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.
Elon Musk shared an incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab’s potential efficiency, as the company has hinted in the past that it could be one of the most affordable vehicles to operate from a per-mile basis.
ARK Invest released a report recently that shed some light on the potential incremental cost per mile of various Robotaxis that will be available on the market in the coming years.
The Cybercab, which is detailed for the year 2030, has an exceptionally low cost of operation, which is something Tesla revealed when it unveiled the vehicle a year and a half ago at the “We, Robot” event in Los Angeles.
Musk said on numerous occasions that Tesla plans to hit the $0.20 cents per mile mark with the Cybercab, describing a “clear path” to achieving that figure and emphasizing it is the “full considered” cost, which would include energy, maintenance, cleaning, depreciation, and insurance.
Probably true
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) January 22, 2026
ARK’s report showed that the Cybercab would be roughly half the cost of the Waymo 6th Gen Robotaxi in 2030, as that would come in at around $0.40 per mile all in. Cybercab, at scale, would be at $0.20.
Credit: ARK Invest
This would be a dramatic decrease in the cost of operation for Tesla, and the savings would then be passed on to customers who choose to utilize the ride-sharing service for their own transportation needs.
The U.S. average cost of new vehicle ownership is about $0.77 per mile, according to AAA. Meanwhile, Uber and Lyft rideshares often cost between $1 and $4 per mile, while Waymo can cost between $0.60 and $1 or more per mile, according to some estimates.
Tesla’s engineering has been the true driver of these cost efficiencies, and its focus on creating a vehicle that is as cost-effective to operate as possible is truly going to pay off as the vehicle begins to scale. Tesla wants to get the Cybercab to about 5.5-6 miles per kWh, which has been discussed with prototypes.
Additionally, fewer parts due to the umboxed manufacturing process, a lower initial cost, and eliminating the need to pay humans for their labor would also contribute to a cheaper operational cost overall. While aspirational, all of the ingredients for this to be a real goal are there.
It may take some time as Tesla needs to hammer the manufacturing processes, and Musk has said there will be growing pains early. This week, he said regarding the early production efforts:
“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”
Elon Musk
Elon Musk to attend 2026 World Economic Forum at Davos
The Tesla CEO was confirmed as a last-minute speaker for a session with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink.
Elon Musk is poised to attend the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos. The Tesla CEO was confirmed as a last-minute speaker for a session with BlackRock CEO Larry Fink, signaling a thaw in Musk’s long-strained relationship with the event.
A late addition
Organizers of the World Economic Forum confirmed that Elon Musk was added shortly before the event to a Thursday afternoon session, where he was scheduled to speak with Fink, as noted in a Bloomberg News report. Musk’s upcoming appearance marks Musk’s first participation in the forum, which annually draws political leaders, business executives, and global media to Davos, Switzerland.
Musk’s attendance represents a departure from his past stance toward the event. He had been invited in prior years but declined to attend, including in 2024. His upcoming appearance followed remarks from his political ally, Donald Trump, who addressed the forum earlier in the week with a wide-ranging speech.
A previously strained relationship
Musk had frequently criticized the World Economic Forum in the past, describing it as elitist and questioning its influence. In earlier posts, he characterized the gathering as “boring” and accused it of functioning like an unelected global authority. Those remarks contributed to a long-running distance between Musk and WEF organizers.
The forum previously said Musk had not been invited since 2015, though that position has since shifted. Organizers indicated last year that Musk was welcome amid heightened interest in his political and business activities, including his involvement in the Trump administration’s Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE). Musk later stepped away from that role.
Despite his friction with the World Economic Forum, Musk has remained central to several global events, from SpaceX’s provision of satellite internet services in geopolitically sensitive regions through Starlink to the growing use of xAI’s Grok in U.S. government applications.
News
Tesla states Giga Berlin workforce is stable, rejects media report
As per the electric vehicle maker, production and employment levels at the facility remain stable.
Tesla Germany has denied recent reports alleging that it has significantly reduced staffing at Gigafactory Berlin. As per the electric vehicle maker, production and employment levels at the facility remain stable.
Tesla denies Giga Berlin job cuts report
On Wednesday, German publication Handelsblatt reported that Tesla’s workforce in Gigafactory Berlin had been reduced by about 1,700 since 2024, a 14% drop. The publication cited internal documents as its source for its report.
In a statement to Reuters, Tesla Germany stated that there has been no significant reduction in permanent staff at its Gigafactory in Grünheide compared with 2024, and that there are no plans to curb production or cut jobs at the facility.
“Compared to 2024, there has been no significant reduction in the number of permanent staff. Nor are there any such plans. Compared to 2024, there has been no significant reduction in the number of permanent staff. Nor are there any such plans,” Tesla noted in an emailed statement.
Tesla Germany also noted that it’s “completely normal” for a facility like Giga Berlin to see fluctuations in its headcount.
A likely explanation
There might be a pretty good reason why Giga Berlin reduced its headcount in 2024. As highlighted by industry watcher Alex Voigt, in April of that year, Elon Musk reduced Tesla’s global workforce by more than 10% as part of an effort to lower costs and improve productivity. At the time, several notable executives departed the company, and the Supercharger team was culled.
As with Tesla’s other factories worldwide, Giga Berlin adjusted staffing during that period as well. This could suggest that a substantial number of the 1,700 employees reported by Handelsblatt were likely part of the workers who were let go by Elon Musk during Tesla’s last major workforce reduction.
In contrast to claims of contraction, Tesla has repeatedly signaled plans to expand production capacity in Germany. Giga Berlin factory manager André Thierig has stated on several occasions that the site is expected to increase output in 2026, reinforcing the idea that the facility’s long-term trajectory remains growth-oriented.
Elon Musk shares incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab efficiency
Elon Musk to attend 2026 World Economic Forum at Davos
