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.
Tesla has launched a direct campaign targeting its customers in New Jersey, sending emails that warn of pending legislation that could effectively block true driverless technology in the state.
The email focuses on Senate Bill S.1677 and Assembly Bill A.3968, measures intended to create a three-year autonomous vehicle pilot program but laden with requirements that Tesla argues make unsupervised Robotaxis impossible.
Tesla is sending out this email to New Jersey Tesla owners, warning them that NJ could block autonomous vehicles, and to take action.
“Proposed legislation moving through Trenton right now would impose restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.… pic.twitter.com/2bmY646AUL
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 16, 2026
According to the email, the bills impose “restrictions so severe that true driverless deployment would remain illegal.” Specific hurdles include mandates for human safety drivers during operations, multimillion-dollar insurance minimums, reportedly $5 million, and thresholds like 100,000 miles of demonstrated safe autonomous driving before any driverless approval.
Tesla contends these are arbitrary barriers that ignore real-world performance data and favor entrenched competitors over innovative technologies like its Full Self-Driving (FSD) system.
The push comes as Tesla has started expanding Robotaxi operations in states like Texas, where unsupervised vehicles are already providing rides in several cities. New Jersey, by contrast, risks falling behind. The company highlights in the email communication that more than 94 percent of serious crashes result from human error, meaning impairment, distraction, or fatigue. These are all problems that Robotaxis eliminate entirely.
In 2025, New Jersey recorded 582 traffic deaths, underscoring the human cost of delayed adoption.
Tesla’s outreach stresses the transformative potential of robotaxis. For families, they could offer safer school runs without drowsy or distracted drivers. For seniors and people with disabilities, robotaxis promise independence and reliable mobility.
In areas with limited public transit, they could deliver affordable, on-demand transportation, reducing congestion, emissions, and overall transportation costs. Economically, the company warns that restrictive rules could cost New Jersey jobs, innovation investment, and billions in potential growth as autonomous ride-hailing scales elsewhere.
Supporters of the legislation, including Sen. Andrew Zwicker, describe the pilot as a cautious framework with strong safety oversight, including incident reporting, expert task forces, and restrictions in sensitive zones like school areas. They view it as balancing innovation with public protection.
Tesla and pro-AV advocates counter that the bill lacks technology neutrality, creates insurmountable entry barriers for commercial deployment, and prioritizes process over outcomes — effectively functioning as a de facto ban on services like Robotaxi.
This latest clash echoes Tesla’s past battles in New Jersey over direct vehicle sales. The email directs owners to Tesla’s advocacy platform, where they can send customized messages to legislators calling for amendments: outcome-based safety standards, open competition, and clear pathways for fully driverless commercial operations.
As hearings approach, Tesla’s campaign frames the issue as a choice between protecting the status quo and embracing life-saving progress. With robotaxi technology already proving itself in permissive states, New Jersey owners are being asked to ensure their state doesn’t lock out the future of transportation.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
Tesla urges New Jersey owners to oppose new bill that could block Robotaxi
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
