News
Tesla Model 3 gets penalized in Europe despite top scores in vehicle assistance and safety
In collaboration with Thatcham Research, the Euro NCAP has launched the world’s first Assisted Driving Grading system, a new set of metrics that are specifically designed to evaluate the driver-assist systems of cars available on the market today. For its first batch of vehicles, the firms evaluated 10 cars, from premium SUVs like the Mercedes-Benz GLE to affordable hatchbacks like the Renault Clio to all-electric vehicles like the Tesla Model 3.
As noted by Thatcham Research Director of Insurance Research Matthew Avery in a video outlining the results of the Assisted Driving Grading system’s first tests, vehicles would be graded on three metrics: the level of vehicle assistance that they provide, the level of driver engagement that they offer, and the effectiveness of their safety backup systems. The results of these tests, especially on the Tesla Model 3’s part, were rather peculiar, to say the least.
Out of 10 vehicles that were evaluated, the Tesla Model 3 ranked 6th with a “Moderate” grade, falling behind the Mercedes-Benz GLE, BMW 3-Series, and Audi Q8, which were graded as “Very Good,” and the Ford Kuga, which received a “Good” rating. This was despite the Tesla Model 3 receiving the top scores in the “Vehicle Assistance” and “Safety Backup” metrics.
The study, for example, dubbed the Model 3 as outstanding in terms of steering assistance, with the vehicle steering itself exceptionally well through an S-shaped curve at speeds of 80, 100, and 120 km/h. Tesla’s lane change systems were also satisfactory, despite the system’s limitations in Europe. Distance control was dominated by the Model 3 as well, with the evaluators stating that Tesla’s adaptive cruise control featured a “high level of technical maturity.” From a score of 100, Tesla’s vehicle assistance received a score of 87, the highest among the cars tested.
The Model 3’s safety backup systems were also a league above its competition. As noted in a post from the Allgemeiner Deutscher Automobil-Club e.V. (ADAC), Tesla demonstrated its strengths with the Model 3’s collision avoidance systems. The all-electric sedan earned a perfect score in the firms’ tests, outperforming its premium German competition. Overall, the Model 3 received an impressive score of 95 in the Assisted Driving Grading system’s “Safety Backup” metric.
Considering these scores, one might wonder why the Model 3 ended up ranked 6th among the 10 vehicles tested by the Euro NCAP and Thatcham Research. As it turned out, this was because of the Model 3’s poor scores in the “Driver Engagement” metric, where the vehicle only earned a score of 35 out of 100. So poor was the Model 3’s scores in this metric that it was ranked last among the 10 vehicles that were evaluated.
A look at the reasons behind the Model 3’s poor scores in “Driver Engagement” includes a number of interesting insights from Thatcham Research and the Euro NCAP. When testing the vehicles’ steering override functions, for example, the evaluators stated that the Model 3 resisted steering overrides from its driver. These issues were explained in the ADAC’s post.
“Should the driver make a steering movement in order to avoid an object or a pothole in the roadway, the steering assistant should allow this without resistance. In the Tesla Model 3, for example, this is not the case. Apparently, Tesla trusts the system more than its driver. The necessary cooperative assistance is not given. Instead, the Tesla system prevents its driver from attempting to intervene – it mustn’t be,” the ADAC remarked in its post.
Even more interesting is that part of the Model 3’s poor “Driver Engagement” scores was due to the term “Autopilot,” which Tesla uses to describe its driver-assist suite. The evaluators argued that the term “Autopilot” was misleading and irresponsible on Tesla’s part, and this was heavily taken against the Model 3’s rankings in the Assisted Driving Grading system.
“When it comes to the first test criterion – consumer information – the Tesla Model 3 in particular fails. The assistance systems are referred to as “Autopilot” in the operating instructions for the Model 3 as well as in the sales brochures and in marketing. However, the term suggests capabilities that the system does not have in sufficient measure. It tempts the driver to rely on the capabilities of the system – which is currently not allowed by the legislature anyway. Due to its good quick-start operating aid, the Tesla Model 3 still receives 10 points,” the evaluators noted.
