News
Tesla’s next-gen Roadster would likely have ‘Track Mode’ refined by the Model 3 Performance
The next-generation Roadster is set to become the golden standard of Tesla’s electric cars. The all-electric supercar is the very definition of a “Halo Car,” a vehicle designed to showcase the full capabilities of the automaker. The next-gen Roadster’s specs are practically unheard of, such as its 0-60 mph time of 1.9 seconds, its sub-9-second quarter-mile time, its top speed of over 250 mph, and its 200 kWh battery that gives a range of 620 miles per charge.
Being Tesla’s halo car, the next-gen Roadster would likely annihilate any competition on the quarter-mile. Vehicles such as the Model S P100D and the Model X P100D, after all, are known for besting gas-powered supercars on drag races, and those are essentially family cars that just happen to be really quick. That said, inasmuch as the straight-line performance of the next-gen Roadster is all but assured, the vehicle’s capability to handle the demands of track driving are still up for question. Fortunately, Tesla appears to have addressed this through a feature found in the Model 3 Performance — Track Mode.
The Model 3 Performance is so far the only vehicle in Tesla’s lineup that has Track Mode. In a statement to Road and Track, Michael Neumeyer, Tesla’s Manager of Chassis Controls, stated that the Model 3 Performance’s Track Mode is not like similar features found in other vehicles, since “(Tesla’s) Track Mode doesn’t disable features, it adds them.” Elon Musk also provided more details about the feature in a recent interview with popular YouTube tech reviewer Marques Brownlee, where he described the feature as an “Expert User Mode” for drivers.
“Track Mode will open up a lot of settings. You can adjust settings, and it’s kinda like an ‘Expert User Mode.’ You can sort of adjust traction control, adjust battery temperature. You can basically configure a bunch of things, and it will tell you, like ‘Hey, you know if you do this, it’s a bit risky. You’re gonna wear out your brakes sooner; you might blow a circuit.’ But like, it’ll be clear — like, you know, this is the risk you’re taking. It’s kinda like if you have a graphics card in a computer. You can go in there and change the settings and you can overclock things,” Musk said.
From the perspective of the next-generation Roadster’s expected release in 2020, it appears that Tesla’s rollout of Track Mode in the Model 3 Performance is not just intended to give the electric sedan a considerable selling point — it also appears to be an excellent way for the company to gather data for the all-electric supercar’s own Track Mode (Track Mode V2, perhaps?). Considering that the Roadster is a halo vehicle, there is a very good chance that it would include the feature, and by the time the car gets released in 2020, Tesla would have probably refined Track Mode considerably based on data gathered from the Model 3 Performance. In a way, this makes the Model 3 Performance an even more compelling purchase today, considering that it might have a feature that would eventually be shared with the next-gen Roadster.
When the next-generation Roadster was unveiled last year, Elon Musk dubbed the vehicle as a “hardcore smackdown to gasoline-powered cars.” Later tweets from Elon Musk suggest that Tesla is actually looking to push even more boundaries for the next-gen Roadster. One of these is equipping a variant of the vehicle with actual rocket tech from SpaceX, which, according to Musk, should give the all-electric supercar notable boosts in speed and handling. Elon Musk also mentioned that the next-gen Roadster would be equipped with an “Augmented Mode” feature that will help drivers operate the vehicle.
For the next-generation Roadster to become a true halo car, it must prove its worth in both straight-line races and on the racetrack. If Tesla manages to tune the all-electric supercar to be robust enough to endure extended track driving, the next-gen Roadster could very well find itself beside other legendary halo cars in the automotive industry, such as the iconic Ford GT and the Ferrari F40.
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
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 to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
