Tesla FSD version 10.69.2.3 rolled out shortly after AI Day. The latest update of Tesla’s Full Self Driving software delivers minor bug fixes. Some testers have received v10.69.2.3 and shared their observations with Teslarati.
As previously noted, 10.69.2.3 is a relatively small update that addresses some minor bugs in FSD Beta. As it sometimes goes with software bug fixes, some Beta testers mentioned a new issue in the latest version that appeared to be a step or two backward.
Road Obstacle Detection Issues
A few testers in Tesla’s FSD Beta Program reported experiencing road obstacle detection issues when their vehicles would not register particular objects in their path or directly ahead.
For instance, beta tester Jonathan shared that his vehicle did not recognize or avoid dead animals on the road. Another beta tester experienced similar issues with gates in his community.
“One day coming back from work I decided to see if it can get me close to the proximity of my house. I live in a gated community. The vehicle made the turn into the drive entry of the community which has two swing gates. Vehicle was almost going to go through the closed gates,” FSD Beta user Sean shared with Teslarati. “I had to tap the breaks and override the system to make it stop. It didn’t see the gates as obstacles or road blocks. I have tried this a couple of times during daylight and night time and result is the same.”
After Tesla released v10.69.2.2, a few beta testers observed that their vehicles recognized and avoided construction work sites and similar obstacles on the road.
Left and Right Turns
A couple of beta testers mentioned issues with left and right turns, specifically during intersections. The most prominent issue FSD Tesla drivers raised about turns was their cars’ hesitation during intersections. Testers highlighted that their cars’ hesitation during intersections isn’t really a big issue until they consider the other drivers on the road.
“Hesitates too long at intersections presumably trying to determine if/when it’s safe to proceed. This only matters to me when there are cars behind me. I feel intense pressure to push the car through (and I do). Humans do not have patience to wait on its time-table,” noted Terry, another FSD Beta tester.
FSD Beta user Dr. Rahaman made similar observations. He noted that his Tesla would creep forward after stopping at an intersection on a red light and would take a left or right turn too slowly, sometimes irritating the drivers behind him. Dr. Rahaman specifically observed that his car entered left turn lanes late without a signal. In the past, the Tesla owner has noted that the car’s turn signals sporadically turn off and on at some intersections or turns.
Lane Selection Issues
Tesla FSD v.10.69.2.3 doesn’t appear to address the largest issue multiple testers have pointed out over the past few weeks: lane selection. One beta tester seemed to sum up the sentiments most drivers in the Tesla FSD program have regarding lane selection.
“Lane selection sometimes just plain wrong and dumb. Causes driving task to be harder for itself than it needs to be because it realizes (eventually, usually) it’s in the wrong lane too late and then has to get over which is harder with traffic and unlike a human who can gesture, the car can give no such signals as to its self-made predicament,” the tester commented.
“Also, it sometimes gets into turn lane just late enough that cars behind me assume I’m continuing straight and swoop in behind me and get over immediately causing it to be even harder for my car to get over into that lane now because all slots are occupied and the road is about to end at a light,” he added.
Other Issues
Some other less prominent issues that a few FSD Beta testers have noted are listed below.
1. Lane Positioning – The car hugs the double yellow lines too closely on narrow roads or sticks to the middle of the road when no lines are present.
2. Wide turns – The Tesla car takes wide turns, far from the curb. One tester observed that his car risked hitting the guard rails and other obstacles with its wide turn.
3. Turn Lane Issues – The car still mistakes turn lanes for driving lanes
Some testers still report experiencing phantom braking and jerkiness while taking turns. However, the one observation that seems to stick out among others came from beta tester Neeraj.
“Drives as if everyone is going to follow the rules 100% and is not accommodating or accounting for those who may not be going 100% as they should,” he said about FSD Beta.
FSD Beta still has a ways to go before 100% autonomous version rolls out to the general public. Observations and tests from beta testers help Tesla improve FSD. Elon Musk teased more significant improvements in the next update, 10.69.3. Tesla hopes to release a ‘supervised’ FSD version by the end of the year.
Have you tried out FSD Beta 10.69.2.3 yet? I’d like to hear from you! Contact me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
