News
Tesla Model 3 tops Cars.com’s ‘American Made’ Index, first time an EV conquers the list
The Tesla Model 3 has captured Cars.com’s “American-Made” Index, a monumental achievement for the automaker’s mass-market sedan. Not only is the recognition a huge feather in the cap for Tesla, but also for the electric vehicle movement as it is the first time an EV has topped the list.
Since 2005, Cars.com has compiled a list qualifying all vehicles built and bought in the U.S. This year’s study ranked 90 vehicles through five categories of major criteria: assembly location, parts content, engine origins, transmission origins, and U.S. manufacturing workforce. For the first time in the 16-year history of the Index, Tesla has topped the list, also becoming the first all-electric car to capture the top spot from vehicles like the Ford Mustang, Chevrolet Corvette, and Jeep Cherokee, three long-standing vehicles that have been included in the Index’s past rankings.
The Model 3 topped the 2021 list after coming in fourth just a year ago, being recognized as the most “American-Made” vehicle for the first time in its nearly four-year stay in the U.S. automotive market. First being delivered in mid-2017, the Model 3 was Tesla’s first mass-market sedan and was arguably the catalyst to the American EV sector. After the Model 3 was released by Tesla, it proved that EVs could be affordable, and they could begin displacing the overwhelming majority of gas-powered engines that dominated U.S. roads. Since then, the Model 3 has made a tremendous dent in the ICE market, especially in the sedan body style. The Model 3 was the 16th best-selling car in the world, according to a May 2021 report from Forbes.
The key to Tesla’s overwhelmingly domestic production process of its vehicles starts with the company’s focus on vertical integration. Tesla CEO Elon Musk has commented on the company’s focus on this in the past, highlighting the automaker’s general strategy of creating its own machinery to design things. To Musk, this could be one of the company’s biggest advantages over competitors due to Tesla’s ability to not depend on manufacturers to provide parts. Instead, Tesla can basically build a car from the ground up using what it has in-house, to an extent. Of course, the company still utilizes suppliers for things like tires and glass, but the bulk of the car is produced by Tesla.
Elon Musk gives a rare look into the Model 3 production line. [Credit: CBS This Morning/YouTube]
“Tesla is absolutely vertically integrated compared to other auto companies or basically most any company,” Musk said during the Q3 2020 Earnings Call. “We have a massive amount of internal manufacturing technology that we built ourselves. We literally make the machine. In fact, we design it — so like, OK, what are the things we want to make, design a machine that will make that thing, then we make the machine. This is what — this makes it quite difficult to copy Tesla, which we’re not actually all that opposed to people copying us, but it’s quite difficult because you can’t do catalog engineering. You can’t just pick up the supplier catalog, I’ll get one of those machines, one of that machine; bingo, I’m now Tesla. You have to — there is no catalog,” he continued.
This has also led to its understanding of its product to depths that many other automotive manufacturers simply cannot match. Tesla’s in-house Insurance program also receives dividends from the company’s vertical integration because the cars are made up of so many company-produced parts. This allows for a greater understanding of the product.
Amazingly, the Model 3 was not the only Tesla vehicle on the list, and in fact, it wasn’t the only Tesla in the top 3. The Model Y made its debut on the list, coming in at #3. This is not much of a surprise as the Model 3 and Model Y share a very similar design, and some have indicated that the two vehicles share 75% of the same parts. This makes the Model Y a no-brainer for this list, only being bested by the Model 3 and the Ford Mustang.
The full “American-Made” Index from Cars.com can be viewed here.
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
