Tesla Full Self-Driving (FSD) Beta applicants who own older car models are still patiently waiting for access to the FSD Beta program. Some applicants have shared their frustrations at camera upgrade issues which prevent them from becoming an FSD Beta user.
Camera Upgrade Issues
Tesla owners with older car models have reported their frustrations regarding camera upgrade requirements. Most of the owners are waiting to enter Tesla’s FSD Beta program.
The common issue is that owners receive camera upgrade notifications even after Tesla Service installed new cameras. It has caused great confusion among a number of Tesla community members waiting to become FSD Beta testers.
In correspondence with Teslarati, FSD Beta applicant Houman H. noted that his 2017 Model S with FSD had yet to receive access to Tesla’s Beta program. The Model S owner had upgraded his vehicle to Hardware 3. He also proactively contacted Tesla Service to get the necessary camera upgrade for his car.
Even after the upgrades, Houman H. did not receive FSD Beta access. Instead, he received another notice of his ineligibility for the program, stating that his Model S still needed camera upgrades. Confused, Houman H. contacted Tesla Service, thinking there must have been a mistake in their records as he had already upgraded his cameras.
Who is affected by the Camera Upgrade Issues?
A few Tesla owners who own older models talked to Teslarati about their challenges while patiently waiting for access to the FSD Beta program. Most—if not all—of the owners Teslarati spoke to have a Safety Score between 80 to 90 and purchased FSD at least a year ago.
Most owners with camera upgrade issues own vehicles from 2017 or older. A few other owners have posted about camera upgrade issues online.
“I have been patiently waiting since November 2021 for the FSD beta for my 2017 MS P100D when my cameras were upgraded and the MCU2 was installed. The vehicle was delivered with MCU1 and AP2.0. Safety score has always been 95 or above,” shared Powderkeg in the Tesla Motor Club (TMC) Forum.
“Recently the Tesla app version 4.14.2 allows the user to view if their vehicle is eligible for the FSD Beta. Much to my chagrin my vehicle shows that it is not eligible due to the cameras needing to be replaced. I know they were replaced at the time of the MCU2 upgrade because they are listed under the parts section,” the TMC member elaborated.
Tesla’s Response to the Camera Upgrade Issue
The TMC member and Houman H. worked with their local Tesla Service Center to solve their issues. They received different reasons for their camera upgrade issues.
In Houman H’s case, one of his upgraded cameras needed to be replaced. Tesla reportedly mentioned that some upgraded cameras in select cars needed to be replaced due to an unspecified issue.
“So apparently they didn’t have to replace all of them, they said that there was a problem with one of their replacement cameras that wasn’t working for many people, I think it was the front right side camera so for many of them they had to be replaced Even if they had already been upgraded. Therefore, doesn’t sound like it’s a true situation where all of them have to be replaced, but there are select cameras on select cars that have to be upgraded again due to some type of problem,” Houman H. told Teslarati.
Powderkeg also received information from his local Tesla Service Center. In his case, Tesla stated that all cameras need to be upgraded to run the final production FSD software.
Another Teslarati reader, Frank H., noted that he couldn’t upgrade his cameras, even after several requests to his Tesla Service Center. Frank H. paid for FSD, but has not been able to participate in Tesla’s beta program because of old cameras.
“I paid for FSD years ago but have been unable to participate in the beta program due to old cameras. Now FSD is in wide release and Tesla still has not upgraded my cameras after several requests. I am told: ‘We are currently experiencing a parts shortage on all parts necessary to perform FSD camera upgrade,’” Frank H. shared with Teslarati.
Are you having trouble getting into the FSD Beta program, too? I’d like to hear from you. Contact me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.
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
