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
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new rules that the Trump Administration is aiming to enforce on autonomous vehicles. On Thursday, NHTSA, under the Trump Administration’s U.S. Department of Transportation, commenced rulemaking on the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS).
This effort aims to eliminate the mandate for manual brake pedals in vehicles that are designed to be driven exclusively by automated driving systems. This would impact the Tesla Cybercab, which the company has stated would operate without a steering wheel or pedals.
Tesla Cybercab launch is imminent after latest sighting at Giga Texas
The Trump Administration is looking to revise FMVSS No. 135, which requires standard braking systems on light-duty vehicles.
Currently, the regulation requires light-duty cars to use traditional manual braking systems that allow operators to slow the vehicle. With the advent of self-driving in the U.S., these regulations need updating, and these are the changes that could come to FMVSS No. 135:
- Removes requirements for hand- or foot-operated brake controls for vehicles designed never to be operated by a human. Existing rules still apply to AVs that retain manual controls.
- All subject vehicles must still meet the same stopping distance performance criteria via alternative testing procedures.
- While this update ensures AVs can physically stop when commanded, NHTSA is separately developing safety performance requirements for AVs in real-world driving scenarios.
- NHTSA will continue to use its broad defect enforcement authority to investigate unsafe ADS behavior and oversee recalls.
As autonomy becomes a greater part of passenger travel, these types of rule adjustments will be more than reasonable. It will give manufacturers the ability to self-certify their vehicles and avoid any red tape that could ultimately delay the deployment of these vehicles.
Administrators are also incredibly excited about the opportunity to play a role in the advancement of self-driving vehicles.
“We are at the cusp of the greatest technological revolution in vehicle technology since the innovation of the Model T,” NHTSA Administrator Jonathan Morrison said. “If we want America to lead the way, we have to reimagine our regulatory framework. That’s why under Secretary Sean Duffy’s AV Framework, NHTSA is tearing down pointless barriers to innovative designs while strengthening the fundamental safety requirements that matter and holding AV developers accountable for safe performance.”
The Cybercab entered mass production at Gigafactory Texas in April. Tesla ultimately plans to push the vehicle into its Robotaxi fleet, potentially when frameworks like these are established.
Tesla plans to boost production at its Gigafactory Berlin plant in Germany following a sharp rebound in sales and demand in Europe after a softer 2025.
The plans put Tesla in a better position to compete with strengthening companies in Europe and potentially other markets; demand indicators show Tesla is much better off than in 2025.
Last year was a tough year for Tesla in terms of overall demand in Europe. The company produced over 200,000 vehicles at the German plant last year, a soft figure compared to the 375,000 vehicles Tesla lists as its current capacity at the factory.
🚨 Tesla said this morning it will ramp up production at Gigafactory Berlin to a volume of 7,500 vehicles per week.
This is a 20 percent boost in production. Tesla will hire 1,000 new employees to help with the increase.$TSLA pic.twitter.com/kravKfRO5n
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 25, 2026
Tesla’s overall European sales dropped significantly last year due to a variety of factors. However, sales are rebounding, and demand is strong once again, and only getting stronger. Tesla is now planning to bump production of Model Y vehicles at Giga Berlin upward by about 20 percent. It will also bring 1,000 new jobs to the plant.
Tesla confirmed the details of its planned production expansion in Germany this morning. It is a strategy to keep up with strengthening demand.
In Q1, Tesla saw a record 61,000 vehicles produced at Giga Berlin. European registrations rebounded sharply, with Model Y seeing 117 percent increases in March 2026 compared to last year. Germany alone saw stark increases, with a quadrupling in registrations to 9,252 units.
This trend continued in other key European markets, including France, Denmark and Sweden. Tesla registrations were up over 46 percent in some of these markets, and Model Y continued its trend as a top BEV in the market.
Demand has been recovering strongly in 2026, giving Tesla a reason to expand production efforts at the factory. These increases signal management’s confidence in sustained or growing European pull for Berlin-built vehicles.
Tesla is being sued by the family of the woman who was killed in a Texas crash involving a Model 3. The driver, who is also being sued, claimed the vehicle was operating on Autopilot mode, but Tesla executives have come out challenging that claim, stating that the driver of the vehicle overrode the system.
The lawsuit was filed by 76-year-old Martha Avila’s daughter and her husband, who allege a “design defect” involving a Tesla and a failure to warn. The suit alleges negligence against Tesla and the driver, Michael Butler.
Butler “stated he was operating with an automated driving assistance system engaged at the time of the crash,” the Harris County Sheriff’s Office said in a statement. He showed no signs of intoxication and was cooperative, the Sheriff’s Office said, according to NBC News.
Just after reports of the crash and numerous headlines that immediately blamed Tesla’s Autopilot suite, both Tesla CEO Elon Musk and Head of AI Ashok Elluswamy challenged that. Musk said the crash made “no sense” given that Tesla Autopilot and Full Self-Driving do not travel at the speeds the door cameras captured the car traveling at, which Tesla says was 73 MPH.
Tesla finally clarifies fatal Texas crash, confirms driver manually overrode acceleration
Elluswamy also revealed that Tesla data showed Butler overrode the system by pressing the accelerator to 100%, and that the pedal was compressed fully even after the car had crashed. Tesla has not released this data to the public, likely because it is communicating with agencies like the NHTSA on an investigation.
The suit uses a Washington Post analysis of government data that “identified at least 17 fatal incidents linked to Tesla Autopilot.”
This is far from the first time an accident has been blamed on Autopilot. A fatal crash in Texas was blamed on Autopilot several years ago, but when Tesla released data to the NTSB, which was investigating the crash, Autopilot was not available where the crash occurred, and Autosteer was never enabled, meaning the car was manually controlled at the time of the accident.
“Application of the accelerator pedal was found to be as high as 98.8 percent,” the NTSB said in their findings. The highest recorded speed in the five seconds leading up to the impact was 67 miles per hour. The area where the crash occurred is residential, and Texas State laws… pic.twitter.com/XGD97NHVZ2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 18, 2026
More information on the accident will be released as Tesla works with agencies to find the cause of the crash. From personal experience, it is hard to imagine Tesla Autopilot or FSD operating in this manner. It drives sometimes too cautiously in residential areas in parking lots, at least in my experience. Speeding happens, but at this rate in this type of area, it is hard to believe.
We look forward to more details being released with time.
Tesla Cybercab stands to gain from new Trump autonomy rules
Tesla plans production boost at Giga Berlin following rebound in Europe
