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.
Tesla Optimus showed off its newest capability as progress on the project continues to accelerate toward an ultimate goal of mass production in the coming years.
Tesla is still developing Optimus and preparing for the first stages of mass production, where units would be sold and shipped to customers. CEO Elon Musk has always marketed the humanoid robot as the biggest product in history, even outside of Tesla, but of all time.
He believes it will eliminate the need to manually perform monotonous tasks, like cleaning, mowing the lawn, and folding laundry.
However, lately, Musk has revealed even bigger plans for Optimus, including the ability to relieve humans of work entirely within the next 20 years.
JUST IN: Elon Musk says working will be ‘optional’ in less than 20 years because of AI and robotics. pic.twitter.com/l3S5kl5HBB
— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) November 30, 2025
Development at Tesla’s Artificial Intelligence and Robotics teams has progressed, and a new video was shown of the robot taking a light jog with what appeared to be some pretty natural form:
Just set a new PR in the lab pic.twitter.com/8kJ2om7uV7
— Tesla Optimus (@Tesla_Optimus) December 2, 2025
Optimus has also made several public appearances lately, including one at the Neural Information Processing Systems, or NeurIPS Conference. Some spectators shared videos of Optimus’s charging rig, as well as its movements and capabilities, most interestingly, the hand:
You have to hand it to Elon 🤟 pic.twitter.com/fZKDlmGAbe
— Ric Burton · NeurIPS 2025 (@_ricburton) December 2, 2025
The hand, forearm, and fingers have been one of the most evident challenges for Tesla in recent times, especially as it continues to work on its 3rd Generation iteration of Optimus.
Musk said during the Q3 Earnings Call:
“I don’t want to downplay the difficulty, but it’s an incredibly difficult thing, especially to create a hand that is as dexterous and capable as the human hand, which is incredible. The human hand is an incredible thing. The more you study the human hand, the more incredible you realize it is, and why you need four fingers and a thumb, why the fingers have certain degrees of freedom, why the various muscles are of different strengths, and fingers are of different lengths. It turns out that those are all there for a reason.”
The interesting part of the Optimus program so far is the fact that Tesla has made a lot of progress with other portions of the project, like movement, for example, which appears to have come a long way.
However, without a functional hand and fingers, Optimus could be rendered relatively useless, so it is evident that it has to figure this crucial part out first.
Elon Musk said in late November that he’s “tried to warn” legacy automakers and “even offered to license Tesla Full Self-Driving, but they don’t want it,” expressing frustration with companies that refuse to adopt the company’s suite, which will eventually be autonomous.
Tesla has long established itself as the leader in self-driving technology, especially in the United States. Although there are formidable competitors, Tesla’s FSD suite is the most robust and is not limited to certain areas or roadways. It operates anywhere and everywhere.
The company’s current position as the leader in self-driving tech is being ignored by legacy automakers, a parallel to what Tesla’s position was with EV development over a decade ago, which was also ignored by competitors.
The reluctance mirrors how legacy automakers initially dismissed EVs, only to scramble in catch-up mode years later–a pattern that highlights their historical underestimation of disruptive innovations from Tesla.
Elon Musk’s Self-Driving Licensing Attempts
Musk and Tesla have tried to push Full Self-Driving to other car companies, with no true suitors, despite ongoing conversations for years. Tesla’s FSD is aiming to become more robust through comprehensive data collection and a larger fleet, something the company has tried to establish through a subscription program, free trials, and other strategies.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk sends rivals dire warning about Full Self-Driving
However, competing companies have not wanted to license FSD for a handful of speculative reasons: competitive pride, regulatory concerns, high costs, or preference for in-house development.
Déjà vu All Over Again
Tesla tried to portray the importance of EVs long ago, as in the 2010s, executives from companies like Ford and GM downplayed the importance of sustainable powertrains as niche or unprofitable.
Musk once said in a 2014 interview that rivals woke up to electric powertrains when the Model S started to disrupt things and gained some market share. Things got really serious upon the launch of the Model 3 in 2017, as a mass-market vehicle was what Tesla was missing from its lineup.
This caused legacy companies to truly wake up; they were losing market share to Tesla’s new and exciting tech that offered less maintenance, a fresh take on passenger auto, and other advantages. They were late to the party, and although they have all launched vehicles of their own, they still lag in two major areas: sales and infrastructure, leaning on Tesla for the latter.
