News
Tesla is building an empire with Model 3 drive units, custom chips, and loyal customers
When the Tesla Semi and the next-generation Roadster were unveiled last year, Elon Musk pointed out that the whole company was built on the original Roadster, an electric car which proved that EVs could be exciting, fun, and quick. Tesla is now at a point where it could become a threat to established premium automakers; and just like how Apple built a trillion-dollar empire on the back of the iPhone, Tesla seems poised to establish its own empire through its Model 3 drive units, its custom-made chips, and its passionate consumer base.
The brilliance of the Model 3’s drive unit was recognized by Detroit veteran Sandy Munro, whose company conducted a thorough teardown and analysis of the electric sedan. While Munro noted some points for improvement with regards to the vehicle’s chassis, he was incredibly impressed with the car’s suspension, batteries, and electric motor. Recently relating his findings to Bloomberg, Munro noted that the Model 3’s electric motor is a “game changer,” and that “everyone should be benchmarking (it).” The entire subframe where the drive unit is housed even detaches cleanly from the Model 3, seemingly allowing DIY enthusiasts in the future to resurrect drive units from damaged vehicles by using them for electric car conversions.
Tesla recently shared images of the Model 3’s drive system after being tested for over 1 million miles. Images of the drive system’s gears suggest that there was very little wear and tear despite extensive testing. With this in mind, Tesla’s idea of using the Model 3’s drive unit to power upcoming vehicles like the Semi and the Model Y, or possibly even the Tesla Truck and the upcoming compact car, could pay off in spades for the company. If teardowns of the Model 3 are any indication, after all, the electric car’s drive unit could very well be reliable, easy to manufacture, and even swappable if the need arises. It could, in a way, be a building block in Tesla’s emerging empire.
Beyond the Model 3’s drive units, Tesla is also starting to dip its feet into creating its custom chip. Such a strategy is very much in line with Tesla’s character, considering that the company already manufactures many of its vehicles’ components in-house. In an interview with Yahoo Finance last week, ARK Invest CEO and CIO Cathie Wood noted that the electric car maker’s initiatives towards the creation of its own hardware are a “replay of Apple.” Wood notes that in the same way Apple’s innovations with the iPhone pushed the tech giant to create its own silicon, Tesla’s progress with the intelligent tech in its vehicles are driving the electric car maker to design and build its own chips.
“This is a replay of Apple. Apple was moving so fast with the smartphone that it had to design its own chip to move that fast. This is what has happened to Tesla. Nvidia chips will be in mostly every other autonomous vehicle to hit the market. But Musk has a vision for this market that needs (a) faster, better, cheaper, sooner (solution) – and so he designed it himself,” Wood noted.
Elon Musk is optimistic about the potential of Tesla’s custom silicon. Designed by a team led by Pete Bannon, who used to work for Apple, Musk noted that Tesla’s custom hardware would be ” the world’s most advanced computer designed specifically for autonomous operation.” This custom chip, which would be included in Tesla’s Hardware 3, will be rolled out to all production cars in around six months; and if Tesla’s other in-house solutions are any indication, the introduction of its upcoming silicon would likely allow the company to establish a lead against rival automakers who are also dabbling in self-driving initiatives.
While Tesla’s vehicles and their components make the company a formidable player in the car industry, it is perhaps its dedicated consumer base that makes Tesla downright threatening to traditional auto. It is quite rare to see a car company command such a devoted following, though considering Tesla’s stance in the auto industry today, the strong brand loyalty displayed by Tesla owners is not very surprising at all. As Tesla grew over the years, after all, the company has practically transformed itself into an entity that is far more than a carmaker or a battery storage provider. Tesla has become a movement of sorts, populated by electric car owners who are willing to pay it forward when needed. This was shown in the final weeks of Q3, when owners mobilized to help the company deliver as many vehicles as it could before September ended.
The Tesla community’s dedication to the company’s mission and vision were in full force earlier this month as well, as 36 Tesla Owner’s Clubs from nine countries convened in Fremont, CA to meet and strategize initiatives that can help support the growing number of electric car owners across the globe. Denver Tesla Club President Sean M. Mitchell, who attended the meeting, believes that the source of enthusiasm among electric car owners is multifold. For one, the company was able to integrate technology in a way that made even something as ordinary as driving exciting once more. Sean also notes that the company’s grass-roots marketing approach, which relies primarily on word-of-mouth, fosters a very authentic and honest relationship among owners.
It remains to be seen if Tesla would be succeed in its mission to accelerate the world’s transition to renewable energy. That said, the company’s strategy in its electric vehicle business seems to be working, as legacy carmakers such as Porsche and Jaguar are starting to fully embrace the idea of a zero-emissions fleet. Companies such as Audi and Mercedes-Benz have also begun offering premium electric vehicles of their own. In South Australia, Tesla’s big battery is also triggering a clean energy movement, with similar renewable projects now underway after the Powerpack farm proved to be effective. Ultimately, Tesla’s empire might not be as tangible or evident today, but the components that would make it are already there, steadily growing.
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.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
