News
Tesla Cybertruck’s potential amphibious capabilities are starting to become realistic
In a recent lighthearted post, Tesla CEO Elon Musk referenced the Cybertruck’s potential amphibious capabilities once more. Musk’s tweet was a response to a rather humorous concept video featuring the all-electric pickup being used as a boat. And while such a concept may be farfetched for the skeptics, the idea of an amphibious vehicle may actually be pretty feasible.
The amusing render was created by Slav Popovski, the same 3D artist that came up with a realistic concept video of the next-gen Tesla Roadster SpaceX Package’s 0-60 mph launch. Musk, for his part, stated that Tesla could probably give the all-electric pickup a similar function. “I think we could make it work,” the CEO noted. This echoed a previous tweet that Musk posted in April, when he noted that the Cybertruck would “float for a while” when traversing deep waters.
Recent images of the Tesla Cybertruck at the Petersen Automotive Museum have revealed that the vehicle may actually be designed to resist being breached with water. As indicated by pictures from the Tesla community, several sections of the Cybertruck’s underbody seem to be watertight, and the vehicle’s suspension area seemed to be sealed as well. This suggests that Elon Musk’s statements about the Cybertruck’s amphibious capabilities may be less outlandish than expected.
Musk has been pretty open about his love for vehicles that can travel on both land and water. In 2013, Musk purchased the actual Lotus Esprit S1 movie prop from the 1977 James Bond film The Spy Who Loved Me, which became iconic due to its capability to transform from a sports car into a submarine. Musk would later joke that he was disappointed to find out that the Lotus did not really transform into a submarine, and that he would probably attempt an amphibious vehicle using Tesla tech.
The CEO revisited this idea in the 2019 Annual Shareholder Meeting, when he stated that a submarine car is “technically possible.” Musk did admit that the market for such vehicles would be small, but he suggested that there will probably be a lot of enthusiasm around the project.
A novel amphibious car has actually been attempted over ten years ago by Swiss niche automaker Rinspeed. During the Geneva Motor Show in 2008, the company took the wraps off its all-electric sQuba amphibious sports car. The vehicle ran on lithium ion batteries and was built on top of a Lotus Elise, which actually makes it pretty similar to the original Tesla Roadster, at least to some degree.
Granted, the sQuba was slower than Tesla’s sports car with its top speed of 75 mph, but it does have the capability to travel over water, and up to 33 ft underwater. The vehicle even came equipped with scuba tanks for its two passengers, which are incredibly useful when the vehicle is in its submarine configuration. Unfortunately, the sQuba has so far not made it to production, with Rinspeed founder and CEO Frank M. Rinderknecht stating that the appeal of such a vehicle is very limited due to the fact that it was mostly a toy for the wealthy.
But the Cybertruck is no niche vehicle, nor is it a novel toy for the rich. Starting at less than $40,000 for its RWD variant, the Cybertruck is made for utility and actual, tough work. This means that if the Cybertruck were to have actual amphibious abilities, it could have practical, real-world uses. The vehicle could be used as a rescue pickup for the Coast Guard, for example, since it could function as a boat to some degree.
Of course, these are all speculations for now. That being said, Elon Musk does have a reputation for bringing to market products and features that were initially thought of as a joke. The Boring Company’s Not-a-Flamethrower is one of these, and Tesla’s amusing Emissions Testing Mode (aka Fart Mode) is another. With these in mind, and with the Cybertruck seemingly being designed to withstand water, perhaps the idea of an amphibious all-electric pickup is not too farfetched after all.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
