News
Opinion: The Tesla Cybertruck accelerated the Ford F-150 Lightning’s release, like it or not
During the Ford F-150 Lightning’s unveiling, the veteran automaker proudly presented a vehicle that has the potential to carry the company well into the age of electric cars. But inasmuch as the F-150 Lightning is impressive and worthy of its flagship EV status, Ford may have a competitor and unlikely ally to thank for its release. This competitor is the steel beast from Silicon Valley, the Tesla Cybertruck.
A different landscape
It should be noted that just a few years ago, the EV landscape was much different for Ford and its fellow veteran automakers. In 2019, it appeared that the electric pickup market was destined to be yet another niche segment populated by expensive EVs that were out of reach for the conventional buyer. Back then, the Rivian R1T seemed to be the electric pickup truck to beat, after it debuted in late 2018 and impressed the car community with its novel features.

Inasmuch as Rivian captured the attention of EV enthusiasts, legacy auto, at least from the perspective of a layman, seemed to be quite uninterested in the battery-electric truck market. This was one of the reasons why Ford inspired a ton of headlines in January 2019 when then-president of global markets and now-CEO Jim Farley announced that the F-Seres was getting electrified. “We’re going to be electrifying the F-Series — battery electric and hybrid,” he said.
It was a shock to the United States’ automotive industry, with longtime industry observer and Autoline This Week host John McElroy highlighting the gravity of Farley’s statement. “When he says ‘battery-electric,’ what I’m taking that to mean is a battery electric vehicle. Pure electric. They’ve said they would have a hybrid plug-in version of the F-150. But this is different than what they’ve talked about in the past,” McElroy said.

A noncommittal stance
But while Ford’s announcement showed that it could talk the talk, the company didn’t necessarily walk the walk. Even after Ford showed off the capabilities of the electric F-150 by having the vehicle pull a freight train loaded with other F-150s, the company proved very elusive about its plans for the vehicle. Speaking to Yahoo Finance’s The First Trade following the electric F-150’s 1-million-pound demonstration, Ford Chief Product Development Officer Hau Thai-Tang was asked about the upcoming vehicle’s release.
The Ford executive’s answers about the all-electric truck were very reserved. When pressed further, the executive simply remarked that the battery-electric F-150 was “still a couple of years out,” though he did highlight that the F-150 Hybrid would be released first.
This noncommittal stance was prevalent for much of 2019. Ford’s longtime rival, General Motors, also announced then that it had a program for an all-electric pickup truck. During a quarterly earnings call, GM CEO Mary Barra stated that the company intends to “create an all-electric future that includes a complete range of EVs, including full-size pickups. She also noted that details about GM’s battery-electric pickup would be shared “when competitively appropriate.”

A watershed moment
But something happened at the end of 2019. In November 2019, Tesla took the wraps off its all-electric pickup truck. It was a vehicle that Elon Musk has been mentioning for years, and in the months leading up to its unveiling, the CEO had been setting the public’s expectations. Musk noted that the Cybertruck would probably be polarizing, and he even stated that if it were to flop, Tesla would simply make a more conventional pickup truck. The Cybertruck proved to be everything that Musk said it was, and more. With its angular design and unpainted steel body, the Cybertruck was unlike any vehicle on the road, and it barely looked like a pickup truck.
Its appearance, together with the Armor Glass demonstration that ended with the Cybertruck’s driver’s side windows getting cracked, resulted in the futuristic vehicle becoming a meme overnight. Tesla fans learned to love it, and critics made sure to point out how strange and ugly it looked. But amidst all the memes about the Cybertruck’s looks and its failed Armor Glass demonstration lay something notable—Tesla’s all-electric pickup truck had some serious specs.
While the Cybertruck’s looks were amusing to critics, its specs were very real, and most of all, it was cheap for the features that it offers. Starting at less than $40,000 and capable of towing 14,000 pounds, it was a threat to the status quo, especially as it could become attractive to businesses and people who value low operating costs and a rapid return of investment. After all, Tesla may be known for its delays, but the company never overpromises on its vehicles’ capabilities.

An accelerated shift
Something seemed to change after the Cybertruck was unveiled. Just months after the Cybertruck’s launch, GM revealed its Ultium batteries, which was announced together with a number of new all-electric models. By October 2020, GMC launched the Hummer EV, a gargantuan all-electric pickup truck designed for serious off-roading. GM may never admit it, but signs pointed to the Hummer EV’s development being rushed. The automaker unveiled the vehicle with a CGI video and a prototype that barely moved.
This was very different from the strategy of Tesla and Rivian, of course, both of whom unveiled fully-working trucks. Tesla even had the Cybertruck take attendees for a test ride for several hours following its unveiling. GM Chief Engineer Al Oppenheiser admitted as such in a statement to EV publication Green Car Reports. Oppenheiser revealed that the Hummer EV was only 18 months into its development cycle when it was unveiled, which was a very short time for a legacy automaker.
“Interestingly enough, we don’t have a vehicle yet. We’re building our first test vehicle as we speak; the vehicle you see in the video is our display vehicle,” he said. GM, of course, eventually started demonstrating the Hummer EV’s capabilities in real-life settings later on. But by then, it was practically evident that the automaker was moving as fast as it could to enter the all-electric pickup truck market with a competitive edge.

Ford seemed to have accelerated its battery-electric truck program as well, and now the Ford F-150 Lightning is here. And unlike the Hummer EV, it seems to be ready to go. The Rouge facility seems ready to produce the vehicle, though the ongoing chip shortage is still looming in the background. There’s also the issue of securing enough batteries for the vehicle, considering that the F-150 is expected to demand equally large battery packs to hit its targeted 300 miles of range.
Overall, it appears that the rush is now on to produce the first mainstream electric pickup truck. And so far, it appears that the battle will be waged by the Ford F-150 Lightning and the Tesla Cybertruck, considering their comparable starting prices. But while the F-150 Lightning loses out in key features such as range and towing capacity, it does have the pedigree and reputation of a tried and tested pickup brand and a design that is as conventional as it is comfortable. And that, ultimately, could be a trump card for the electric revolution as a whole.
The battle is on for America’s most popular automotive segment.

Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
News
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
News
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
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