News
Tesla’s inexperienced off-road test drivers are doing a disservice to the Cybertruck (Op-ed)
Elon Musk has noted that the Cybertruck has the potential to become Tesla’s magnum opus. The Cybertruck is designed to dominate on the pavement and off-road. With this in mind, the electric vehicle maker should probably deploy test drivers who are very experienced in rough terrain. Otherwise, Tesla runs the risk of giving the Cybertruck a stigma — one which suggests that the vehicle is inadequate when it comes to “real truck” things.
It is no secret that Tesla already gets a lot of negative attention, and this is particularly true for the Cybertruck. The truck’s appearance alone is enough to warrant anger from critics, so any videos featuring the all-electric pickup truck failing in doing “truck things” will undoubtedly be amplified. This could be seen in social media’s reactions to the Cybertruck’s previous outing at Hollister Hills in California.
The Hollister Hills “Steps” Run
Videos of the Cybertruck back then featured the all-electric pickup truck seemingly struggling up Hollister Hills’ “steps.” Such reactions were amplified further when videos of the Rivian R1T and the Ford F-150 Lightning were shared online, showing both electric pickup trucks taking on the Hollister Hills “steps” without as much difficulty as the Cybertruck.
pic.twitter.com/iFwnC98lYw— ⭕️ CyberMike ⭕️ (@CyberMikeOG) November 15, 2023
Cake walk! Tried to copy what the Cybertruck did https://t.co/t9gkJKfBXw pic.twitter.com/pBDnFw7kcw— omg_Tesla/Rivian (@omg_tesla) November 12, 2023
At the time, Tesla watchers noted that the Cybertruck’s difficulties in the “steps” seemed to be due to the capabilities of its driver, who did not seem very experienced in off-road settings. The Rivian R1T and Ford F-150 Lightning’s drivers, on the other hand, seemed more familiar with such scenarios. The Cybertruck ultimately received quite a bit of flak from critics for being the “worst” among the three electric pickup trucks that took on the Hollister Hills “steps.”
Cybertruck’s Embarrassing Snowy Mishap
More recently, an even more embarrassing video of the Cybertruck has started making the rounds online. This time around, the Cybertruck could be seen getting stuck on a snowy incline. The all-electric pickup truck, which seemed to be carrying a tree on its bed, was evidently stuck, as the driver could be seen pressing on the throttle to no avail. The Cybertruck was ultimately towed out of the incline by a Ford pickup truck.
This is an example of someone without off-roading experience. There is no reason the Cybertruck couldn’t get up that small incline except for an inexperienced driver or this was done purposely to attempt to make the Cybertruck look bad. pic.twitter.com/DuJP6HE7Kd— Miss Jillybean (@MissJilianne) December 12, 2023
yikes https://t.co/bYVNeip2PB— JerryRigEverything (@ZacksJerryRig) December 12, 2023
Longtime electric vehicle owners, especially those who have experience off-roading, have noted on social media that the Cybertruck’s driver could have done a number of things that could have helped prevent the vehicle getting stuck. The all-electric pickup’s tires were evidently not fit for the terrain, and the driver’s actions with the Cybertruck’s throttle gave the impression that there was a lack of off-road experience at play. Some EV watchers even noted that the Cybertruck’s lousy performance on the snowy incline was so bad that it would not have been surprising if the vehicle was being intentionally sabotaged.
Fostering a Negative Narrative
What’s quite unfortunate is that the group that pulled out the Cybertruck actually provided some context about the incident, noting that the vehicle also had a software issue that caused its rear brakes to not act like “lockers.” The Cybertruck in the video was also a release candidate, so it had no recovery or pickup points. These comments from the group that pulled out the Cybertruck provided a good explanation behind the incident, but they did little to shift the narrative. As far as social media was concerned, the Cybertruck had another epic fail off-road, and that was it.
More info on the Cybertruck stuck on a snowy hill: lockers did work, recovery points missing, and wrong tires.
CT wasn’t their only recovery that day ? pic.twitter.com/cmNa4w0hYD— The Cybertruck Guy (@cybrtrkguy) December 12, 2023
When Tesla started deliveries of the Cybertruck, CEO Elon Musk made it a point to highlight how the all-electric pickup truck is a durable and tough vehicle that could survive whatever the world could throw at it. Unfortunately, the Cybertruck has so far not shocked skeptics with its off-road prowess yet. Instead, the evident lack of off-roading experience of its test drivers is simply giving more ammo to those who only wish to see the Cybertruck fail. Hopefully, Tesla could address such issues soon, especially considering the number of EV community members who are both well-experienced in off-road settings and more than willing to help out the EV maker test out the vehicle.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads-up.
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
