News
Tesla Model 3 wins Detroit News’ 2018 Car of the Year award: ‘It is Apple on wheels’
It appears that Elon Musk was right to bet the future of Tesla on the Model 3. Since the electric car started getting delivered to its long list of reservation holders, the vehicle has won the hearts of EV enthusiasts and old-school gearheads alike. A member of the latter group is Henry Payne of The Detroit News, who previously noted in an appearance at Autoline TV that he purchased a Long Range RWD Model 3 simply because there is no other vehicle like it on the road.
Payne is a true-blooded car enthusiast. Apart from being a 30-year veteran of the news industry, Payne is also an avid racecar driver and a professional automotive critic. He is also the farthest from being a stereotypical EV buyer, openly admitting that he’s not a “greenie” and that he is not a global warming believer. That said, if there is one thing that Payne knows, it is cars — how they work, and how good they are.
As it turns out, Tesla’s midsize sedan ended up impressing the automotive veteran. So impressed was Payne with his Tesla Model 3 that in a recent column, he actually selected the electric sedan as The Detroit News‘ 2018 Car of the Year. That’s right. An electric car — a rather tame version of the vehicle at that — convinced a lifelong gearhead that it was arguably the best vehicle available in the United States this year.
Payne noted that Tesla made history in 2018, becoming the first viable startup automaker he encountered in his lifetime. Elaborating on the Model 3, Payne noted that the vehicle has remained competitive in the auto industry despite being a sedan in a market that loves larger vehicles like SUVs. The automotive veteran further pointed out that Tesla was able to achieve all of this despite the constant barrage of skepticism from the company’s critics, Elon Musk’s Twitter missteps, and the company’s manufacturing errors such as over-automating the Model 3 line.
Ultimately, though, Payne stated that the Model 3 is exceptional simply because it reimagines what a car could be like. And it was able to do so without compromising on performance.
“The $55,000 Model 3 succeeds because it is Apple on wheels. Musk re-imagined the car like Steve Jobs re-thought the phone — as a study in design minimalism that is both gorgeous and more efficient than established platforms. Privately, other automaker execs tell me they admire Tesla for innovations that are pushing the industry forward: over-the-air updates, better connectivity, better user interfaces.”
“As different as the Tesla’s operating system is, it sacrifices little in performance to segment athletes like BMW and Alfa. Despite its inherent weight disadvantage, the porky 80.5-kWh battery is integrated to the chassis low in the car, making for good vehicle dynamics.”
What’s particularly noteworthy is that Payne dubbed the Model 3 as the 2018 Car of the Year despite having what appears to be outdated information about the vehicle. For one, he referenced a track test from Motor Trend‘s Randy Pobst, stating that the Model 3 Performance was just a second slower than the Alfa Romeo Quadrifoglio. That particular test mentioned by The Detroit News veteran involved the pre-release version of the Model 3 Performance’s Track Mode. Tesla actually collaborated with Pobst to fine-tune the “release version” of Track Mode after the vehicle’s loss to the Alfa in the initial test. With the release version of Track Mode, the Model 3 Performance soundly beat the Alfa Romeo Quadrifoglio’s time.
Ultimately, though, the auto veteran noted that the Model 3’s combination of driving dynamics and software integration makes the electric car a remarkable vehicle overall.
“A showcase for autonomous features like summon and automatic lane-change, the high-tech Model 3 reaffirms the joy of driving,” Payne concluded.
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
