Connect with us

News

Tesla Cybertruck sure looks similar to NASA’s Mars rover concept

(Credit: CBS This Morning/YouTube)

Published

on

Elon Musk’s “Blade Runner” Cybertruck may only be a couple days away from being unveiled to the world, but the vehicle, from its final specs and design, remains a mystery. The Tesla CEO has stated that the vehicle will not look like a traditional pickup truck, and this has been confirmed by teasers from the company and clever Easter Eggs hidden in the CYBRTRK event’s invitation and the vehicle’s stylized logo. 

Considering that Musk has stated that the Tesla Cybertruck will look like an armored personnel carrier (APC) from the future, it’s difficult to not see the potential similarities between the vehicle and NASA’s Mars Concept Rover, which was unveiled back in 2017. NASA’s Mars Rover concept looks a lot like an APC from the future, and it looks very tough. It’s massive at 28 feet long, its ground clearance is no joke, and its modular structure allows it to perform a variety of tasks on the harsh environment of the Red Planet. 

NASA’s Mars Rover Concept (Image: Public Domain)

Quite interestingly, Tesla’s CYBRTRK seems to have some design cues that may very well be similar to that of NASA’s Mars Rover Concept. Tesla’s Easter Eggs show the Cybertruck with a smooth sloping hood, high ground clearance, and an APV-like silhouette. The similarities between the two vehicles’ design (at least based on what Tesla’s Easter Eggs have shown so far) are so notable that one can’t be faulted for speculating that the CYBRTRK may be used by Elon Musk’s companies not just as a disruptive pickup on Earth; it may also be used as a basis for a potential SpaceX Mars Rover. 

This sounds very much like a statement from a sci-fi novel, but considering Musk’s habit of doing the unorthodox and implausible, a double-purpose heavy-duty vehicle may actually make sense. Musk likely prefers to have as much overlap between Tesla and SpaceX’s technologies, after all. Last September, for example, Musk stated that Teslas have the potential to work in other planets. “Well, actually, Teslas will work on Mars. You can just drive them, pretty much, because electric cars don’t need oxygen, they don’t need air. So you can just drive them around, no problem,” Musk said during SpaceX’s Starship Q&A session

That being said, creating a crewed Mars Rover from the CYBRTRK’s platform would be incredibly challenging. For a Mars Rover project, SpaceX and Tesla would most likely focus on making the vehicle as light as possible. This is due to the Rover being part of a payload that gets sent to space. Payloads are very expensive, and thus, equipment from the CYBRTRK that’s useful on Earth will likely not be relevant for a vehicle designed for Mars. Performance is also pretty irrelevant in a crewed rover. If Tesla were to design a crewed Mars rover based on the Cybertruck, it would have to create massive modifications to the vehicle in itself, from its battery cooling systems to its equipment. 

This, of course, would be a pretty challenging endeavor on both Tesla and SpaceX’s part. The difficulties of creating a vehicle capable of traversing a foreign planet from the platform of an Earth-based truck are no joke, after all. Things do get a bit easier if SpaceX ends up using the CYBRTRK platform to create an unmanned Mars Rover. 

Tesla has a lot of experience in autonomous driving, and this could play very well into its advantage if Elon Musk’s private space firm decides to deploy unmanned rovers to explore the Red Planet. With this concept in mind, a tough, lightweight vehicle that’s loaded to the teeth with tech and based on the CYBRTRK platform could make sense. Tesla and SpaceX would still have to overcome massive challenges in creating a space-capable land vehicle from a pickup truck platform, but there’s no denying that the electric car maker’s expertise in designing and making EVs can very well make an affordable, reliable unmanned Mars Rover feasible. 

Advertisement
-

Inasmuch as these ideas may sound implausible, it should be noted that a Mars Rover project between Tesla and SpaceX will likely not strain either company. The number of rovers needed for the initial years of a Mars mission, crewed or unmanned, will likely be very small, perhaps an order of magnitude less than the rollout of the original Tesla Roadster. Thus, both companies could innovate to the limit based on the CYBRTRK platform and it would not be a difficulty at all. The size of a CYBRTRK-based rover may not even be much of an issue, provided that SpaceX’s Starship rollout goes off without problems. 

Tesla deserves a lot of credit for keeping the CYBRTRK a secret until today. Considering its futuristic cues and Elon Musk’s fond references to the vehicle being a truck worthy of a sci-fi set, the pickup truck may very well be the machine that bridges Tesla and SpaceX, at least to some degree. Even if the only parts of the Cybertruck that can be used for a Mars Rover are its chassis and powertrain, such an overlap will still be incredibly useful. Such ideas are crazy, but they may also be classic Elon Musk.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

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.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

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.

Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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.

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.

Continue Reading