News
Tesla is breaking the 'Made-in-China' stereotype with the GF3-made Model 3
Elon Musk and the Tesla team revel in busting stereotypes. This was evident in the Cybertruck’s unveiling, where Chief Designer Franz von Holzhausen literally took a sledgehammer to emphasize the point that EVs can be stronger than conventional rough-and-tough vehicles. In China, Tesla is doing the same thing, but this time, the electric car maker is breaking a stereotype that has been around for a long time: the myth of bad “Made in China” quality.
A study from the Iowa State University reported via Futurity noted that before the words “Made in China” were perceived in the United States as a reference to low-cost and low-quality goods, the perception for Chinese-made products was actually quite positive. Gang (Kevin) Han, an associate professor at Iowa State University’s Greenlee School of Journalism and Communication, noted that things started changing when China became the manufacturing powerhouse that it is today.
“People really enjoyed products from China. They viewed products, such as tea, furniture, or dishware, as unique. It was a quality product and there was a cultural value. But when China became a world factory and produced so many items for so many brands, people changed their views,” he said, adding that the prominent media coverage about issues with China-made products also added to the stereotype. “We see a lot of framed messages in these stories and receive the message subconsciously,” Han remarked.
These stereotypes were promptly invoked by Tesla critics as soon as the electric car maker announced its plans to build a factory in China. Over the course of Gigafactory 3’s construction, it was not rare to find a Tesla critic mocking the alleged quality issues that would most likely plague the MIC Model 3. This point, as with many criticisms thrown at Tesla, appears to have been taken as a challenge by the electric car maker’s team in China. When the company invited the media to experience the Made-in-China Model 3 for the first time, Tesla was serious. It wanted to break another stereotype. And they did.
Reviews of the Made-in-China Model 3 were notably positive, even if the vehicles being produced in the Shanghai-based site are only the Standard Range Plus variants of the all-electric sedan. Despite not having Tesla’s stunning white interior or more fancy 19″ Sports Wheels, the locally-made Model 3s were built with near-surgical precision. The vehicles’ panel gaps were meticulously aligned, their trimmings fit to a tee. In the United States, former GM executive Bob Lutz eventually praised Tesla’s build quality for the Model 3, but only after Tesla mastered the production of the vehicle, which took over a year to achieve. The MIC Model 3 units in China were first production cars, which means that they’ll likely only get better with time.
It’s a bit humorous, but Tesla China’s press images for the MIC Model 3 featured numerous close-ups of the locally-made electric car, and many of them showcased the cars’ smooth paint and consistent panel lines, aspects of the car that proved difficult for the company in the United States. In a way, Tesla China’s MIC Model 3 press images seem to be a direct response against the stereotype, proving that any vehicle made in Shanghai’s Gigafactory 3 matches the quality of a car built in Fremont.
Perhaps most telling of these observations came from local auto journalists who were among the first to review the locally-made Model 3. Tencent Auto editor 常岩, who happens to be a Model 3 owner himself, was invited to check out the locally-made version of his electric car. Much to the auto editor’s surprise, he noted that the build quality of the Gigafactory 3-made Model 3 was actually better than his car, which was imported from the United States. With this conclusion, the auto journalist noted that Tesla’s MIC Model 3 will likely prove successful in the Chinese market, as it offers great quality and features for its price. The locally-made Model 3 is proudly Made in China, and it is just as good, if not better, than other Model 3 in the market.
Tesla’s Made-in-China Model 3 is poised to make waves in the Chinese EV segment, with the massive Shanghai-based Gigafactory 3 now mass manufacturing the all-electric sedan. Recent flyovers of the Gigafactory 3 complex have revealed hundreds of MIC Model 3 just ready for delivery. Car carrier trucks loaded with Model 3s have also been photographed leaving the Gigafactory 3 premises. With these sightings in mind, it may only be a matter of time before deliveries of the locally-made electric car begins in the country.
Watch an existing Tesla Model 3 owner review the MIC Model 3 in the video below.
H/T Ray4Tesla/Twitter
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
