News
Tesla is going mainstream with every milestone: US car buyers just need to know about it
Just recently, Tesla’s Model S, Model 3, and Model X made a big splash at cars.com’s 2020 American-made Index, an annual survey that ranks vehicles which “contribute most to the US economy” through factory jobs, manufacturing plants, and parts sourcing. Tesla’s Model S3X line took numbers 3, 4, and 9 in the Top 10 list, which is impressive on its own right. However, these results could have easily been better, if more respondents to cars.com’s study had been more aware about Tesla, its products, and its operations.
A look at the results of cars.com’s Top 10 American-made Index list shows that there is still an information divide between Tesla’s electric vehicles and mainstream car buyers. Topping the Top 10 rankings of the survey are the Ford Ranger and the Jeep Cherokee, which are iconic for being American cars but are hardly more US-based than Tesla’s trifecta of electric vehicles. In fact, a case could even be made that the Model S, Model 3, and Model X are more American than the Ranger and Cherokee, considering that Tesla’s vehicles are made in the US using American labor and (for the most part) components.
This year marks the first time that Tesla supplied cars.com with the information necessary to qualify for the annual survey. According to Kelsey Mays, cars.com’s senior consumer affairs and vehicle evaluations editor, the location where a vehicle is made is becoming increasingly important these days, especially in the light of the ongoing pandemic.
“We live in a global economy, but cars.com’s research found 70% of American shoppers consider a car’s U.S. economic impact a significant or deciding factor in their vehicle purchase. The COVID-19 pandemic is increasing Americans’ desire to buy local, with 37% reporting they are more likely to buy an American-made vehicle in light of the economic disruption of COVID-19,” Mays said.
This is where the information gap between Tesla and mainstream American car buyers still exists. According to cars.com, only about 10% of American car buyers recognized Tesla as “California-made” in 2019, and this year, the number has increased to 18%. The motoring firm added that only half of the survey’s total respondents were aware that Tesla was an American company, and only a third of those who participated knew that the Model S was built in the United States. These show that for a significant number of mainstream car buyers, Tesla’s vehicles are still an unfamiliar concept, and one that is not associated with the US the same way as Ford’s pickups and Jeep’s off-roaders.
While it is impressive that the number of American buyers recognizing Tesla as a US-focused company is growing over the past years as per cars.com’s survey results, it appears that Tesla could still do so much more to emphasize the fact that its vehicles are made in the US. Granted, the company is very firm in its stance against traditional advertising, but there are ways to disseminate information about the company and its products without resorting to conventional marketing tricks.
These could go a long way towards ensuring that more people remain informed about what Tesla really is and what its products can do. After all, Tesla’s electric vehicles still made a strong impact on cars.com’s Top 10 American-made Index, even with a significant number of respondents being uninformed about the company or the nature of its operations.
Fortunately, the company’s next two vehicles would likely raise more awareness about Tesla’s US-based roots. Following the Model Y crossover, Tesla is poised to ramp the production of the Semi, a Class 8 long-hauler, and the Cybertruck, a pickup. Both these vehicles are poised to be operated by drivers who personify the ideals of workers that value utility and practicality. And these, ultimately, could help make Tesla be recognized better as a company that makes American cars by American workers using American resources.
This very point was emphasized by Jay Leno in a previous statement about Tesla and the flak it receives from critics. Speaking with CNBC’s The Exchange, Leno candidly stated that he does not really get where all the criticism of Tesla is coming from, considering the company’s milestones over the years.
“In the mid-teens, there were 350 car companies in the United States. Every year since then, two or three of them dropped out… There’s a whole bunch that just disappeared. So here comes a brand new car company, so that’s impressive. It’s a tough business to get into; and the fact that Tesla is making a go of it and quite successfully, I think is impressive and should be applauded. We’re becoming like the British — we like noble failures. I would watch, listen to these radio talk shows just tear Tesla apart; and I go, ‘Here’s a guy, building an American car in America, using American labor. Why are you not rooting for it to be successful? Why do you wish it would fail?’ I don’t quite understand,” he said.
