Connect with us

News

Tesla FSD Beta takes on Waymo’s autonomous taxi in real-world test

(Credit: Whole Mars Catalog/YouTube)

Published

on

Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite recently went head-to-head against the acclaimed leader in the autonomous driving race, Alphabet’s Waymo. The two self-driving systems were tested twice using destinations that are frequented by commuters. In both instances, the results proved quite surprising, especially on Waymo’s part. 

Rankings of the market’s self-driving systems today typically rank Waymo at the top, thanks in part to the number of miles driven by the company’s vehicles in simulations and several geofenced areas today. On the other hand, Tesla typically does not get ranked among self-driving systems at all, since its Autopilot and FSD Beta require drivers to keep their hands at the wheel and remain attentive on the road. 

Tesla Model 3 owner and FSD Beta tester @WholeMarsBlog was fortunate enough to personally test the capabilities of Alphabet’s Waymo, a driverless ride-sharing service that is currently being deployed in several geofenced areas today. The Tesla owner opted to see how Waymo’s driverless taxi compared to his Model 3’s FSD software when tasked to drive to two destinations: a Taco Bell outlet and a Safeway grocery store. 

During the drive to Taco Bell, both Tesla’s FSD Beta and Waymo’s driverless taxi completed the task without any untoward incidents. However, Waymo ended the ride by dropping off the Tesla owner at the wrong side of the road, despite the destination clearly indicating the restaurant’s exact location. This resulted in the EV advocate walking several minutes to reach the Taco Bell. Tesla’s FSD Beta completed the drive well, dropping off the Model 3 owner at the restaurant, and on the right side of the road. 

Advertisement

A second test to a Safeway grocery store ended with equally-interesting results. This time around, Waymo’s autonomous taxi dropped off its passenger in the correct location, and the same was true for Tesla’s FSD Beta. However, there were differences between the two drives, with the Model 3 owner stating that the Waymo took a more roundabout way to reach its destination. Ultimately, Waymo completed the drive in 8 minutes, while Tesla’s FSD Beta was able to do the same in 5 minutes and 12 seconds. 

In a message to Teslarati, the Tesla owner noted that based on his experience, Tesla’s camera+AI approach definitely seems to be on par, if not more efficient, than Waymo’s Lidar-based approach on autonomous driving. The limitations of Waymo’s geofenced areas were also evident as the autonomous taxi’s routes ended up being longer. Tesla’s FSD Beta does not have this limitation, and the system behaves bolder due to the presence of an attentive driver. 

Watch Tesla’s FSD Beta take on Waymo’s driverless taxi service in the video below. 

Advertisement

Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla Giga Berlin plant manager faces defamation probe after IG Metall union complaint

Prosecutors in Frankfurt (Oder) confirmed they have opened a defamation probe into Gigafactory Berlin plant manager André Thierig.

Published

on

Credit: @Gf4Tesla/X

Tesla’s Giga Berlin plant manager is now under investigation after a complaint from trade union IG Metall, escalating tensions ahead of next month’s works council elections. 

Prosecutors in Frankfurt (Oder) confirmed they have opened a defamation probe into Gigafactory Berlin plant manager André Thierig, as per a report from rbb24.

A spokesperson for the Frankfurt (Oder) public prosecutor’s office confirmed to the German Press Agency that an investigation for defamation has been initiated following a criminal complaint filed by IG Metall against Thierig.

The dispute stems from Tesla’s allegation that an IG Metall representative secretly recorded a works council meeting using a laptop. In a post on X, Thierig described the incident as “truly beyond words,” stating that police were called and a criminal complaint was filed.

Advertisement

“What has happened today at Giga Berlin is truly beyond words! An external union representative from IG Metall attended a works council meeting. For unknown reasons, he recorded the internal meeting and was caught in action! We obviously called police and filed a criminal complaint!” Thierig wrote in a post on X.

Police later confirmed that officers did seize a computer belonging to an IG Metall member at Giga Berlin. Prosecutors are separately investigating the union representative on suspicion of breach of confidentiality and violation of Germany’s Works Constitution Act.

