This is a preview from our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
Tesla has tapped a new type of automotive glass from supplier AGP for the Plaid Model S, invoking the thought that everything, even the finest details of the vehicle, was considered a possible improvement for the company’s rebirth of the all-electric, flagship sedan.
Many months ago, Teslarati stumbled across a list of Tesla’s suppliers through international connections. These suppliers were shipping massive volumes of whatever product they were giving to Tesla on cargo ships, and we noticed that there was a company called AGP that was shipping windshields and other automotive glasses to the company’s Fremont Factory.
It turns out that AGP has been providing Tesla with automotive glass for several years. Back in 2016, AGP provided glass for the Model X’s panoramic roof and windshields. However, Tesla utilized AGC Automotive’s windshields for its cars, according to Investopedia.
AGP is a Peru-based company that specializes in all types of automotive glass, but what they’ve done for Tesla is especially interesting. The company has been in business for 50 years, but just like everything else, it changes, and the automotive industry is no different. As electric vehicles have become more mainstream, technologies surrounding the development of these new, sustainable automobiles are popping up left and right. AGP’s eGlass for electric and autonomous vehicles is no different.
Now, AGP says on its website that it collaborates “closely with the companies that are leading the new wave of the electric and autonomous vehicles of tomorrow.” When I first stumbled across AGP many months ago on the cargo ship list for Tesla, there was no indication that there was an official partnership, so I looked into it a tad further. I reached out to AGP and received a response that thanked me for my inquiry but refused to confirm or deny whether it was in any sort of professional relationship with Tesla. Ironically, AGP gave the answer we needed, because responding to me was all I needed to know.
Many may ask, “What’s the significance of what glass Tesla is using on its cars?” There are plenty of automotive glass suppliers out there that are worth their weight in gold, providing high-quality windshields and windows for vehicles on the road. Of course, consumers are going to want something that is relatively high quality, because nothing is worse than driving behind a tractor-trailer on the Interstate, just to have a chip or small crack on your windshield from something as tiny as a pebble. While strength is undoubtedly a need for all windshields, EVs require a slightly different bit of development.
One of the biggest focuses for EVs is their drag coefficient. Why is it so important? Because aerodynamics are crucial to the performance, range, and effectiveness of electric vehicles. As high-quality, long-range batteries are hard to come by in the EV sector, manufacturers look for every advantage they can get to achieve robust range ratings. While Tesla is the leader in EV range figures, the company is still looking for ways to get all of its vehicles to or near the 400-mile threshold.
Aerodynamics are a great way to do that. And Tesla undoubtedly worked extremely hard to achieve the best-in-class drag coefficient of .208, beating out the Lucid Air’s impressive .21 coefficient.
We knew aerodynamics was going to be a big part of the Plaid Model S when it was spotted at the Nürburgring two years ago. The vehicle was sporting a large spoiler, a huge rear diffuser, and the new eGlass from AGP is just another addition to Tesla’s attempts to make the Plaid Model S the most aerodynamic vehicle in its lineup.

A blue Tesla Model S Plaid unit with new aeros attacks the Nurburgring. (Photo: Stefan Baldauf/Auto Motor Uund Sport)
We finally confirmed that AGP was providing the highly aerodynamic and EV-specific automotive glass to the Model S Plaid thanks to Tesla Raj, who took a picture of the manufacturer’s sticker on the window of the all-electric sedan at Tesla’s Delivery Event on June 10th. This all confirmed Teslarati’s discovery of AGP in its supplier list several months ago and also confirmed that the two companies had a partnership, despite AGP’s unwillingness to provide a comment (which we understood why!)
New window manufacturer? pic.twitter.com/m4gjhkl7kR
— Tesla Raj (@tesla_raj) June 11, 2021
It makes me think about what Elon Musk may have needed to work on for the final week of Plaid development. When he had announced that the event was going to be delayed a week due to “tweaks,” I wondered whether it was software or hardware. While it was likely a software fix that needed to be addressed, it could have been related to the drag coefficient, which Tesla proudly displayed at the Plaid Event on the 10th. Nevertheless, the vehicle has finally been released to pre-orderers, and the fastest production car that has ever run the 1/4-mile drag is here, and it’s taking down anything in its path.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
-Joey
News
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
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.