Are you looking to order a Tesla Model 3 soon? You might be waiting a while for it to show up at your local Showroom to accept delivery if you are in the United States. According to Tesla’s online Design Studio, demand for the all-electric sedan’s Long Range All-Wheel-Drive variant continues to skyrocket, and new order delivery dates are being prolonged to dates as late as November. Currently, expected delivery is slated at between 10-16 weeks for the Model 3 configuration. Demand for the vehicle is still rising, just in time for the company to open a new production plant in Texas that will assist consumers’ ever-growing want for the car.
Tesla’s all-electric vehicles, especially its mass-market Model 3 and Model Y, have been among the most popular EVs globally. In mid-June, we reported that the Long Range Model Y was nearly sold out for Q3 as estimated delivery dates had extended to the final month of the quarter. The demand for the Model 3 has evidently surpassed that of its automotive sibling, with delivery dates for the Model 3 extending into mid-November.
Tesla’s Design Studio for the Model 3 Long Range has extended the estimated delivery time frame to 10-16 weeks, meaning the earliest scheduled delivery for new orders would be the final week of September. The latest would be the second week of November.
Credit: Tesla
The Model 3 has been Tesla’s best-seller globally for some time, only eclipsed by the Model Y in some regions like Tesla’s home state of California. However, the Model 3’s affordable price points combined with industry-leading software and range ratings make it an ideal choice for consumers, especially if it’s their first time buying an electric car. Outside of the United States, the Model 3 has remained a dominator of many EV-heavy markets, including Norway, Ireland, and Japan. The Model 3 has cemented itself as a Top 3 vehicle in China, sparring for the top spot with the Wuling HongGuang Mini EV for nearly a year straight.
Tesla’s profitability in Ireland doubles with Model 3 taking center stage
Tesla has continued to grow its production and delivery figures quarterly. On July 2nd, Tesla reported it had produced 206,421 cars in Q2, with 201,250 vehicles being delivered. This was an increase from Q1, where the automaker reported 180,338 vehicles produced, with 184,800 deliveries. Both quarters were overwhelmingly dominated by the Model 3 and Model Y.
The Model 3 is manufactured at Tesla’s Fremont Factory in Northern California currently. Within the coming months, it will also be produced at Tesla’s Giga Texas facility near Austin. The Texas plant will produce Model 3s for customers in the Eastern half of North America, while the Fremont plant will continue its production for the Western portion of the continent.
It is interesting to note that the Model 3 Long Range is not the least expensive variant of the all-electric sedan. However, this has not stopped the car from having the most prolonged delivery date. The vehicle has 353 miles of range and a lightning-quick 4.2-second 0-60 MPH time. The car offers sufficient range with incredible performance, making it an ideal combination for consumers who want a little taste of both.
As demand for the Model 3 and Tesla’s other vehicles continues to grow, the company continues to expand its footprint of factories to handle the increasing demand for its cars. While Tesla is currently building its vehicles in Fremont and China at Giga Shanghai, Tesla will open the Giga Texas plant and its first European factory, Giga Berlin, later this year.
Disclosure: Joey Klender is a TSLA Shareholder.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with tips! Email us at tips@teslarati.com, or you can email me directly at joey@teslarati.com.
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
