News
Tesla’s resilience is forcing veteran automakers to draw the battle lines on diesel
There are probably very few companies in the market that have attracted the same amount of skepticism as Tesla. Since it started producing its first vehicle, the original Tesla Roadster, more than a decade ago, the “impending” death of the company has been foretold. Despite this, the small, disruptive electric car maker has stubbornly refused to die, and it continues to grow despite the noise. Today, Tesla is bigger than ever before, and the impending completion of a third Gigafactory 3 in China could signal yet another period of incredible growth for the company.
The inevitable electric age
The rise of Tesla did not only prove that electric cars need not be boring, glorified golf carts. The rise of Tesla also showed that consumers from various walks of life are willing to pay top dollar for well-designed electric vehicles, simply because they are superior to internal combustion cars. By proving these points, Tesla was able to force the hand of veteran automakers, pushing them to come up with their own battery-powered vehicles. Today, most of the world’s most notable carmakers are looking into electrification. Some brands such as Porsche have even decided to abandon diesel altogether, aiming instead to push the development of both all-electric and hybrid cars.
It’s not just Porsche either. Other automakers such as Jaguar even beat the German automaker’s Taycan to market with its I-PACE, which it started delivering last year. Daimler rushed to join the fray with the EQC, and Audi, not to be left behind in the emerging EV race, brought out the rather unfortunately-named e-tron, which was received warmly nonetheless. Even mass-market automakers such as Kia and Hyundai have come up with their own bang-for-your-buck electric cars in the form of the Niro EV and Kona Electric. Volkswagen recently made a splash with the debut of the ID.3 as well. Even British-bred MG, which has been reborn as a Chinese-owned hyper-budget brand, is preparing to attack the lower end of the market with the MG ZS EV.
Learning from Tesla
Amidst this transition, it is starting to become evident which carmakers are dead serious about their transition to the electric age. This became notable in Germany, when Volkswagen, Daimler, and BMW came together last March to call for the widespread adoption of EVs. Volkswagen CEO Herbert Diess was at the helm of the radical stance, at one point practically butting heads with BMW CEO Harald Krüger and the industry lobby group Association of the Automotive Industry (VDA) due to his push for widespread electric car adoption. Audi boss Bran Schot, in a recent interview with Manager Magazin, reiterated this point, noting that “electric is the core” of the automaker’s “new strategy.”
Audi is currently attempting to ramp the production of the e-tron SUV, its first all-electric vehicle, but things have not exactly been easy. Due to factors such as reported battery constraints from supplier LG Chem, as well as other incidents such as a workers’ strike in one of its plants earlier this year, the e-tron has been delayed. Yet, Schot noted that the company remains focused on pushing more electric cars. During the interview, Schot candidly admitted that Audi is behind other automakers such as Tesla, not only “in the electric cars” themselves, “but also at the pace with which they solve some software issues.”
Schot noted that he was recently “driven once again a Tesla,” and he came away impressed by the experience. “That was fun,” he said, later admitting that “No question, we are learning from Tesla.” Learning from the leader in electric mobility is an excellent strategy for Audi, as it would allow the company to develop vehicles that mix the best of veteran auto’s experience and Tesla’s tech mastery. In a way, Audi has already taken steps towards this goal with its e-tron GT sedan, a vehicle built on the same platform as the Porsche Taycan. The Taycan stands apart from other EVs from veteran auto in the way that it’s built from the ground up to be an electric car, making it the last thing from a compliance vehicle.
Commitments to diesel and a denial of EVs
While companies like Porsche have found it easy to commit to electrification and abandon things like diesel, other carmakers are not having such an easy time relinquishing their ties with oil. The most recent source of this shock was Jaguar Land Rover CEO Ralf Speth, who recently spoke with Automotive News Europe sister publication Automobilwoche’s publisher in an interview. When asked about the company’s powertrain strategy amid a decline in demand for diesels and V8 gasoline engines, the CEO was candid.
“According to industry forecasters, a global share of 20 percent to 30 percent for electrified vehicles is expected by 2025. When you turn this around, it means that 70 percent to 80 percent of all vehicles around the world will have conventional engines. Let me add that today’s diesels, (which) are absolutely CO2-efficient and clean,” he said.
When asked by the publication why electric mobility is still not important to consumers, the CEO noted that “On one hand, the products are still too expensive. On the other hand, the infrastructure is still too inconvenient and unreliable, so electric cars tend to be for people with deep pockets.” These are rather surprising to hear from the Speth, whose company produced the I-PACE, which has pretty much swept awards left and right since its debut last year.
Explaining his conservative stance on electric vehicles further, the Jaguar CEO argued that “When it comes to electric vehicles, the question isn’t how many cars I can build but rather how many batteries I can buy. The demand for batteries is so great that there will be a limited ability to deliver them over the next few years. And, unlike some others, I expect continually rising battery prices – at least for the next two to three years.”
Quite interestingly, the Jaguar Land Rover CEO’s concerns about electric cars have long been addressed by Tesla. When it came to charging infrastructure, the California-based carmaker developed and aggressively rolled out its Supercharger Network, which currently have over 12,000 stations across the globe. The company has also ironed out the supply of its vehicles’ batteries, thanks to a massive investment in facilities such as Gigafactory 1 in Nevada.
