News
Tesla Model Y mishap shows urgent need for aggressively better quality control
Tesla currently stands at the top of the auto market, and for good reason. Its vehicles provide an experience unlike any other, their performance is incredible for their price, and their tech is top-notch. Yet as the company pursues its target of delivering 500,000 cars this year, something is becoming evident: Tesla needs to aggressively emphasize its quality control, especially with regards to the Model Y.
Just recently, EV enthusiast u/Indescribables shared a verified anecdote at the r/TeslaMotors subreddit, stating that their new all-electric crossover lost its glass roof while they were driving in California’s 238 highway. According to the Tesla owner, he and his dad started noticing some wind noise inside the cabin while they were driving. They initially thought that a window had been open, but before they could check, the Model Y’s entire glass roof reportedly got blown off.
After overcoming the initial shock of the incident, the pair drove back to the Tesla delivery center. Upon inspection, the manager at the Tesla location reportedly noted that the incident was caused by either a faulty seal on the glass roof, or someone from the factory forgot to seal the roof on. The new Tesla owners were then given a loaner as well as the option to repair or replace the Model Y. The pair declined a repair, instead opting to have the vehicle replaced.
So Tesla’s quality control is really bad. Our brand new model y’s entire roof just fell off from r/teslamotors
Granted, such an account is strictly anecdotal, but it does highlight a notable point of improvement for Tesla. As the company grows, after all, the electric car maker must make it a point to ensure that its quality control matches its pace of innovation. This ensures that every new Tesla owner gets to experience the same type of experience that has inspired such a strong and dedicated following for the company and its CEO, Elon Musk. This becomes challenging if some vehicles end up leaving the factory without being properly checked for potential build issues.
This is especially notable with this recent Model Y mishap, since Elon Musk himself has proven in the past that he is not content with Tesla making cars that have subpar build quality. During the middle of the Model 3’s “production hell” in 2018, reports were abounding that some vehicles being delivered to customers were not up to par in quality compared to the company’s previous cars like the Model S. Musk then sent a letter to Tesla employees calling for vast improvements in build quality. Musk’s intent was clear.
“We will keep going until the Model 3 build precision is a factor of ten better than any other car in the world. I am not kidding… Our car needs to be designed and built with such accuracy and precision that, if an owner measures dimensions, panel gaps, and flushness, and their measurements don’t match the Model 3 specs, it just means that their measuring tape is wrong,” Musk wrote.
Tesla Convertible???
The improvements in the Model 3’s build quality did not happen overnight, but once the company was able to get better, even legacy auto veterans could not deny that the all-electric sedan was being built with world-class standards. Longtime GM executive Bob Lutz, who is typically critical of Tesla, pretty much threw in the towel when he encountered a Model 3 in the wild. The following excerpt from a post Lutz shared on Road and Track explains his observations best.
“When I spied a metallic-red Model 3 in an Ann Arbor parking lot, I felt compelled to check it out. I was eager to see the oft-reported sloppy assembly work, the poor-fitting doors, blotchy paint, and other manifestations of Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s ‘production hell’ with my own eyes.”
“But, when next to the car, I was stunned. Not only was the paint without any discernible flaw, but the various panels formed a body of precision that was beyond reproach. Gaps from hood to fenders, doors to frame, and all the others appeared to be perfectly even, equal side-to-side, and completely parallel. Gaps of 3.5 to 4.5mm are considered word-class. This Model 3 measured up,” Lutz wrote.
What is rather interesting is that Tesla, especially the Model 3, enjoys widespread support from its consumer base. A thorough study from Bloomberg which polled 5,000 Model 3 owners found that buyers of the all-electric sedan were extremely happy about their cars despite the occasional cosmetic issue. Almost 99% of Model 3 owners remarked that they would recommend the car to friends and family. These are remarkable results, and it speaks volumes about the disruption that Tesla is really bringing to the auto market.
But the company could do better. Adopting a more aggressive quality control system is one way to do this.
Tesla has grown at a pace that is almost unprecedented, transitioning from a maker of premium cars like the Model S and Model X to a mass-market automaker that produces the Model 3 and Model Y in but a few years. With this transition came challenges, as evidenced in the well-documented “production hell” that Tesla experienced during the initial Model 3 ramp. The company has since overcome its quality issues with the Model 3, but it appears that the same pattern is somewhat happening with the Model Y’s ramp. This has to improve.
