News
Tesla Model 3 named as vehicle with ‘lowest probability of injury’ by the NHTSA
The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has dubbed the Long Range RWD Tesla Model 3 as the vehicle with the lowest probability of injury among all cars that the agency has tested so far. The Model 3’s low likelihood of injury rating was given after the vehicle went through the NHTSA’s New Car Assessment Program, which involves a series of crash tests determining the likelihood of serious passenger injury for front, side, and rollover crashes.
The Model 3’s stellar rating from the NHTSA could be seen as yet another testament to the quality of Tesla’s all-electric cars. Immediately following the Model 3’s scores, after all, are the Model S and Model X, which are currently the vehicles considered by the NHTSA with the second and third lowest probabilities of injury. In a blog post announcing the electric sedan’s safety ratings, Tesla noted that it expects the Dual Motor AWD Model 3 to perform just as well in the NHTSA’s tests as its Long Range RWD sibling.
Part of the reason why the Model 3 is so safe is due to the vehicle’s all-electric design. Tesla opted to place the Model 3’s battery pack, the heaviest component of the vehicle, right at the car’s center of gravity. This gives the Model 3 performance and handling that is almost similar to that of mid-engine vehicles, while allowing the electric sedan to have a near 50/50 weight distribution. Other subtle design tweaks, such as the rear motor being placed slightly in front of the axle, further improve the Model 3’s weight distribution, as well as its overall agility and handling.
Model 3 provides superior safety with its front crumple zone which is optimized to absorb energy and crush upon impact https://t.co/RJEn0LlVNi pic.twitter.com/foF7CXPCc0
— Tesla (@Tesla) October 8, 2018
In true Tesla tradition, the Model 3’s all-electric architecture comprises of a sturdy, rigid passenger compartment, a fortified battery pack, and a low center of gravity. Just like its larger siblings, the Model S and X, the absence of an internal combustion engine in front and a fuel tank at the rear give the Model 3 extra large crumple zones, which are optimized to absorb energy and crush more efficiently in the event of an accident.
In the event of a frontal crash, the crumple zone at the front of the vehicle controls the deceleration of occupants, while the Model 3’s advanced restraint systems keep occupants safe in place. Passenger airbags are even specially designed to protect an occupant’s head in the event of an angled or offset crash, while active vents enable the vehicle to adjust the internal pressure of the frontal airbags when deploying. These systems optimize protection based on the specifics of an accident.
The Model 3’s energy-absorbing lateral and diagonal beam structures help occupants safe during pole impact crashes. These structures include a high-strength aluminum bumper beam, a sway bar placed close and forward in front of the car, cross members are the front of the steel subframe that are connected to the main crash fails, as well as diagonal beams in the subframe that distribute energy back to the crash rails when they are not directly impacted. An ultra-high-strength martensitic steel beam is further fitted on the front of the suspension to absorb crash energy from severe impacts.
Tesla also designed the Model 3 with a patented pillar structure and side sills to absorb as much energy as possible in a short distance. Coupled with the vehicle’s rigid body construction and fortified battery architecture, these design elements enable the Model 3 to reduce and prevent compartment intrusion in the event of an accident, while allowing its side airbags to have more space to inflate and cushion occupants.
Just like the Model S and Model X, the Model 3’s low center of gravity plays a key role in keeping the vehicle safe from rollover crashes. That said, even if a rollover does occur, Tesla notes that internal tests have shown that the Model 3 is capable of withstanding roof-crush loads equivalent to more than four times the electric sedan’s weight, far more than the NHTSA’s standards that require cars to withstand three times their own weight.
.@NHTSAgov will post final safety probability stats soon. Model 3 has a shot at being safest car ever tested.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) September 20, 2018
The Model 3 was recently given a flawless 5-Star Safety Rating in all categories and subcategories by the NHTSA. In a follow-up tweet to the NHTSA’s Model 3 results, Elon Musk noted on Twitter that the electric sedan has a shot at being the “safest car ever tested” by the agency. With the Model 3 being dubbed as the vehicle with the lowest probability of injury by the NHTSA, it appears that Musk’s statement has proven to be accurate.
Model 3 has the lowest intrusion from side pole impact of any vehicle tested by @NHTSAgov https://t.co/RJEn0LlVNi pic.twitter.com/ZvGCC82rEX
— Tesla (@Tesla) October 8, 2018
It’s not just the NHTSA that has given the Model 3 its approval, either. Earlier this year, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), a nonprofit funded by auto insurers aimed at reducing accidents on the road, gave the Model 3 a “Superior” front crash avoidance rating. During the course of its testing, the Model 3 performed well in the crash avoidance and mitigation category, thanks to the vehicle’s Forward Collision Warning, its low-speed autobrake, and its high-speed autobrake systems. The Model 3 was also given a “Recommended” rating by Consumer Reports, after an over-the-air software update reduced the vehicle’s braking distance.
Tesla’s electric cars are known for their performance and their safety. The Model X, for one, also received 5-Star Safety Ratings in all categories and subcategories during the NHTSA’s tests. The Model S, on the other hand, performed so well during the NHTSA’s safety evaluation that the agency’s crash-testing gear broke while it was testing the electric sedan.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
