News
Tesla Top 5 Week in Review: Utah Bans Tesla Sales, Controversy Over Drivers Data, Model 3 Sensors, and More
What a week it was for Tesla! Reaching all-time trading highs was certainly an achievement to celebrate. So, too, was the 2017 Q1 earnings report, in which Tesla excelled in deliveries versus same month, previous year. Teslarati gets the first scoop a Model 3 release candidate in the wild, with reports of new sensors being spotted. Tesla’s company practice of divulging individual driver data became a contested topic, as did the Utah Supreme Court’s decision to prohibit Tesla direct sales to customers. Here are those stories and more on our Teslarati Top 5 Week in Review.
Tesla steamrolls US automakers to become #1 by market cap
Source: Courtesy Yahoo Finance
Tesla, Inc. (TSLA) stock, which had previously traded at $280 in February, achieved its all-time high this week, up from the March 31, 2017 close of market mark of $291.74. Tesla’s performance pushed the company’s market capitalization past that of Ford for the first time ever. Ford’s market capitalization at about $44.8 billion stood just about $3 billion under Tesla’s. Next in line for Tesla is GM’s $51.4 billion market cap. Tesla sold only a fraction of Ford’s 6.7 million cars and GM’s 10 million cars in 2016; both offer investors the comfort of healthy balance sheets and steady profits. However, Tesla investors seem willing to hold out for the company’s future potential for still higher growth ahead. Historical malaise over missed delivery targets may be dissipating.
Tesla delivers a record 25,000 Model S, X in Q1 2017, 69% increase over Q1 2016
With Model S deliveries at 3,450 and Model X deliveries at 11,550, Tesla achieved a new quarterly record to start 2017. Selling just over 25,000 vehicles in Q1 represented a 69% increase over the same month, Q1 2016. Tesla argues that vehicle deliveries symbolize only one measure of the company’s financial performance; quarterly financial results, they say, depend on a variety of factors, including the cost of sales, foreign exchange movements, and mix of directly leased vehicles.
New sensors spotted on Tesla Model 3: Autopilot 2.0 could have 10 cameras
Up until Tuesday, the Model 3 was assumed to have eight cameras: three facing forwards, two in the B-pillar between the front and rear doors, two in the front fenders, and one in the rear by the hatch latch. (Radar and ultrasonic sensors will also provide the computer with contextual data.) The recent sighting indicates that two additional sensors are located by the C-pillars between the rear door and back. This is significant because Tesla CEO Elon Musk has repeatedly stated that the Model 3 design is meant to include autonomous driving. With a dashboard that lacks a speedometer on the driver’s side and, instead, will fade in and out of opacity on the central control screen, the Model 3 technology evolution will be fascinating. Its sensors and cameras will provide crucial data about the vehicle’s surroundings, bringing the future to today.
Tesla defends its right to release individual driver data to disprove claims
Tesla’s company policies about owner privacy has been under scrutiny this week, with accusations that it divulges drivers’ performance information in order to protect its self-driving car technology. Unlike other research institutions, Tesla does not acquire permission from its drivers, who are supplying data about self-driving technology system responses. Moreover, while the company has disseminated specific driver information to the media following crashes, it has refused thus far to share that same data with the drivers. Some accidents involving Tesla all-electric vehicles have involved the Tesla Autopilot system, but in 2016 the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration cleared Tesla of any wrong-doing in a fatal crash in which Autopilot was engaged.
Tesla loses 5-0 battle in Utah over right to sell direct to consumers
The Utah Supreme Court this week has upheld a previous ruling which prohibits Tesla and other automakers from selling directly to customers. Tesla contested Utah’s claim of manufacturers and dealer owners being one and the same, saying its direct sales to customers distinguish it from independent dealerships. In essence, the Utah Supreme Court justices chose not to address when Utah law does or does not block an automaker from direct sales.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
