News
Tesla Model Y production at Giga Berlin will redefine ‘Elon Time’
Tesla has made strides in terms of adjusting the timeline of Model Y deliveries. From Fall of 2020, Elon Musk and his team moved it up to Summer this year. During the company’s Q4 2019 earnings call, the carmaker announced that the initial delivery of the much-awaited electric crossover will actually happen this March. This says a lot on how the Silicon Valley-based carmaker has matured through the years.
Tesla began limited production of the Model Y at its Fremont factory and it has also started building the next phase of Giga Shanghai meant for the production of the crossover SUV. Giga Berlin would be the next big thing and with its learnings from the Model Y program in Fremont and Shanghai, the production of the Model Y in Germany may help Tesla redefine “Elon Time.”
Biggest Room For Improvement
Tesla is undeniably the leader in the electric vehicle industry. Even automotive giants have acknowledged that Tesla is the standard that they need to catch up to.
Tesla has great products and a CEO with great vision but if there’s one aspect of business all loyal followers would love to see, it’s in the timely delivery of its vehicles. Depending on how efficient ongoing production is and how many standing preorders are to be served, waiting times could be a few weeks, to a month, to a few months, or even a year or so for products that are yet to be produced. Delays, such as those experienced by reservation holders of the Model X, have even inspired the meme-worthy moniker of “Elon Time,” a reference to the CEO’s optimistic target timeframes.
Tesla’s logistics does not depend on any third-party franchise dealerships like other automakers but rather its own stores and delivery centers. Elon Musk has continually strived to improve delivery times and part of the strategy is by bringing Tesla’s car factories to its customers. Thus, Giga Shanghai is set to give a strong foothold in the biggest automotive market in the globe. Then, there’s Giga Berlin that would cater to Germany and the rest of Europe.
“It kind of makes sense. But what we’re doing — or have been doing in the past was really pretty silly in making cars in California and then shipping them halfway around the world to Asia and Europe. And this created a lot of cost, because you got to ship those cars, so they got lot of finished goods, sitting on the order or waiting at the port or going through customs, you got tariffs, transport,” said Musk. This also addresses the complexity of fulfilling the build according to the regulations of different regions.
Tesla’s Transformation as a Mature Car Manufacturer
The Tesla Giga Berlin groundbreaking is expected to happen this March and Elon Musk hopes to flick the switch on of the first Gigafactory in Europe by July 2021 to begin the production of the Model Y for Germany and the rest of Europe.
Tesla has proven itself capable of sticking to timelines when it comes to building its Gigafactories. For example, It practically turned a muddy field in China into an operational car factory in 10 months. In Germany, it has been cooperating with federal and local authorities and has addressed concerns of environmental groups to get closer and closer to laying the first brick of Giga Berlin in Grunheide.
The more interesting thing to take note of is how Tesla outlined its goals for Giga Berlin.
“Phase 1 will focus on production of Model Y, with a target capacity of 10,000 vehicles per week. We estimate that during Phase 1, we will employ up to 12,000 people, with roles being filled by local residents and employees from wider Europe,” the Giga Berlin website reads.
Manufacturing cars is far from making pancakes. Tesla’s Fremont factory has a current capacity of producing 400,000 combined Model 3 and Model Y units per year. Giga Shanghai, meanwhile, aims to do 150,000 vehicles annually. To do 10,000 units per week is a gargantuan task but realizing that Elon Musk has been underpromising and over-delivering when it comes to the Model Y, perhaps Tesla has indeed started using advanced manufacturing techniques that the CEO hinted at during a Model 3 event in Shanghai.
“Model Y will also have some advanced manufacturing technology that we will reveal in the future. I think it will be exciting to show the kind of manufacturing technology associated with the Model Y and it will be exciting to learn about these technologies,” Musk said.
No one exactly knows what these manufacturing technologies are but there are speculations that the Model Y will heavily rely on casting to quickly and efficiently produce the vehicle’s essential parts. This is also what’s suggested by earlier patents of the company.
The Model Y could be the first vehicle that demonstrates the company’s improving efficiency. It unveiled the Model Y prototype in March 2019 and it’s delivering the first units this month to consumers. This could partly be due to the Model Y sharing about 75% of its DNA with its Model 3 sibling, but it reflects Tesla’s manufacturing advancements nonetheless.
New Elon Time
If Giga Berlin remains on schedule and Tesla starts Model Y production in Germany, a country that highly values punctuality, on time, it could give its sales books a good boost as the vehicle is perfectly timed for Europe’s crossover growth. Sales of compact SUVs are forecasted to be flat this year with LCM Automotive predicting only about 2 million units in the segment as carmakers transition from older vehicles to electric vehicles. As Giga Berlin begins production of the Model Y, there is an expected uptick in demand with sales rising to 2.4 million units per year to about 2.8 million by the mid-2020s.
Beyond earnings, the redefinition Elon Time by a timely Model Y production and delivery will help Tesla gain the respect of other car manufacturers, the market, and investors. The new Elon Time would further prove why Tesla has the loyal following, and why it will be like that for a foreseeable future.
Investor's Corner
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.
Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.
The Giga Texas Optimus Factory latest update … construction keeps moving fast!
Steel assembly is now only about 5 column grids from the north perimeter beam. Concrete is going in on the three upper floors, rebar is still being laid for more pours, and footing / grade-beam work… pic.twitter.com/qvFPvwnYzW
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) September 17, 2026
Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.
Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.
Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
