Connect with us

News

Tesla’s Model 3 build quality improvements discussed in video review

A Model 3 in the EU market is reviewed, delivery taken by Martin Welzl of Teslafinity. | Image: Martin Welzl/YouTube

Published

on

Tesla’s Model 3 build quality has received a fair amount of criticism since it began shipping to customers, particularly in terms of the finishing touches on seat stitching, paint, and lineups between panels and cabin components. However, a video review by Martin Welzl of Teslafinity assessing a recently delivered Model 3 indicated that significant improvements have been made to the midsize sedan. Overall, Welzl found that any quality variations in that particular Model 3 were in line with those found in cars produced by major auto manufacturers, none of which would recommend against purchase of the vehicle.

The white Model 3 in the video had a VIN in the 310,000+ range and was built in April 2019 for the European market. Only a few build quality issues were noted after the review. In particular, some corners and edges had a slightly uneven paint appearance, the driver’s side door speaker was hovered 1 mm above the door, and about 1 cm of stitching in the passenger seat was uneven. The Model 3’s panels were slightly off in spots, but significantly improved over older videos showing earlier builds. Given Tesla’s rapid rate of adjusting and improving its production process, any quality issues noted in the review may have already been addressed.

A Model 3 in the EU market is reviewed, delivery taken by Martin Welzl of Teslafinity. | Image: Martin Welzl/YouTube

Taking delivery of the European Model 3 was also described as a somewhat frustrating experience with schedule delays creating most of the issues. The Model 3 was purchased by Welzl’s parents, and he took over communications with Tesla on their behalf to ensure their experience with their new car wasn’t affected by any delivery hiccups. Once the car was in hand, though, the process became forgivable. “It’s just a beautiful piece of engineering,” Welzl said in the video, referring to his reaction to delivery of the vehicle.

Tesla often finds itself under a microscope as a new car maker, especially while producing all-electric vehicles intended to upend an industry deeply rooted in gasoline and diesel-powered products. Scathing reviews have been infamously produced by a few industry professionals, and the California-based automaker has addressed both their inaccuracies and their fair criticisms. Panel gaps, for instance, have now been fine tuned to be competitive with Audi, BMW, and Mercedes models, according to Tesla.

Quality is expected to continue to improve even further as Model 3 sales continue to grow and Tesla ramps up production. A recently leaked email from CEO Elon Musk suggested that the midsize sedan is being produced at a steady 900/day currently, resulting in a run rate of 6,300 vehicles per week with component production rates helping to quickly close in on 7,000 cars per week. If achieved and matched with delivery output, Tesla could beat its Q4 2018 record deliveries which amounted to over 90,000 vehicles.

Advertisement

Watch the full Teslafinity European Model 3 build quality review below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gd0lMgtOpGE

Accidental computer geek, fascinated by most history and the multiplanetary future on its way. Quite keen on the democratization of space. | It's pronounced day-sha, but I answer to almost any variation thereof.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

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.

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.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

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.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

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.

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.

Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Continue Reading