Elon Musk recently restated a fact that still defines SpaceX’s origin story: if Falcon 1’s fourth launch had failed, the company would not exist. The comment answered a reminder that after three consecutive losses, SpaceX had money for only one more attempt.
On X, Peter Diamandis said that the present-day acknowledgement of SpaceX’s success does not discount the rough start the company had. “Almost nobody remembers that Elon’s first rocket failed three times, and there was money for exactly only one more attempt.”
Musk said, “If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist.”
If the 4th launch had failed, SpaceX would not exist
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 30, 2026
In late 2008, the firm was nearly out of cash. Another failure would have ended payroll, closed the Hawthorne factory, and left the Falcon 9 and Dragon programs as unfinished drawings.
The first flight lifted off from Omelek Island on 24 March 2006. Thirty-three seconds later, a corroded aluminum fitting on a fuel line leaked. Kerosene ignited around the Merlin engine, control was lost, and the vehicle came apart. The small DARPA payload, FalconSAT-2, survived the short flight only to land on a storage shed near the pad. Investigators later traced the fitting to a materials mix-up that should never have reached the rocket.
Flight 2, on 21 March 2007, looked far better at first. The first stage burned cleanly and handed off to the Kestrel-powered upper stage. The vehicle crossed 100 kilometers and reached a peak of about 289 kilometers. Then propellant slosh in the second-stage tank started a circular coning motion that grew until the engine shut down. Telemetry faded as the stage tumbled, and SpaceX had reached space but not orbit. Over the next year, the team redesigned everything from the ground up, including tanks, baffles, and the new regeneratively cooled Merlin 1C.
That engine flew on Flight 3 on 2 August 2008. The first stage performed almost perfectly and reached 217 kilometers. After main-engine cutoff, leftover fuel in the cooling channels produced a faint residual thrust, roughly 10 pounds per square inch of chamber pressure. On a Texas test stand, the effect was invisible beneath ambient air pressure. In vacuum it was enough to push the spent first stage back into the second stage after separation. The stages collided, the upper stage spun, and the mission was lost. Musk later said a slightly longer delay before staging would have saved the flight.
Six weeks later, the team assembled Flight 4 from remaining parts and flew it on 28 September 2008 at 23:15 UTC. The payload was Ratsat, a 165-kilogram aluminum mass simulator built in-house. Staging was delayed so residual thrust could decay. The Kestrel ignited, the fairing split away, and nine and a half minutes after liftoff the vehicle was in orbit. After a coast, the second stage restarted, settling into a 621-by-643-kilometer path at 9.35 degrees inclination. Falcon 1 became the first privately developed liquid-fueled rocket to reach Earth orbit. Musk called the insertion “middle of the bull’s-eye.”
SpaceX restores a Falcon 1 rocket for 10th anniversary of first launch success
That success unlocked NASA’s Commercial Resupply Services award later that year. Without it, there would have been no Falcon 9, no reusable first stages, and no Dragon cargo or crew flights to the International Space Station. Launch prices would have remained far higher. Starlink’s constellation would not exist; broadband from low Earth orbit would still be a paper concept.
Ride-share markets, high launch cadence, and the current pace of lunar and Mars hardware would be years behind. Communications, Earth observation, and the cost of putting anything into space would look more like the 2000s than the 2020s.
One extra second of residual thrust in August 2008 would have written a different decade.
News
Tesla surges Robotaxi fleet ahead of Cybercab launch event
Tesla’s unsupervised robotaxi fleet quietly grew sevenfold in three weeks just before Cybercab Day arrives.
Tesla’s unsupervised Robotaxi fleet has grown far faster than the public numbers suggested, and the timing lines up with the company’s biggest autonomy showcase yet. According to data compiled by the crowdsourced Robotaxi Tracker, Tesla now has nearly 200 vehicles operating without a safety monitor across Austin, Dallas and Houston, yielding a roughly 7X increase in about three weeks.
The jump lands four days before this week’s Tesla Cybercab launch event in Austin, where the company plans to show off its purpose-built, two-seat robotaxi with no steering wheel or pedals in a live commercial setting for the first time. Stick with us on X and Facebook for live reporting from the event.