Ultimately, these complaints about Autopilot’s branding ended up pulling down the Model 3’s scores to the point where the all-electric sedan was ranked below the Ford Kuga. Thatcham Research Director of Insurance Research Matthew Avery explained this in a video released about the evaluation. “The Tesla Model 3 was the best for safety backup and vehicle assistance but lost ground for misleading consumers about the capability of its Autopilot system and actively discouraging drivers from engaging when behind the wheel,” Avery said.
As noted by Avery, it is pertinent for vehicles to exhibit a balance to score very well in the Assisted Driving Grading system. This was not achieved by the Model 3 despite its industry-leading backup safety systems and actual vehicle assistance tech. ADAC explained it best when outlining why the Tesla Model 3 lost to four other vehicles despite being equipped with what is noticeably the most advanced driver-assist system.
“When analyzing the test results, it is noticeable that the Tesla Model 3 has the most advanced assistance systems. With 95 points for emergency assistance (Safety Backup) and 91 points for technical assistance, it doesn’t beat the Mercedes GLE by far, but at least 11 points… Because Euro NCAP removes the many points in the area of driver support from the Tesla, because on the one hand it does not sufficiently comply with the driver’s request for a steering correction. On the other hand, because Tesla is irresponsible about the term autopilot – an even more serious reason. With only 36 points from the test area driver integration, the Tesla falls back to sixth place in the final bill,” the ADAC noted.
Thatcham Research’s overall findings could be viewed in the video below.
News
Tesla Supercharger vandalized with frozen cables and anti-Musk imagery amid Sweden union dispute
The incident comes amid Tesla’s ongoing labor dispute with IF Metall.
Tesla’s Supercharger site in Vansbro, Sweden, was vandalized during peak winter travel weeks. Images shared to local media showed frozen charging cables and a banner reading “Go home Elon,” which was complete with a graphic of Musk’s controversial gesture.
The incident comes amid Tesla’s ongoing labor dispute with IF Metall, which has been striking against the company for more than two years over collective bargaining agreements, as noted in a report from Expressen.
Local resident Stefan Jakobsson said he arrived at the Vansbro charging station to find a board criticizing Elon Musk and accusing Tesla of strikebreaking. He also found the charging cables frozen after someone seemingly poured water over them.
“I laughed a little and it was pretty nicely drawn. But it was a bit unnecessary,” Jakobsson said. “They don’t have to do vandalism because they’re angry at Elon Musk.”
The site has seen heavy traffic during Sweden’s winter sports holidays, with travelers heading toward Sälen and other mountain destinations. Jakobsson said long lines formed last weekend, with roughly 50 Teslas and other EVs waiting to charge.
Tesla Superchargers in Sweden are typically open to other electric vehicle brands, making them a reliable option for all EV owners.
Tesla installed a generator at the location after sympathy strikes from other unions disrupted power supply to some stations. The generator itself was reportedly not working on the morning of the incident, though it is unclear whether that was connected to the protest.
The dispute between Tesla and IF Metall centers on the company’s refusal to sign a collective agreement covering Swedish workers. The strike has drawn support from other unions, including Seko, which has taken steps affecting electricity supply to certain Tesla facilities. Tesla Sweden, for its part, has insisted that its workers are already fairly compensated and it does not need a collective agreement,
Jesper Pettersson, press spokesperson for IF Metall, criticized Tesla’s use of generators to keep charging stations running. Still, IF Metall emphasized that it strongly distances itself from the vandalism incident at the Vansbro Supercharger.
“We think it is remarkable that instead of taking the easy route and signing a collective agreement for our members, they are choosing to use every possible means to get around the strike,” Pettersson said.
News
Tesla Cybertruck owner credits FSD for saving life after freeway medical emergency
The incident was shared by the Tesla owner on social media platform X, where it caught the attention of numerous users, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
A Tesla Cybertruck owner has credited Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised for saving his life after he experienced a medical emergency on the freeway.
