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 had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
