News
Tesla Model Y police cruiser draws criticism from taxpayers
The Tesla Model Y police cruiser, which joined the Hastings on Hudson, New York Police Department in late December, is receiving criticism from taxpayers. Unfortunately, many of those who have expressed their concerns about the vehicle’s cost are not fully aware of the long-term savings that the Model Y will give taxpayers and the police department.
The Hastings on Hudson PD posted a video of their new Model Y crossover, equipped with flashing red and blue lights and the necessary equipment for an officer of the law. It was the first-ever Model Y to be used as a police cruiser, and the Department indicated that the all-electric crossover would serve “as the police car assigned to the Detective Division.”
Despite the environmental and long-term cost-effectiveness of the Tesla, many Social Media users were critical of the Department’s choice to purchase the car in place of the traditional Dodge Charger cruiser that many forces across the country have utilized for transportation. The widespread idea that Teslas are only affordable by the rich and famous is still presently being used as an argument based on what Twitter users are saying, even though the automaker has been able to release the Model 3 and Model Y at price points that are affordable for many people. The price alone, along with the industry-leading battery tech and performance of Tesla’s cars, is what has made them the most popular EVs in the United States and China.
One Twitter user gained over 46,000 Retweets and over 172,000 Likes by stating, “This is gonna be parked outside of a public school with a paper shortage, old textbooks, and one computer per classroom.”
A user on Facebook replied to the Hastings on Hudson PD’s Facebook post directly, saying, “DEFUND THE POLICE! Why is this needed?”
The problem with making statements like those above is that the price comparison of the Model Y to a traditional Dodge Charger is not all that different. When factoring in the maintenance and fuel savings that the Department will have in the coming years, the Tesla will be substantially less expensive than the Charger, which will require regular oil changes and maintenance that is more likely to be needed when dealing with a gas car that has so many moving parts.
The cost-effectiveness of driving a Tesla instead of a Charger has already been proven by the Bargersville, Indiana Police Department, who purchased a Model 3 for a cruiser in August 2019. In the first 13 months, the Department saved $6,755 in fuel alone. A Charger, which the Bargersville PD maintained while also operating the Model 3, had a yearly cost of $7,580 for gas and maintenance. The Model 3’s annual cost was only $825.
Actual numbers for 1 year of Tesla model 3 police car pic.twitter.com/lGESk0LgIR
— Todd Bertram (@ToddBertram1) September 29, 2020
Meanwhile, the Dodge Charger Scat Pack, which is a frequently-purchased variant of the vehicle for Police Departments, had an MSRP of $40,500. The Model Y’s Long Range AWD variant starts at just $49,990. Based on the Bargersville PD’s figures, the $9,490 difference would be canceled out in about a year and a half.
While there is plenty of criticism floating around social media because of the Police Department’s choice to purchase a Tesla, the real issue is the consistently spread misinformation. The environmental advantages of driving a Tesla over a powerful, gas-thirsty Charger are enough to convince some, but the long-term savings of going with the EV option are enough to sway even the most critical of skeptics.
What do you think? Leave a comment down below. Got a tip? Email us at tips@teslarati.com or reach out to me at joey@teslarati.com.
H/t: Business Insider
Elon Musk
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a recent podcast interview that Tesla is not who Americans should look at to beat Chinese carmakers.
The comments have sparked quite a bit of outrage from Tesla fans on X, the social media platform owned by Elon Musk.
Farley said that Chinese automakers are better examples of how to beat competitors. He said (via the Rapid Response Podcast):
“If you’re an American and you want us to beat the Chinese in the car business, you’re all going to want to pay attention, not necessarily to Tesla. Nothing against Tesla—they’ve been doing great—but they really don’t have an updated vehicle. The best in the business for us, cost-wise and competition-wise, supply chain, manufacturing expertise, and the I.P. in the vehicle, was really BYD. In this next cycle of EV customers in the U.S., they want pickups and utilities and all these different body styles. But they want them at $30,000, not $50,000. Like the first inning, they want them affordably.”
Despite Farley’s synopsis, it is worth mentioning that Tesla had the best-selling passenger vehicle in the world last year, and in China in March, as the Model Y continued its global dominance over other vehicles.
Musk responded to Farley’s comments by stating:
“This is before Supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.”
This is before supervised FSD is approved in China. Limiting factor is production output in Shanghai.
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 19, 2026
Interestingly, Farley has been one of the most hellbent CEOs in terms of a legacy automaker standpoint to push the EV effort. It did not go according to plan, as Ford took a $19.5 billion charge and retreated from its EV push in late 2025.
Ford cancels all-electric F-150 Lightning, announces $19.5 billion in charges
Instead, Ford is “doubling down on its affordable” EVs and said it would pivot from its previous plans.
Reaction from Tesla fans was pretty much how you would expect. Many said they have lost a lot of respect for Farley after his comments; others believe he is the last CEO anyone should be taking advice on EVs from.
