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
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
