News
Tesla is designing an electric pump system that makes its drive units even better
Amidst Tesla’s continued efforts to usher in an era of mobility optimized for the convenience and safety of car owners, the electric car maker is exploring new ways to improve its vehicles’ systems. Recently published patent applications, for one, indicate that Tesla is working on better damage monitoring features, as well as safer seats that are capable of classifying a car’s occupants. Apart from these, Tesla is also looking into improving its vehicles’ electric pump system, which could ultimately result in better cooling and diagnostics.
The patent application, published on January 3, 2019 and titled “Electric Pump System and Method,” explores improvements that could be implemented on traditional pump systems used in automobiles. As noted by Tesla, traditional oil pumps, particularly those that are used for EV components such as the drive unit, do not have the capability to monitor oil condition. As a result, oil that is used to lubricate an electric car’s drive unit need to be changed on a regular basis (albeit very infrequently).
In the discussion section of its patent application, Tesla pointed out that traditional oil pumps are unable to accurately determine temperature, since temperature sensors are usually located outside of a conventional pump system. Apart from this, the electric car maker notes that conventional oil pumps are also large and unwieldy due to attachment mechanisms comprised of different parts. With these points for improvement in mind, Tesla has pointed out that there is a need for an “improved oil pump — in particular an electric pump system — designed to work in conjunction with an electric motor.”
-
- (Photo: US Patent Office)
-
- (Photo: US Patent Office)
Illustrations from Tesla’s recently published patent application for an electric pump system. (Photo: US Patent Office)
Tesla’s patent describes an electric pump system that “presents methods and structures that help overcome the difficulties of operating a cooling and lubrication system, in particular, managing the transfer of heat and assessment of fluid temperature in electric pump systems.” The Silicon Valley-based carmaker describes its electric pump system design as follows.
“There is provided an apparatus that includes an electronic control unit, a mechanical pump, and a motor having a first side and a second side, the motor including: a stator, a rotor including a hollow shaft, and a housing around the stator and rotor, wherein the electronic control unit is connected to the first side of the motor, wherein the mechanical pump is connected to the second side of the motor, wherein the hollow shaft defines a shaft inlet and a shaft outlet, wherein the mechanical pump defines a first fluid passageway from a first pump inlet to the shaft inlet, wherein the housing defines an internal motor cavity, wherein the shaft outlet is in fluid communication with the internal motor cavity, wherein the mechanical pump defines a second fluid passageway from a second pump inlet to a pump outlet, and wherein the motor housing and mechanical pump define a third fluid passageway from the internal motor cavity to the pump outlet via a third pump inlet.”
“In some embodiments the apparatus according to the above-described aspect of the present disclosure or any other aspects thereof, a number of optional operations and features may be employed. One optional feature is the electronic control unit further including a thermistor to measure a temperature of a fluid exiting the shaft outlet. Another optional feature is wherein the housing defines a bypass inlet in fluid communication with the internal motor cavity. Another optional feature is at least a portion of the second fluid passageway and the third fluid passageway is common. Another optional feature is the mechanical pump is a gerotor. Another optional feature is the electronic control unit includes a microcontroller controlling the mechanical pump. Another optional feature is the electronic control unit includes cooling ribs.”
-
- (Photo: US Patent Office)
-
- (Photo: US Patent Office)
Illustrations from Tesla’s recently published patent application for an electric pump system. (Photo: US Patent Office)
With such a design, the fluid temperature inside the electric pump system could be used to control and optimize the lubrication system of a vehicle, thereby improving the efficiency of an electric drive unit. Depending on the temperature of the oil in the system, the electric pump could react accordingly, even warning the vehicle’s computers that something is wrong. The readings from the electric pump system can be used to monitor the health of a vehicle’s drive unit as well. Tesla explains this process in the following discussion.
“The fluid temperature may be controlled to achieve certain lubrication properties. For example, hotter oil has lower viscosity which reduces drag and hydraulic power to pump the fluid, which can increase efficiency. If the oil becomes too hot, however, it will not provide sufficient cooling. The fluid temperature reading feature of the oil pump can monitor the general health and performance of the fluid in the electric drive unit system. For example, if the oil is too hot, the oil pump may alert the car computer that something is wrong, for oil that is too hot can damage or/and reduce the life of some components on the drive unit.”
“Stated another way, the temperature of fluid may be used to monitor the health and performance of the drive unit. The ECU may capture other information besides the temperature, such as pump speed, pump current composition, oil pressure, or other information. The information captured by the ECU may then be fed into a proprietary algorithm that monitors oil pump and overall drive unit health. The algorithm may provide an indication of service, such as when oil must be replaced or when the drive train needs to be serviced.”
What is particularly notable is that these improvements could result in enhancements to Tesla’s drive units, which are already among the best in the industry. The Model 3’s drive unit, for one, has been lauded by veteran teardown experts such as Sandy Munro as industry-leading. In a recent appearance at Autoline TV, for one, Munro noted that Tesla’s drive units are practically a class above its competitors.
Tesla’s constant efforts to improve its vehicles are highlighted by the patent applications from the company that have been published over the past months. Among these include an automatic tire inflation system that hints at off-road capabilities for the company’s vehicles, a system that allows Tesla to address panel gaps during vehicle assembly, a way to produce colored solar roof tiles, and even a model that utilizes electric cars as a way to improve vehicle positioning, to name a few.
The full text of Tesla’s recently published patent application could be read here.
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