Nevertheless, Farley’s plans are bold and brash; many consider Tesla the most ideal company to replicate EV efforts from. It will be interesting to see if Ford can rebound from this big adjustment, and hopefully, Farley’s plans to replicate efforts from BYD work out the way he hopes.
Elon Musk
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
NASA awarded SpaceX a $175 million Mars rover contract while the White House proposes cutting the mission.
NASA just signed a $175.7 million contract with SpaceX to launch a Mars rover that the White House is simultaneously trying to defund. The contract, awarded on April 16, 2026, tasks SpaceX’s Falcon Heavy with launching the European Space Agency’s (ESA) Rosalind Franklin rover from Kennedy Space Center in Florida, no earlier than late 2028. It would mark the first time SpaceX has ever sent a payload to Mars.
Under NASA’s Rosalind Franklin Support and Augmentation project, known as ROSA, the agency is providing braking engines for the rover’s descent stage, radioisotope heater units that use decaying plutonium to keep the rover warm on the Martian surface, additional electronics, and a mass spectrometer instrument, as noted by SpaceNews.
Those nuclear heating units are the reason an American rocket was required at all. U.S. export controls on radioisotope technology mean any payload carrying them must launch on a domestic vehicle, which narrowed the field to SpaceX and United Launch Alliance. Falcon Heavy’s pricing made it the practical choice.
SpaceX is quietly becoming the U.S. Military’s only reliable rocket
Falcon Heavy debuted in February 2018 and has 11 launches to its record. The rocket has not flown since October 2024, when it sent NASA’s Europa Clipper toward Jupiter. The three-core design, built from modified Falcon 9 first stages, gives it the lift capacity needed for deep space planetary missions that a single Falcon 9 cannot reach.
The Rosalind Franklin rover has been sitting in storage in Europe for years. It was originally due to launch in 2022 as a joint mission with Russia, but Russia’s invasion of Ukraine ended that partnership, leaving the rover built but stranded without a launch vehicle or landing hardware. NASA stepped back in through a 2024 agreement with ESA to rescue the mission. The rover is designed to drill up to two meters below the Martian surface in search of evidence of past life, a science objective no previous mission has attempted at that depth.
The contradiction at the center of this story is hard to ignore. The White House’s fiscal year 2027 budget proposal included no funding for ROSA and did not mention the mission at all in the detailed congressional justification document released April 3.
Musk has long argued that reaching Mars is not optional. “We don’t want to be one of those single planet species, we want to be a multi-planet species.” Whether this particular mission survives Washington’s budget fight, the Falcon Heavy contract means SpaceX is now formally on record as the rocket that could get humanity’s next Mars science mission off the ground.
The timing of this contract carries extra weight given that SpaceX filed confidentially with the SEC in early April and is targeting an IPO roadshow in the week of June 8. It would be the largest public offering in history.
Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) is set to hold its Earnings Call for the first quarter of 2026 on Wednesday, and there are a lot of interesting things that are swirling around in terms of speculation from investors.
With the company’s executives, including CEO Elon Musk, answering a handful of questions that investors submit through the Say platform, fans want to know a lot of things about a lot of things.
These five questions come from Retail Investors, who are normal, everyday shareholders:
- When will we have the Optimus v3 reveal? When will Optimus production start, since we ended the Model S and Model X production earlier than mid-year? What’s the expected Optimus production rate exiting this year? What are the initial targeted skills?
- What milestones are you targeting for unsupervised FSD and Robotaxi expansion beyond Austin this year, and how will that drive recurring revenue?
- How will Hardware 3 cars reach Unsupervised Full Self-Driving?
- When do you expect Unsupervised Full Self-Driving to reach customer cars?
- When will Robotaxi expand past its current limited rollout?
Additionally, these are currently the three questions that are slated to be answered by Institutional Firms, which also answer a handful of questions during the call:
- Now that FSD has been approved in the Netherlands and is expected to launch across Europe this summer, can you discuss your Robotaxi strategy for the region?
- What enabled you to finish the AI5 tapeout early and were there any changes to the original vision? Last week, Elon said AI5 will go into Optimus and the Supercomputer, but one month ago said it would go into the Robotaxi. Has AI5 been dropped from the vehicle roadmap?
- Given the recent NHTSA incident filings, can you update us on the Robotaxi safety data? If safety validation remains the primary bottleneck, why not deploy thousands of vehicles to accelerate the removal of the safety driver?
The questions range through every current Tesla project, including FSD expansion and Optimus. However, many of the answers we will get will likely be repetitive answers we’ve heard in the past.
This is especially pertinent when the questions about when Unsupervised FSD will reach customer cars: we know Musk will say that it will happen this year. Is Tesla capable of that? Maybe. But a more transparent answer that is more revealing of a true timeline would be appreciated.
Hardware 3 owners are anxiously awaiting the arrival of FSD v14 Lite, which was promised to them last year for a release sometime this year.
The Earnings Call is set to take place on Wednesday at market close.
Ford CEO Farley says Tesla is not who to look at for EV expertise
SpaceX wins its first MARS contract but it comes with a catch
