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:
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