IG Metall has denied Tesla’s allegations. The union claimed that its member offered to unlock the laptop for review in order to accelerate the investigation and counter what it called false accusations. The union has also sought a labor court injunction to “prohibit Thierig from further disseminating false claims.”

The clash comes as Tesla employees prepare to vote in works council elections scheduled for March 2–4, 2026. Approximately 11,000 Giga Berlin workers are eligible to participate in the elections.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla wins FCC approval for wireless Cybercab charging system

The decision grants Tesla a waiver that allows the Cybercab’s wireless charging system to be installed on fixed outdoor equipment.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla AI/X

Tesla has received approval from the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to use Ultra-Wideband (UWB) radio technology in its wireless EV charging system. 

The decision grants Tesla a waiver that allows the Cybercab’s wireless charging system to be installed on fixed outdoor equipment. This effectively clears a regulatory hurdle for the company’s planned wireless charging pad for the autonomous two-seater.

Tesla’s wireless charging system is described as follows in the document: “The Tesla positioning system is an impulse UWB radio system that enables peer-to-peer communications between a UWB transceiver installed on an electric vehicle (EV) and a second UWB transceiver installed on a ground-level pad, which could be located outdoors, to achieve optimal positioning for the EV to charge wirelessly.”

The company explained that Bluetooth is first used to locate the charging pad. “Prior to the UWB operation, the vehicular system uses Bluetooth technology for the vehicle to discover the location of the ground pad and engage in data exchange activities (which is not subject to the waiver).”

Advertisement

Once the vehicle approaches the pad, the UWB system briefly activates. “When the vehicle approaches the ground pad, the UWB transceivers will operate to track the position of the vehicle to determine when the optimal position has been achieved over the pad before enabling wireless power charging.”

Tesla also emphasized that “the UWB signals occur only briefly when the vehicle approaches the ground pad; and mostly at ground level between the vehicle and the pad,” and that the signals are “significantly attenuated by the body of the vehicle positioned over the pad.”

As noted by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, the FCC ultimately granted Tesla’s proposal since the Cybercab’s wireless charging system’s signal is very low power, it only turns on briefly while parking, it works only at very short range, and it won’t interfere with other systems.

While the approval clears the way for Tesla’s wireless charging plans, the Cybercab does not appear to depend solely on the new system.

Advertisement

Cybercab prototypes have frequently been spotted charging at standard Tesla Superchargers across the United States. This suggests the vehicle can easily operate within Tesla’s existing charging network even as the wireless system is developed and deployed. With this in mind, it would not be surprising if the first batches of the Cybercab that are deployed and delivered to consumers end up being charged by regular Superchargers.

DA-26-168A1 by Simon Alvarez

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla posts updated FSD safety stats as owners surpass 8 billion miles

Tesla shared the milestone as adoption of the system accelerates across several markets.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has posted updated safety stats for Full Self-Driving Supervised. The results were shared by the electric vehicle maker as FSD Supervised users passed more than 8 billion cumulative miles. 

Tesla shared the milestone in a post on its official X account.

“Tesla owners have now driven >8 billion miles on FSD Supervised,” the company wrote in its post on X. Tesla also included a graphic showing FSD Supervised’s miles driven before a collision, which far exceeds that of the United States average. 

The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable. As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.

Advertisement

At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.

Tesla also recently updated the safety data for FSD Supervised on its website, covering North America across all road types over the latest 12-month period.

As per Tesla’s figures, vehicles operating with FSD Supervised engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles. In comparison, Teslas driven manually with Active Safety systems recorded one major collision every 2,175,763 miles, while Teslas driven manually without Active Safety recorded one major collision every 855,132 miles. The U.S. average during the same period was one major collision every 660,164 miles.

During the measured period, Tesla reported 830 total major collisions with FSD (Supervised) engaged, compared to 16,131 collisions for Teslas driven manually with Active Safety and 250 collisions for Teslas driven manually without Active Safety. Total miles logged exceeded 4.39 billion miles for FSD (Supervised) during the same timeframe.

Advertisement
Continue Reading