News
Tesla Model 3 single-piece casting will come, but not anytime soon, Elon Musk says
Tesla will “likely” switch the Model 3 sedan to a single-piece casting design in the future, CEO Elon Musk said in an interview with Sandy Munro. However, the design will not be on its way anytime soon, as Musk said the Berlin and Texas Gigafactories need to have production efforts well underway to sustain demand fulfillment.
The Model 3’s current design is not a single piece casting and is comprised of 70 different metal parts welded together to create the vehicle’s underbody. Tesla improved upon this design in its Model Y crossover by using a massive, single-piece casting to eliminate 69 total parts. The single-piece design is effective for manufacturing purposes and increases structural rigidity in the event of an accident.
As the Model Y and Model 3 dominate Tesla’s current sales and delivery figures, Munro mentioned to Musk that he was disappointed that his new Model 3 teardown did not reveal a single piece casting similar to the Model Y design. However, Musk indicated Tesla’s mass-market sedan would eventually use the single-piece casting, it would just take its next two production facilities to be in operation for it to happen.
Musk told Munro:
“At some point, we probably will switch to a single-piece casting, but I think we need to get the Texas factory and the Berlin factory going. We do have an issue. It is hard to change the wheels on the bus when it is going 80 MPH down the highway. So, Model 3 is…well, was most of our volume. Model Y will exceed Model 3, but we just need an opportunity to redo the factory without blowing the cash flow of the company.”
In its Q1 2020 Update Letter, Tesla showed the two designs. The Model Y casting (right) was two pieces at this point in time. Thanks to the introduction of Tesla’s Giga Press from IDRA, the automaker has eliminated the two-piece design in favor of a massive one-piece casting. The elimination of so many parts was a huge advantage for Munro, who detailed the casting advantages in several teardown episodes last year.
Tesla Model Y owner Tony Pham then showed the one-piece casting design on his vehicle while having a third-party accessory installed into his all-electric crossover. Pham’s Model Y was delivered in late 2020, proving that Tesla has been utilizing the one-piece design for several months.
Model Y single piece rear casting!
VIN 97k, delivered 12/23/2020. Thanks @TeslaFrunk for the rear kick sensor installation pic.twitter.com/jkIGwX265v— Tony Pham – “Quick Bandit” license plate mount (@TonyTesla4Life) January 10, 2021
Tesla’s single-piece design is widely thought by automotive engineers, including Munro, to be the most advantageous way to build a car. In Munro’s opinion, other automakers have ignored a single-piece design’s advantages due to their stubbornness to keep things the same. “Thousands of engineers, big-time executives, walk by [the idea]. They don’t do it,” Munro said.
One of Tesla’s manufacturing process’s main advantages is that it continues to refine its techniques and never admits that its current processes are the best way to handle things. Tesla is always looking to improve the situation of its manufacturing and production lines, always seeking different techniques and new ways to build its vehicles. The issue now is that Tesla’s vehicles are becoming so popular that its limited production lines cannot be halted to update some production techniques, especially to mass-market vehicles that have been produced for several years. Musk’s analogy of the bus going 80 MPH down the highway is extremely accurate, especially as Tesla is coming off of its largest production and delivery year in company history. Halting Model 3 production lines for an update to the vehicle’s casting design would be detrimental at the current time.
While it is likely that Model 3 single-piece castings could happen down the road, it is not something to expect soon. With Musk indicating that Giga Berlin and Giga Texas need to be in operation for this to occur, these facilities will likely need to have Model 3 production numbers high enough to offset the closure of lines at Giga Shanghai and Fremont. With Berlin focusing on Model Y production initially, it is likely that Model 3 lines will not be ramped for at least a year, so the single-piece Model 3 casting may not be seen until at least 2023.
Elon Musk’s full interview with Sandy Munro is available below.
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