The incident was shared by the Tesla owner on social media platform X, where it caught the attention of numerous users, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
In a post on X, Cybertruck owner Rishi Vohra wrote that he had unintentionally fasted for 17 hours, taken medication, and experienced what he described as a severe allergic reaction while driving.
“What started as a normal drive turned terrifying fast. My body shut down. I passed out while driving on the freeway, mid-conversation with my wife on the phone,” he wrote.
Vohra stated that his Tesla was operating with FSD Supervised engaged at the time. According to his account, the Cybertruck detected that he had lost consciousness using its driver monitoring system, slowed down, activated hazard lights, and safely pulled over to the shoulder.
“Thank God my Tesla had Full Self-Driving engaged. It detected I lost consciousness (thanks to the driver monitoring system), immediately slowed, activated hazards, and safely pulled over to the shoulder. No crash. No danger to anyone else on the road,” Vohra wrote.
The Cybertruck owner added that his wife used Life360 to alert emergency services after hearing him go silent during their call. He said responders located him within five minutes. After being attended to, Vohra stated that the vehicle then drove him to the emergency room after he refused to leave his truck on the freeway.
“So the Tesla autonomously drove me the rest of the way to the ER. I walked in, got admitted, and they stabilized me overnight,” he wrote.
He later posted that he was being discharged and thanked Tesla and Elon Musk. Musk replied to the post, writing, “Glad you’re ok!” The official Tesla X account also reposted Vohra’s story with a heart emoji.
Tesla recently published updated safety data of vehicles operating with FSD (Supervised) engaged. As per Tesla’s latest North America figures, vehicles operating with FSD (Supervised) engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles. The U.S. average is one major collision every 660,164 miles.
Considering the experience of the Cybertruck owner, Tesla’s safety data does seem to hold a lot of water. A vehicle that is manually driven would have likely crashed or caused a pileup if its driver lost consciousness in the middle of the freeway, after all.
News
Tesla Cyberbeast price drops to less than $100k but loses Luxe package with FSD
The change adjusts the truck’s positioning in the high-performance premium EV pickup truck segment, where several rivals now command six-figure price tags.
Tesla has reduced the price of the Cyberbeast to below $99,990, but the update also removes a compelling feature set from the vehicle.
The change adjusts the truck’s positioning in the high-performance premium EV pickup truck segment, where several rivals now command six-figure price tags.
Prior to its price adjustment, the Cyberbeast was listed for $114,990. However, the vehicle’s prior configuration included a Luxe package that bundled features such as Full Self-Driving Supervised and other premium inclusions. That package is no longer listed as part of the Cyberbeast.
For its sub $100,000 price, the Cyberbeast offers 325 miles of estimated range, a 0-60 mph time of 2.6 seconds, a payload capacity of 2,271 lbs with the Cyber Wheel, and Powershare.
Interestingly enough, the Cyberbeast now undercuts some of its most powerful competitors with its updated price. The Rivian R1T Quad, for example, starts at $116,900, though the R1T has more range at 374 miles per charge, and it is also a bit faster with a 0-60 mph time of 2.5 seconds.
Other rivals include the GMC Hummer EV 3X Omega Edition Truck, which has a starting MSRP of approximately $148,000 before dealer markups, the Chevy Silverado EV LT Max Range, which starts at over $91,000 before dealer markups, and the GMC Sierra EV Denali Max, which starts at about $101,000.
Considering that rivals like the Rivian R1T Quad, Chevy Silverado EV LT Max Range, and GMC Sierra EV Denali Max outgun the Cyberbeast in raw range, the Cyberbeast’s competitiveness will likely rely on its Full Self Driving Supervised system, which allows it to navigate inner city streets and highways.
For $99 per month, the Cyberbeast practically becomes a self-driving vehicle, and that is something that its rivals cannot match, at least for now.
Tesla Supercharger vandalized with frozen cables and anti-Musk imagery amid Sweden union dispute
Tesla Cybertruck owner credits FSD for saving life after freeway medical emergency
