News
Tesla engineers share Model 3 steering, drivetrain, and suspension secrets
The Tesla Model 3 is practically taking over the electric car market, establishing a strong presence in every region where it is released. A key reason behind this lies in the fact that the Model 3 happens to be a really fine automobile that just happens to be electric. It’s quick on its feet, handles nimbly despite its weight, and it provides a ride that is both sporty and comfortable.
One of the UK’s most established motoring magazines, Autocar, spoke with a number of Tesla engineers to gain some insights on the design and development process of the Model 3. The result was an extensive discussion in how a clean-sheet design and a serious commitment to safety could make all the difference when creating a car that is, for all intents and purposes, intended to reinvent the automobile.
Tires
Immediately emphasized by the Tesla engineers was that the Model 3’s chassis and suspension were designed using a ‘first principles’ clean-sheet approach. This started with the Model 3’s tires, which the engineers fondly described as the “unsung heroes” of the vehicle, being critical to its feel and drivability. The development of the Model 3’s tires began back in 2015, when Tesla started working with manufacturers to create the ideal tires for the electric sedan.
The engineers noted that the tires of a high-performance electric car like the Model 3 are challenged in different ways compared to gas-powered automobiles. This is due to a number of factors, including the vehicle’s weight and its instant torque. Since the bulk of an EV’s mass is situated lower down compared to a vehicle with an internal combustion engine, there is less vertical force buildup on the outside pair of tires to generate grip when cornering.
To address this, Tesla focused on tread stiffness, even developing new compounds to deliver a good combination of cornering grip and low rolling resistance for the Model 3’s tires. Sound-absorbing foam placed inside the tire cavity further increases comfort during driving by suppressing noise. The Model 3’s rear wheels hold some interesting secrets as well. The engineers revealed that each rear wheel of the electric sedan has six degrees of freedom, with five links and one damper, though the links are split to allow superior control over forces that are transmitted through the vehicle’s tire contact patch.
Safety Systems and Steering
The Model 3 has earned a perfect 5-Star Safety Rating from the NHTSA, the Euro-NCAP, and the ANCAP. This comes as no surprise, considering that the vehicle is designed from the ground up to emphasize safety. The Model 3’s front suspension, for example, was specifically designed to provide maximum protection in small-overlap frontal collision crash tests.
Sacrificial links that are designed to snap when the front wheel and suspension get damaged are also integrated into the vehicle, allowing the Model 3’s front wheels to rotate. This moves the front wheels outside the Model 3’s body, while pushing the car, its occupants, and its battery pack from the point of impact. These safety systems extend to the Model 3’s dual-motor AWD variants as well.
Tesla designed the Model 3’s electric power steering system to have a rapid 10:1 ratio. The power steering is equipped with full redundancy with separate power feeds taken directly from the vehicle’s high-voltage battery. The engineers also mentioned two electronic modules and two inverters providing “hot backup” to the system if one fails.
Brakes
The Model 3’s braking system is quite unique, in the way that Tesla opted to equip the electric sedan with more expensive four-pot brake calipers at the front wheels instead of a single-piston sliding mechanism. This gives the Model 3 superior pedal response, and it opened the door for the electric car maker to design its own piston seals that fully retract the brake pads after braking; thus, boosting available driving range and cutting drag. Such a system adds to the Model 3’s efficiency, which has proven superior to other premium electric vehicles like the Audi e-tron and the Jaguar I-PACE.
Elon Musk has mentioned multiple times in the past that brake pads in a Tesla will last for the lifetime of a vehicle. This is no exaggeration, according to the Tesla engineers, who noted that the Model 3’s discs and brake pads are designed to last for around 150,000 miles. This is made possible by the Model 3’s regenerative braking system, which allows drivers to slow down the vehicle without using its physical brakes. As for rust issues, the engineers pointed out that Tesla has developed new anti-corrosion techniques for its electric cars.
Suspension
Perhaps the most interesting tidbit discussed by the Tesla engineers involved the Model 3’s suspension. In true Elon Musk fashion, Tesla actually used concepts from NASA when it was refining the suspension settings of the electric sedan. The electric car maker based the Model 3’s suspension settings on a study by the space agency about how long the human body can be subjected to a certain frequency without feeling uncomfortable. Considering that the vertical frequency of a suspension’s movement affects comfort and drivability, Tesla engineers settled on a vertical frequency that is equivalent to a brisk walk or a slow run to give the Model 3’s chassis a comfortable, sporty feel.
The Model 3’s suspension has impressed a number of industry experts, among them being automotive veteran and teardown expert Sandy Munro of Munro and Associates. During his teardown of the vehicle, Munro noted that the Model 3 has areas of improvement in its body and finish, but everything from the electric car’s suspension, all the way down to its tires, is flawless. In a segment on YouTube’s Autoline TV, Munro mentioned that the person who tuned the Model 3’s suspension could easily be an “F1 Prince.”
During the electric car maker’s second-quarter earnings call, Elon Musk mentioned that the “story for Tesla’s future is fundamentally Model 3 and Model Y.” While the Model S and Model X were made to prove that electric vehicles could be superior alternatives to gas-powered premium sedans and SUVs, the more affordable Model 3 — and in extension, the Model Y — would likely be the cars that could reinvent the automobile and encourage mass-market car buyers to rethink what a vehicle could be like. Based on the Model 3’s success so far, it appears that Tesla is so far succeeding in this endeavor.
H/T to JPR007.
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