The transition to the electric age will be difficult for carmakers, and it would require massive investments just to get well-designed all-electric cars ready for the market. If these developments are any indication, it appears that in the next few years, the battle lines will be drawn between veteran automakers that are willing to go all-in on electric mobility, and veteran carmakers who will steadfastly hold on to oil and the internal combustion engine.
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.
News
Tesla surges Robotaxi fleet ahead of Cybercab launch event
Tesla’s unsupervised robotaxi fleet quietly grew sevenfold in three weeks just before Cybercab Day arrives.
Tesla’s unsupervised Robotaxi fleet has grown far faster than the public numbers suggested, and the timing lines up with the company’s biggest autonomy showcase yet. According to data compiled by the crowdsourced Robotaxi Tracker, Tesla now has nearly 200 vehicles operating without a safety monitor across Austin, Dallas and Houston, yielding a roughly 7X increase in about three weeks.
The jump lands four days before this week’s Tesla Cybercab launch event in Austin, where the company plans to show off its purpose-built, two-seat robotaxi with no steering wheel or pedals in a live commercial setting for the first time. Stick with us on X and Facebook for live reporting from the event.
The strategic logic is straightforward. Tesla has spent the past year scaling Robotaxi in small, deliberate steps, first widening geofences, then extending operating hours, then quietly growing fleet size, usually with little advance notice. Ashok Elluswamy told investors on the Q2 earnings call that the program had logged more than 380,000 unsupervised miles with zero notable incidents, a safety record the company has leaned on to justify moving slowly. Critics have used the flip side of that caution, a fleet that appeared stuck around two dozen vehicles for months, as evidence that Tesla’s driverless ambitions were outrunning its actual deployment.
A fleet quietly scaling to nearly 200 vehicles right before Cybercab Day undercuts that argument without Tesla having to say anything about it directly. It also sets up the event to do double duty. Rather than simply introducing new hardware, Tesla can point to an operating base of unsupervised Model Ys already running at meaningful scale, then argue the Cybercab, which uses the same underlying Full Self-Driving stack according to earlier coverage of the fleet’s software upgrades, is a natural next steps. Tesla has separately been registering the two-seat Cybercabs with Texas regulators this week, with the count climbing from seven to 45 in a matter of days.
The two ramps, one in software-driven Model Y deployment and one in physical Cybercab registrations, are happening in parallel rather than in sequence. That suggests Tesla wants Thursday’s event to land as proof that the robotaxi business is already running at scale, not just a reveal of a new vehicle shape. Whether the unsupervised numbers hold up once Cybercabs start mixing into the same fleet is the detail worth watching once the event wraps.
Tesla is lowering the monthly price of its Cybertruck Windshield Protection Plan from $35 to $25. The new rate will apply to the first payment on or after October 1, 2026. Tesla has told subscribers that all other benefits stay the same.
The plan covers unlimited repairs for chips and minor cracks on the front windshield. It also includes one full replacement every 12 months at no extra charge. Additional replacements in the same year carry a $100 deductible. Service is performed with Tesla glass and camera calibration, which matters because Autopilot and Full Self-Driving rely on those lenses behind the windshield.
Looks like Tesla is decreasing the Cybertruck windshield protection plan price from $35 to $25
Awesome https://t.co/MRlTU1XTbf pic.twitter.com/PWkMZt1H7G
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 28, 2026
There is no long-term contract. Coverage applies only to the front glass and does not include collision, vandalism, or weather damage.
The Cybertruck’s large, complex windshield has been more expensive to replace than glass on Tesla’s cars, which is why the pickup started at a higher subscription price. The $10 monthly cut reduces the annual cost from $420 to $300. Tesla has not publicly explained the change. The timing coincides with a year of claims data after the plan was extended to the Cybertruck.
Tesla sells several related protection products as monthly subscriptions through the Tesla app. The Windshield Protection Plan is also offered on other models. Model 3 and Model Y currently cost $16 a month. Those passenger-car rates are unchanged in the latest Cybertruck notice.
The Wheel and Tire Protection Plan covers road-hazard damage such as potholes, nails, and debris. Repairs are unlimited. Each wheel or tire replacement appointment has a $25 deductible. Pricing varies by model and whether the vehicle is a Performance version. Tesla is raising some of those rates on the same October 1 date.
Reported examples include Model 3 Performance moving from $16 to $24 and Model Y Performance from $20 to $24. Cybertruck wheel-and-tire coverage has been listed at $20 a month for the standard configuration.
A separate Luxe Package bundles four years of windshield coverage, wheel-and-tire coverage, and recommended maintenance on certain new Model S, Model X, and Cyberbeast orders, although the Model S and X are now defunct.
Tesla also offers an Extended Service Agreement after the basic vehicle warranty ends. That product covers many Tesla-manufactured parts rather than glass or tires. Together, the plans give owners a menu of targeted, cancel-anytime coverage instead of relying only on auto insurance.
Elon Musk says SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed
Tesla surges Robotaxi fleet ahead of Cybercab launch event
