers pull away from a U.S. Supercharger with the cable still attached, as Teslarati reported. To use it, a driver shifts into Drive while connected, holds the brake and taps Activate. The prompt warns that driving with the cable connected will damage the vehicle and the Supercharger, and that short camera recordings will be shared with Tesla.

Tesla Charging has been clear about what follows a real activation. Repairs to a Supercharger stall can run up to $25,000 depending on the site, a service visit for the car’s charge port is mandatory, and deliberate misuse “will invoke additional penalties.” What the company had not spelled out is that the service requirement is triggered the moment Activate is pressed, not the moment the cable breaks away.

From an engineering standpoint, that is the cautious choice. Once Activate is pressed, the car cannot be sure the charge port latch was not stressed, so flagging it for inspection removes the guesswork. It also means the button carries a price on its own, which is a stronger deterrent against casual use than any warning screen.


The report follows the feature’s first known real world use, when a driver in Austin during F1 weekend appeared to trigger it by accident and dragged the Supercharger cable along with the car. The Reddit user who filmed it said the driver seemed to have only half read the prompts.

For owners, the takeaway is to treat the red prompt as a stop sign. If it appears after shifting out of Park by mistake, shift back and unplug the normal way from the touchscreen, the Tesla app or the button on the charge handle. Activate is meant for moments when staying at the stall is the bigger risk, and Tesla is now pricing it that way.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk calls Earth’s data centers “peanuts” next to what SpaceX is planning in orbit

Elon Musk says SpaceX capex efficiency is underestimated as orbital data centers loom by 2028.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk is pushing back on one of the biggest worries hanging over SpaceX stock. In a reply on X on Sunday, Musk said the company’s capital expenditure efficiency is severely underestimated. He was responding to a Milk Road Stocks post citing analyst Kyle Reidhead, who estimates SpaceX will need to spend roughly $470 billion over the next five quarters.

Reidhead built that figure around the target SpaceX set on its third quarter earnings call: 13 gigawatts or more of compute by the end of 2027. In his breakdown, Nvidia captures 83 to 89 percent of the spending. SpaceX ended the quarter with 1.7 GW of nameplate compute and guided to $35 billion to $40 billion in fourth quarter capex, as Teslarati reported.

Musk did not attach a number to his claim, but the earnings call shows the argument. CFO Bret Johnsen said new compute currently pays for itself in under a year at today’s pricing, and Musk said that window could shrink to six months next year. Using that pace, Reidhead argues about $230 billion of the $470 billion could come from operating cash flow and about $60 billion from SpaceX’s roughly $90 billion cash pile, leaving around $180 billion to borrow. Musk confirmed last week that SpaceX had already closed a new $40 billion debt raise to buy GPUs.

The ground buildout is not the end goal. It is what is meant to pay for the move to orbit. Replying on Friday to charts built from Sequoia partner Shaun Maguire’s SpaceX model, Musk wrote that “Terrestrial compute will be peanuts compared to orbital compute,” adding that orbital compute deployed per month “probably exceeds terrestrial around the end of 2028 and then far exceeds it in 2029.”

Maguire’s model shows how steep that path is. It has capex climbing from $88 billion this year to $290 billion in 2027 and $369 billion in 2028, with SpaceX burning $77.8 billion in cash this year and $122.6 billion next year before turning $114.9 billion cash positive in 2028. Musk’s response to the model was, “I think we can do better.”

Advertisement
-

The orbital half runs through Starmind. SpaceX plans to operate up to 1 million AI satellites flying in clusters of about 10, linked by roughly 10 terabits of bandwidth, with deployment of thousands of units starting as soon as late 2027 out of its Gigasat factory in Bastrop, Texas, according to SpaceX’s space safety page. Musk has said each Starmind spacecraft will carry more than 250 kW of solar power.

Getting there depends on launch volume. Maguire’s model assumes 250 Starship flights in 2028, up from two this year and 38 next year. The nearer test is financial: SpaceX guided to $33 billion to $37 billion in first quarter 2027 revenue, more than double the $14.58 billion it booked in Q3, and Musk reposted that guidance again on Sunday morning.

Continue Reading