News
Tesla’s tumultuous relationship with Edmunds is based on love, respect, and improvement
Tesla and automotive information resource Edmunds have had an up and down relationship throughout the years. Many Tesla-loyal EV enthusiasts claim the publication has a vendetta against the Silicon Valley-based electric carmaker. Still, the truth remains that Edmunds has plenty of respect for Tesla and its cars. In a video, Edmunds‘ Manager of Feature Content Carlos Lago outlined not only what Tesla could do better with its Model Y, but also what other carmakers can learn from the hottest company in electric transportation.
Of course, many Tesla owners hold an uncanny loyalty to the carmaker who manufactured their electric vehicle. It is normal and expected. When someone spends at least $35,000 on a car, they’re going to make sure they respect the brand and its ideals. Tesla is no different, but the obsessive nature of the company’s vehicle owners makes the auto manufacturer nearly one of a kind. With Elon Musk at the helm calling the day-to-day shots, the company continues to revolutionize the idea of an electric vehicle, proving to everyone that the battery-electric powertrains don’t have to be “ugly and slow and boring like a golf cart,” like he once said on 60 Minutes.
We really, really like Tesla vehicles, and we can prove it:https://t.co/nhexJgNKFK pic.twitter.com/upTCGtG6RM
— Edmunds (@edmunds) June 8, 2020
And, to be fair, Musk’s company has proven that. Tesla has done more than enough to rid the world of the idea that a battery-powered car is a slow and ineffective mode of transportation. This idea does not mean that Tesla’s are perfect, and there are things that the company could improve on for future builds of their vehicles. Edmunds was more than happy to throw a few suggestions out there.
The improvements that Edmunds would like to see is not indicative of a belief that Tesla has a lack of quality in their cars. When the publication’s review of the Model 3 revealed some issues with panel gaps and overall build quality, Tesla improved upon the issue by confronting it head-on. One of Tesla’s most vocal critics in Bob Lutz even admitted that the Model 3’s build quality was “world-class” after the suggestions, and the improvements won the vehicle Edmunds’ “2020 EV of the Year” award.
For the most part, Tesla’s vehicles have culminated in primarily positive reviews from Edmunds. Most recently, the Model Y won over Lago in a comprehensive study that highlighted Tesla’s improved build qualities and impressive performance standards.
The Model Y crossover could be Tesla’s most popular vehicle to date. The combination of white-knuckle performance with the crossover body style that has quickly become the most popular in the U.S. launches the car into the category of massively appealing.
If Tesla can dial in a few changes that Edmunds suggests, there is a considerable chance that the Model Y can become the most popular car, EV or not, in the country. The company’s growing appeal across the globe has drawn attraction from the world’s biggest brands, who have designed their newest vehicles after Tesla’s technology and minimalist design.
Time after time, Tesla-inspired tech shows up on vehicles outside of the EV sector. The company’s sales figures, combined with customer loyalty, make Tesla a force to be reckoned with not only now, but also in the future.
Before taking Edmunds‘ suggestions as a source of negativity, try and frame it as constructive criticism. Tesla’s vehicles are not perfect, and the constant attention to detail and thirst for improvement is what has made the company so successful in the twelve years it has been building electric vehicles.
Watch Edmund’s Carlos Lago’s Long-Term review of the Model Y below.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
