News
I tried Tesla’s FSD Supervised on a demo drive—Here’s what I learned
Tesla’s Supervised Full Self-Driving (FSD) has been at the center of the company’s long-term strategy for years, and seeing as I’ve been covering the company and its competitors since 2020, I decided it was finally time to try it out myself.
The process of scheduling a demo drive was simple: I scheduled it online through Tesla’s test drive page, and because I was hoping to focus on FSD, I shot an email over to the Loveland team letting them know that I was coming and was planning to try the software out. I got a quick response, in which one of the advisors offered to schedule me for an extended demo drive, effectively giving me a three-hour window to try out FSD Supervised.
On Monday, I headed out from my house in Fort Collins, Colorado, to the next town over, Loveland, to try Tesla’s latest FSD Supervised version available. While I initially scheduled a demo drive for a Model Y with FSD Supervised v13.2.2, one of the Tesla advisors informed me that there was also a Model S on-site with version v13.2.2.1, so I elected to test that one instead.
After getting a quick rundown from the advisor on the Model S, my demo drive officially began. I typed my first destination into the navigation system, pressed and held the blue “Start FSD (Supervised)” button, and off I went.
Tesla’s FSD Supervised: autonomy is definitely on the way
Perhaps many people have this experience when trying FSD out for the first time, but right off the bat, I found myself laughing at how it worked and a little scared that it would make a mistake. This Model S was now driving me out of the Loveland Tesla parking lot to a nearby Target, through busy parking lots, turns and lane changes, and it was pretty uncomfortable at first not to be the one making the maneuvers—let alone the fact that no person was making these maneuvers, but rather it was the vehicle doing it on its own.
I felt like an anxious passenger—my feet pressed firmly on the floor in distrust and disbelief—only I was sitting in the driver’s seat. I really couldn’t do much but laugh at how strange the experience had felt so far.
Then, not long after my first trip, something interesting happened.
My mindset slowly shifted from fear to trust with each correct maneuver, and I managed my first few drives without disengaging at all, offering a true testament to how well FSD Supervised performed on this test. Granted, I went in without too much of a plan and wasn’t targeting fringe cases or particularly tough maneuvers; I just wanted to see if this car could drive me around for a few hours, and to feel what it was like to demo FSD Supervised as a newcomer.
It’s worth noting that I did most of my driving in FSD’s Chill mode, though I also tested a few drives in both Standard and Hurry. Personally, I think I would probably keep it in Chill mode most of the time, as it’s the most similar to how I drive of the three.
Below are a few moments from the drive that show some of the system’s capabilities, even turning onto busy roads that would be difficult for a human driver.
Tesla’s FSD Supervised reverses out of a parking spot… and we’re off
A simple reverse out of a parking spot, a good start! pic.twitter.com/TIx2yDmSxT
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 15, 2025
Tesla’s FSD Supervised takes a few left turns onto busy roads
Another busy left turn – “FSD handled this busy turn with ease.” pic.twitter.com/SncR0Kh7ar
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 15, 2025
Another left turn during a somewhat busy time of day – “I was a little scared, not going to lie, but FSD handled it well.” pic.twitter.com/WNunR05C3h
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 15, 2025
Tesla’s FSD Supervised tackles a two-lane roundabout and parking lot
Roundabout? No problem! – “A two-lane roundabout that FSD handled pretty comfortably.” pic.twitter.com/X9QJIVXb6z
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 15, 2025
Left-hand turn out of a parking lot – “It was pretty busy in there but it was well handled, the car navigated easily through the intersection just as I would have.” pic.twitter.com/Kzxb0aYtFN
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 15, 2025
READ MORE ON TESLA’S FSD SUPERVISED: Tesla Cybertruck receives FSD (Supervised) v13.2.4 update
The temptation not to pay attention, and my most critical disengagement
Elon Musk and others have talked up FSD Supervised v13 since its release, as well as claiming that unsupervised driving is just around the corner. While it does feel closer than ever after years of reporting on small tweaks, improvements and developments, I think it’s also worth emphasizing again that the system still requires the driver to pay attention, even though it’s tempting to believe that it can handle all the driving by itself.
As I drove more and more, or rather as the car drove me, I became more comfortable trusting that FSD Supervised was going to make the right decisions, which it did about 99 percent of the time. I was lulled into somewhat of a false sense of safety that almost had me believing the vehicle didn’t need to be supervised, but that 1 percent of the time (maybe even less) that it did get confused still required my input.
I only had a few interventions for the whole experience, but one in particular had me a little scared after having become a little complacent and too trusting. As you can see in the video below, FSD Supervised was looking to merge into the right lane, when two vehicles slowed down. The Model S attempted to change lanes anyway, requiring me to overtake the wheel and keep driving straight.
Our first bit of adversity – “This was the most dangerous intervention I faced (I only had about three the whole time). FSD was trying to merge right, but the vehicles in that lane slowed down, and the car didn’t seem to understand what was going on. It started merging into the… pic.twitter.com/hJUBnCAjd2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) January 15, 2025
Besides the quick moment of fear in deciding I needed to take the wheel, it really was not a big deal once I regained control. It was actually a good wake-up call: this system still needs to be supervised, even if it makes fewer and fewer mistakes with each new version and feels like a solid human driver for the vast majority of the time.
I had a few other disengagements on my drive, mostly when the vehicle seemed to get confused about uncommon traffic circumstances or in confusing parking lot scenarios without clear signage. However, these moments made up a very small portion of my experience, and I can only imagine what another couple of years of development will do.
Tesla’s FSD Supervised: still needs supervision, but I got a good glimpse into a future of autonomy
All in all, I really enjoyed trying out FSD Supervised and I hope to do it again sometime. Additionally, I’d recommend trying it out to anyone, especially if you’re interested in seeing where driving tech is headed.
While I definitely got a glimpse into the future potential for fully autonomous driving, I also think it still requires supervision, even if just for those very seldom moments where the system gets confused. The margin for error with driving safety is obviously extremely low, though I do believe Tesla will eventually make good on its aim to make this system better than human drivers in time—and it already feels pretty close the majority of the time.
I hope to do this again sometime soon, and a major shout out to the Tesla Loveland team for making the experience smooth and for answering all my questions along the way.
What are your thoughts? Let me know at zach@teslarati.com, find me on X at @zacharyvisconti, or send us tips at tips@teslarati.com.
Tesla employees are performing autonomous FSD trials, CEO Elon Musk says
Need accessories for your Tesla? Check out the Teslarati Marketplace:
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 once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
