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.
Investor's Corner
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.
Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.
The Giga Texas Optimus Factory latest update … construction keeps moving fast!
Steel assembly is now only about 5 column grids from the north perimeter beam. Concrete is going in on the three upper floors, rebar is still being laid for more pours, and footing / grade-beam work… pic.twitter.com/qvFPvwnYzW
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) September 17, 2026
Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.
Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.
Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