I’ve tried to warn them and even offered to license Tesla FSD, but they don’t want it! Crazy …
When legacy auto does occasionally reach out, they tepidly discuss implementing FSD for a tiny program in 5 years with unworkable requirements for Tesla, so pointless. 🤷♂️
🦕 🦕
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) November 24, 2025
Musk’s past warnings have been plentiful. In 2017, he responded to critics who stated Tesla was chasing subsidies. He responded, “Few people know that we started Tesla when GM forcibly recalled all electric cars from customers in 2003 and then crushed them in a junkyard,” adding that “they would be doing nothing” on EVs without Tesla’s efforts.
Companies laughed off Tesla’s prowess with EVs, only to realize they had made a grave mistake later on.
It looks to be happening once again.
A Pattern of Underestimation
Both EVs and self-driving tech represent major paradigm shifts that legacy players view as threats to their established business models; it’s hard to change. However, these early push-aways from new tech only result in reactive strategies later on, usually resulting in what pains they are facing now.
Ford is scaling back its EV efforts, and GM’s projects are hurting. Although they both have in-house self-driving projects, they are falling well behind the progress of Tesla and even other competitors.
It is getting to a point where short-term risk will become a long-term setback, and they may have to rely on a company to pull them out of a tough situation later on, just as it did with Tesla and EV charging infrastructure.
Tesla has continued to innovate, while legacy automakers have lagged behind, and it has cost them dearly.
Implications and Future Outlook
Moving forward, Tesla’s progress will continue to accelerate, while a dismissive attitude by other companies will continue to penalize them, especially as time goes on. Falling further behind in self-driving could eventually lead to market share erosion, as autonomy could be a crucial part of vehicle marketing within the next few years.
Eventually, companies could be forced into joint partnerships as economic pressures mount. Some companies did this with EVs, but it has not resulted in very much.
Self-driving efforts are not only a strength for companies themselves, but they also contribute to other things, like affordability and safety.
Tesla has exhibited data that specifically shows its self-driving tech is safer than human drivers, most recently by a considerable margin. This would help with eliminating accidents and making roads safer.
Tesla’s new Safety Report shows Autopilot is nine times safer than humans
Additionally, competition in the market is a good thing, as it drives costs down and helps innovation continue on an upward trend.
Conclusion
The parallels are unmistakable: a decade ago, legacy automakers laughed off electric vehicles as toys for tree-huggers, crushed their own EV programs, and bet everything on the internal-combustion status quo–only to watch Tesla redefine the industry while they scrambled for billions in catch-up capital.
Today, the same companies are turning down repeated offers to license Tesla’s Full Self-Driving technology, insisting they can build better autonomy in-house, even as their own programs stumble through recalls, layoffs, and missed milestones. History is not merely rhyming; it is repeating almost note-for-note.
Elon Musk has spent twenty years warning that the auto industry’s bureaucratic inertia and short-term thinking will leave it stranded on the wrong side of technological revolutions. The question is no longer whether Tesla is ahead–it is whether the giants of Detroit, Stuttgart, and Toyota will finally listen before the next wave leaves them watching another leader pull away in the rear-view mirror.
This time, the stakes are not just market share; they are the very definition of what a car will be in the decades ahead.
News
Waymo driverless taxi drives directly into active LAPD standoff
No injuries occurred, and the passengers inside the vehicle were safely transported to their destination, as per a Waymo representative.
A video posted on social media has shown an occupied Waymo driverless taxi driving directly into the middle of an active LAPD standoff in downtown Los Angeles.
As could be seen in the short video, which was initially posted on Instagram by user Alex Choi, a Waymo driverless taxi drove directly into the middle of an active LAPD standoff in downtown Los Angeles.
The driverless taxi made an unprotected left turn despite what appeared to be a red light, briefly entering a police perimeter. At the time, officers seemed to be giving commands to a prone suspect on the ground, who looked quite surprised at the sudden presence of the driverless vehicle.
People on the sidewalk, including the person who was filming the video, could be heard chuckling at the Waymo’s strange behavior.
The Waymo reportedly cleared the area within seconds. No injuries occurred, and the passengers inside the vehicle were safely transported to their destination, as per a Waymo representative. Still, the video spread across social media, with numerous netizens poking fun at the gaffe.
Others also pointed out that such a gaffe would have resulted in widespread controversy had the vehicle involved been a Tesla on FSD. Tesla is constantly under scrutiny, with TSLA shorts and similar groups actively trying to put down the company’s FSD program.
A Tesla on FSD or Robotaxi accidentally driving into an active police standoff would likely cause lawsuits, nonstop media coverage, and calls for a worldwide ban, at the least.
This was one of the reasons why even minor traffic infractions committed by the company’s Robotaxis during their initial rollout in Austin received nationwide media attention. This particular Waymo incident, however, will likely not receive as much coverage.
Tesla Optimus shows off its newest capability as progress accelerates
Elon Musk and Tesla try to save legacy automakers from Déjà vu