The strategic logic is straightforward. Tesla has spent the past year scaling Robotaxi in small, deliberate steps, first widening geofences, then extending operating hours, then quietly growing fleet size, usually with little advance notice. Ashok Elluswamy told investors on the Q2 earnings call that the program had logged more than 380,000 unsupervised miles with zero notable incidents, a safety record the company has leaned on to justify moving slowly. Critics have used the flip side of that caution, a fleet that appeared stuck around two dozen vehicles for months, as evidence that Tesla’s driverless ambitions were outrunning its actual deployment.
A fleet quietly scaling to nearly 200 vehicles right before Cybercab Day undercuts that argument without Tesla having to say anything about it directly. It also sets up the event to do double duty. Rather than simply introducing new hardware, Tesla can point to an operating base of unsupervised Model Ys already running at meaningful scale, then argue the Cybercab, which uses the same underlying Full Self-Driving stack according to earlier coverage of the fleet’s software upgrades, is a natural next steps. Tesla has separately been registering the two-seat Cybercabs with Texas regulators this week, with the count climbing from seven to 45 in a matter of days.
The two ramps, one in software-driven Model Y deployment and one in physical Cybercab registrations, are happening in parallel rather than in sequence. That suggests Tesla wants Thursday’s event to land as proof that the robotaxi business is already running at scale, not just a reveal of a new vehicle shape. Whether the unsupervised numbers hold up once Cybercabs start mixing into the same fleet is the detail worth watching once the event wraps.
Tesla is lowering the monthly price of its Cybertruck Windshield Protection Plan from $35 to $25. The new rate will apply to the first payment on or after October 1, 2026. Tesla has told subscribers that all other benefits stay the same.
The plan covers unlimited repairs for chips and minor cracks on the front windshield. It also includes one full replacement every 12 months at no extra charge. Additional replacements in the same year carry a $100 deductible. Service is performed with Tesla glass and camera calibration, which matters because Autopilot and Full Self-Driving rely on those lenses behind the windshield.
Looks like Tesla is decreasing the Cybertruck windshield protection plan price from $35 to $25
Awesome https://t.co/MRlTU1XTbf pic.twitter.com/PWkMZt1H7G
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 28, 2026
There is no long-term contract. Coverage applies only to the front glass and does not include collision, vandalism, or weather damage.
The Cybertruck’s large, complex windshield has been more expensive to replace than glass on Tesla’s cars, which is why the pickup started at a higher subscription price. The $10 monthly cut reduces the annual cost from $420 to $300. Tesla has not publicly explained the change. The timing coincides with a year of claims data after the plan was extended to the Cybertruck.
Tesla sells several related protection products as monthly subscriptions through the Tesla app. The Windshield Protection Plan is also offered on other models. Model 3 and Model Y currently cost $16 a month. Those passenger-car rates are unchanged in the latest Cybertruck notice.
The Wheel and Tire Protection Plan covers road-hazard damage such as potholes, nails, and debris. Repairs are unlimited. Each wheel or tire replacement appointment has a $25 deductible. Pricing varies by model and whether the vehicle is a Performance version. Tesla is raising some of those rates on the same October 1 date.
Reported examples include Model 3 Performance moving from $16 to $24 and Model Y Performance from $20 to $24. Cybertruck wheel-and-tire coverage has been listed at $20 a month for the standard configuration.
A separate Luxe Package bundles four years of windshield coverage, wheel-and-tire coverage, and recommended maintenance on certain new Model S, Model X, and Cyberbeast orders, although the Model S and X are now defunct.
Tesla also offers an Extended Service Agreement after the basic vehicle warranty ends. That product covers many Tesla-manufactured parts rather than glass or tires. Together, the plans give owners a menu of targeted, cancel-anytime coverage instead of relying only on auto insurance.
Elon Musk says SpaceX would not exist if this crucial early launch failed
Tesla surges Robotaxi fleet ahead of Cybercab launch event
