Last week, the Fremont Factory started producing the upgraded Model 3 sedan. With the change, Tesla effectively phased out the original Model 3. It was the end of an era, and numerous electric vehicle enthusiasts expressed their appreciation for the vehicle. The original Model 3, after all, is what made Tesla into a mainstream automaker — a company that is considered the undisputed trailblazer in the EV sector.
As we bid farewell to the original Model 3, it seems pertinent to look behind the vehicle that changed it all for the electric vehicle movement. While the Model S proved that EVs can be just as good or even better than combustion-powered cars, the Model 3 proved that EVs can compete with ICE-powered vehicles at a competitive price.
And that changed everything.
I still remembered my first time going to the show room at Palo Alto to sit in OG Model 3.
Woah, that felt like a future, and secretly hoping that I would own one someday and work for this company.
Then on my first year at Tesla, many old employees told me the legendary stories… pic.twitter.com/FDmCnH5dCX— Yun-Ta Tsai (@YunTaTsai1) January 11, 2024
Tesla’s iPhone moment
The Model 3 made a lot of headlines even before it was unveiled. At the time, the world was shocked as electric vehicle enthusiasts lined up outside Tesla stores so they could place a reservation for the Model 3, not unlike Apple fans waiting for the newest iPhone. But unlike Apple fans lining up for the newest iPhone, the Tesla fans lined up for a car whose design and specs are yet to be revealed.
That was a huge vote of confidence for Tesla and a huge step forward for the electric vehicle movement as a whole. It did, if any, show that there is ample interest in electric cars, provided that they are high quality and well-designed. The Model 3 is both of these things.
Still remember the day I picked up my 2017 Model3. It was absolutely mind blowing! All other cars became old and wrong after that day. Trying Autopark (while working at NIO lol) for the first time ?: https://t.co/iPaidk2mXy pic.twitter.com/qytzw3SvL7— Allen Veach (@allen_veach) January 11, 2024
The OG mainstream Tesla
The original Tesla Roadster proved that electric cars can be taken seriously. The Model S and Model X proved that EVs can be objectively and legitimately better than combustion-powered cars on every important metric. The Model 3 proved that EVs are ready for the mainstream market, and it was the success of the all-electric sedan that ultimately allowed Tesla to bring the Model Y to market.
Needless to say, without the Model 3, there would be no Model Y. And if it were not for the fact that the Model 3 was so well-loved all over the world, Tesla would have had a far harder time cracking the million-vehicle mark at all.
Little story time for me and the now "legacy" Model 3:
As I was going through my late teens and entered my 20's, I was an anti-Tesla, Chevy Volt (with a V) elitist. I believed in lots of the anti-Tesla FUD, as I didn't know anyone in the Tesla community or anyone really that… https://t.co/dGdZHqV8OB— Anthony Spina (@Speenuh) January 11, 2024
“An AK-47 Disguised as a Butter Knife”
There are a lot of things to love about the Model 3. It’s filled to the brim with tech and safety features, even in its base model, and its performance is amazing. When Tesla started shipping Basic Autopilot as standard, the Model 3 pretty much became the best bang-for-the-buck car in the market. But beyond the tech and the features, the Model 3 is simply a great driver’s car. Chris Harris of Top Gear, during a review of the Model 3 Performance, remarked that the vehicle is an “AK-47 disguised as a butter knife.” That’s a perfect description of the Model 3.
It would not be an exaggeration to state that the Model 3, particularly the Model 3 Performance, is the most fun car in Tesla’s lineup. Its Track Mode feature proved that EVs can be driven hard around corners, and it could keep pace with the best ICE-powered track weapons out there. For now, all eyes are on Tesla to see if the company could release a worthy successor to the Model 3 Performance.
After an incredible 6.5 year run & and ~2.3 million units sold, legacy Model 3 production is ending.
The 2017-2023 @Tesla Model 3 not only revolutionized the auto industry, but also dismantled the notion that EVs couldn't be profitable low-cost mass-market cars ? pic.twitter.com/4W8i5jiDX4— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) January 11, 2024
An Everlasting Legacy
Tesla owes its current success to the Model 3. CEO Elon Musk himself admitted that during the Model 3’s infamous production hell, Tesla came close to dying. But the company didn’t fail. Instead, demand for the Model 3 remained healthy, and the all-electric sedan became so successful that Tesla was able to build a strong, profitable business on its back.
The original Model 3 may be gone from Tesla’s production lines at the Fremont Factory and Gigafactory Shanghai. Despite this, the vehicle’s legacy shall live on. Its successor is promising, as the upgraded Model 3 has been critically acclaimed by owners and professional reviewers alike since it was initially revealed last year.
Tesla watchers note that over the original Model 3’s 6.5-year run, the vehicle sold about 2.3 million units. That’s not bad at all for a car that Tesla critics assumed had serious demand problems from the get-go.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
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
