News
Tesla’s next-gen Roadster is ushering in the automotive industry’s ‘Megacar’ era
Elon Musk is a man driven by his limits. The man behind electric car maker Tesla, Musk has led the company from its small Silicon Valley startup days to its current status as a $50 billion automaker with a market cap that rivals that of Ford and GM. With each vehicle that Musk releases, Tesla disrupts an industry, and with the next-generation Roadster, the CEO is aiming to create a true halo car.
Christian von Koenigsegg is a man driven by his passion. The man behind the small, exclusive supercar company Koenigsegg, Christian is known for pushing the limits of the vehicles he releases. Koenigsegg might be far smaller than supercar makers like Ferrari and Lamborghini, but the few cars that it makes shake the automotive world. The Koenigsegg Agera RS, for one, currently holds the title as one of the fastest cars in the world after it reached speeds of 278 mph. The Koenigsegg One:1, named for its equal power-to-weight ratio, also packs 1,341 horsepower, or the equivalent of one megawatt of power. Koenigsegg’s cars are so powerful that some of them actually qualify as a hypercar instead of a supercar.
When Christian von Koenigsegg heard the specs of Tesla’s next-generation Roadster, his entire company’s roadmap for the coming years was shaken. In a recent statement to Top Gear, Koenigsegg admitted that his company was completely thrown off course by the listed specs of the all-electric supercar, even admitting that the experience itself was “frustrating.”
“We kind of had our future mapped out, and then we heard about the new Tesla Roadster and its insane acceleration numbers, and we thought ‘damn that’s put the gauntlet down.’ Sure, it must be really heavy, but that kind of acceleration? That’s frustrating!” he said.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BnDT8v1hKJH/?tagged=teslaroadster
Christian noted that one of the biggest revelations by the arrival of the next-generation Tesla Roadster was that Elon Musk’s quoted specs for the vehicle were actually possible. In order to respond to the arrival of an electric car designed to deliver a “hardcore smackdown” to gas-powered vehicles, Koenigsegg and his engineers came up with a strategy that would allow one of its cars to give the Roadster some good competition.
“We thought, ‘this is not OK.’ We wondered whether it was possible, and yeah, it’s possible. Then we thought, ‘OK how do we deal with it? This is embarrassing.’ In two days we’d thought of a few things. The simplest way of putting it is like this: it’s combining direct drive, with the hybridization we have in a different format with free-valve engine technology, in a peculiar layout,” he said.
The concept that Koenigsegg and his team came up with is pretty much the fossil fuel-powered counterpart of the next-generation Tesla Roadster — one that is beyond a hypercar, perhaps even a “megacar” of sorts. Christian noted that he was partly annoyed at himself, for “needing a kick in the head to start thinking” about improving his vehicles’ acceleration.
“We’re talking 0-250 mph in 14 seconds, or something like this. It’s like, black marks all the way up to 250 mph (400 kph), pushing the combustion engine into the wall to try to make it more power dense than an EV for as long as possible. What we see with our engines, we’ve noticed that we’re just scratching the surface of what we can achieve,” he said.
https://www.instagram.com/p/BnHiOO4FYQv/?taken-by=koenigseggnewportbeach
Elon Musk threw the gauntlet at legacy automakers when he unveiled the next-generation Tesla Roadster last year, and if Christian von Koenigsegg’s reaction to the vehicle is any indication, it appears that the all-electric supercar is doing precisely what it was intended for — it is forcing automakers to see electric cars as a formidable force, and it is driving them to adapt and come up with ways to make their vehicles even better and faster.
Interestingly, such a sentiment has been echoed by Tesla’s test driver for the next-generation Roadster, Emile Bouret, earlier this year. In a segment with YouTube’s VINwiki channel, Bouret, who drove the all-electric car the whole night during its unveiling, encouraged the auto community to support projects and vehicles like the next-generation Roadster, stating that the existence of such vehicles would affect the auto industry in a positive way as a whole.
“I love that I live in a world where all these cars exist. You have Koenigseggs and Paganis and Ferraris and Lamborghinis and McLarens and Porsches and Rimacs and Teslas. So, I know there’s a lot of hate out there, but I just don’t understand it. If you’re a car person, wouldn’t you root for everybody? I’m definitely rooting for them because the world will be a better place if that car does get built and it gets on the road because other people are gonna build cars to beat it — and we’re gonna win,” he said.
Considering that Koenigsegg appears to have come up with a solution to match the next-gen Roadster, it seems that Buoret’s words are coming true. As the Tesla Roadster and Koenigsegg’s upcoming vehicle are released to the market, the era of megacars could very well begin.
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
