News
Tesla’s million mile battery: Veteran auto’s ‘fake it till you make it’ strategy is perfectly fine
It is no secret that Tesla is actively pursuing a million-mile battery. With such an innovation, Tesla hopes to make its electric cars outlast gasoline-powered vehicles several times over, while ensuring that its energy storage devices are capable of lasting literal decades while being actively deployed. But if recent news is any indication, it appears that Tesla is not the only company that is closing in on a million-mile battery.
During a recent online investor conference, GM Executive Vice President Doug Parks stated that the veteran American automaker is also working on a million mile battery solution. Beyond this, Parks suggested that GM is “almost there” in developing a battery that’s far above the Ultium batteries that were announced last March. Unfortunately, the GM executive did not specify a solid timeline for the introduction of its own million mile battery, only stating that multiple teams were working on it.
GM’s rather sudden announcement of its million-mile battery echoes the company’s overall strategy with its electric vehicle program. Back in March, the automaker unveiled a sweeping electric vehicle strategy that will involve $20 billion in investments and about 20 EVs for practically every market. But despite the grandiose plans and announcements, the veteran automaker did not really disclose a lot of concrete details about its EV push, such as pricing, specifications, and timing.
GM’s approach to electric vehicles almost seems like a “fake it till you make it” strategy. Back in March, there was a lot of talk about Tesla’s upcoming Battery and Powertrain Day, which was speculated to involve discussions and announcements about the company’s next-generation of electric vehicles and energy solutions. GM’s “EV Day” seemed to be a response to this. In the same light, the previous weeks have involved updates about the impending release of Tesla’s million mile battery, an innovation that is apparently “almost there” in GM.
While this may at times feel like veteran automakers like GM are simply following Tesla’s EV playbook, it must be noted that every step made by legacy carmakers towards electric vehicles is a step towards the wider adoption of sustainable transport. Thus, despite the fact that GM’s EV strategies today are more smoke and mirrors and concept vehicles, the American automaker’s focus on electric cars is still admirable. This is a pretty big point for GM, considering that it is the very company that practically stopped the first coming of the modern electric car with its controversial cancellation of the EV1.
Besides, it is difficult to deny that legacy automakers such as GM are making an effort towards electrification now. Despite the fact that leaked production plans accessed by Reuters indicated that GM and Ford only intend to produce 320,000 EVs in 2026 for the North American market, the company is still investing heavily in EVs. For its Ultium batteries, for example, GM has stated that it is working with Korean firm LG Chem to find ways to reduce costs and improve overall performance. Adam Kwiatkowski, executive chief engineer of GM’s electric propulsion systems, noted that the automaker and LG Chem are also looking at investments in mines, hedging metals prices, and potential partnerships with metal refiners.
The next few years will definitely be one for the record books, as Tesla enters its next phase with its million mile battery and Plaid powertrain, and legacy automakers such as GM take a serious stance on electric vehicles. It’s easy to forget, after all, that less than a decade ago, the pervading narrative in the auto industry was that electric cars are still intended to be stuck as niche products, glorified golf cars for the wealthy and not much more.
The landscape today is very different, and there’s no bigger symbol of this change than GM’s own Hummer EV, a vehicle that’s the spiritual successor of the gas-guzzling monster SUV that pretty much killed the EV1. Other vehicles like the Tesla Cybertruck, which is expected to break the stereotypes of EVs as vehicles that cannot be used for real work and utility, further shows the steady trend forward for electric cars.
Tesla is a leader in the electric vehicle movement. That much is sure. But the company itself has noted that it cannot transition the world towards sustainability on its own. For true sustainability to happen, other companies, legacy carmakers like GM included, have to go all-in on the EV movement as well. One can only hope that this time, announcements such as GM’s million mile battery initiative are more on the “make it” side than on the “fake it” side.
H/T @ajtourville.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