Considering the company’s goals, from its 1-million-vehicle-per-year target and more importantly, its mission, Tesla must simply not tolerate errors such as releasing a vehicle without proper glass roof sealant to delivery centers. These errors must be beneath Tesla’s Fremont plant at this point, especially since cars from the company’s China factory, Giga Shanghai, have been heavily praised for their build quality, as per data from Chinese quality complaint company CheZhiWang.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
Fort Bend County approved four incentive agreements Thursday for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar factory.
Fort Bend County commissioners on Thursday approved a package of tax incentives for Tesla’s proposed $10.1 billion solar cell factory near Needville, Texas, giving the company one of the last local approvals it needs before it decides where to build. All four Tesla agreements passed 4 to 0.
The votes covered a property tax abatement inside Reinvestment Zone No. 34, a Chapter 381 economic development agreement, a foreign trade zone non-objection paired with payments in lieu of certain taxes, and a separate payment in lieu of taxes “true up” agreement, according to agenda notes from the Fort Bend Commissioners Court meeting.
The project, known internally as “Project Crystal Sun,” would make solar cells and finished modules on roughly 3,000 acres near FM 762 and FM 1994, south of the Brazos River. As Teslarati reported when the filing first surfaced in August, Tesla’s application under the state’s JETI Act splits the investment into $1.5 billion in real property and $8.6 billion in equipment, with 9,712 permanent jobs projected by 2033 and commercial operations targeted for the first quarter of 2029. The plant would handle the full chain from ingot and wafer production through cell testing.
Inside Tesla’s secretive $10 Billion “Project Crystal Sun” filing
Thursday’s approval does not lock in the site. Tesla has told the Texas Comptroller it is still weighing other locations, and site selection adviser David Dennison told Lamar Consolidated ISD trustees in September that the race had narrowed to Fort Bend and one out of state rival with a “very compelling package,” according to the Houston Chronicle. Tesla hopes to decide before the end of 2026, and the incentives still need sign off from the Comptroller and the Governor’s office.
Local officials have now done nearly everything within their control. Commissioners created the reinvestment zone in an August 24 special meeting, with Interim County Judge Daniel Wong formally withdrawing himself over his engineering firm’s past work with Tesla. Lamar CISD trustees voted 7 to 0 on September 15 to advance a JETI agreement that would tax Tesla’s qualifying property at 50 percent of its value for maintenance and operations from 2029 through 2038.
The plant lines up with a target Elon Musk set on Tesla’s Q4 2025 earnings call in January, when he said the company would “work toward getting 100 GW a year of solar cell production, integrating across the entire supply chain from raw materials all the way to finished solar panels.” In March, Tesla was reported to be negotiating a $2.9 billion purchase of Chinese solar manufacturing equipment bound for Texas. The Houston area already hosts Tesla’s Megafactory in Brookshire, where Megapack 3 production has started. Tesla said on its Q3 call that Megapack supply for 2027 is nearly sold out, and Musk wrote on X Thursday that the company is “increasing production of Megapacks as much as possible,” as demand from data centers climbs.
Tesla revealed plans to develop its own maps internally to fix Navigation issues and give owners more control over their routing.
On the company’s Q3 2026 Earnings Call, a question was asked about FSD Navigation issues, particularly speed limit recognition, parking, and routing. These are issues that surface from version to version and seem to be seriously challenging for Tesla’s AI team to resolve.
Tesla’s Head of AI, Ashok Elluswamy, said in response to the question:
“You’re totally right that we shouldn’t be depending on external people’s maps. So we are building our own maps, but not like the same way as OneMoreMap. We are building an entirely new architecture with essentially AI-based mapping and navigation.”
He continued:
“It’s going to be super awesome. It’s going to be integrated with voice. You can talk to it, ask for different routes. It’s going to learn your personalized preferences, plus the fleet preferences. The collective intelligence of all the cars is going to flow into making the maps and navigation super cool.”
Elluswamy said this issue should be confronted, and the mapping should be available for people by the time the v15 release starts deploying to customers.
“And over the next several months,” he added, “it’s just going to take over all of the navigation functions, parking, destination handling. And it will know you better than you know yourself in some regard for the driving task, and then handle it fully.”
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Navigation is perhaps the most notable complaint with FSD, and although it has gotten better, it is still flawed. Much of the time, FSD will take people on routes that are not preferred by the driver, but Tesla tried to combat this with a routing feature in the Summer 2026 Update.
Tesla currently relies on Google for map data, but it is sort of counterintuitive to believe the company would rely on a third party for this. These improvements will be welcome, as routing and navigation have been such a pain point for so many owners for so long.
Quotes via Motley Fool
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Tesla’s secretive “Project Crystal Sun” gets a big green light in Texas
