Munro Live has become a channel where car expert Sandy Munro can educate the public on the inner workings of vehicles. In his latest video, Munro doesn’t hold back and spits out truths about the US government’s approach towards improving the local auto industry and its chosen champions in the fight to dominate the global car market.
Munro drives home two main points in his video. First, American EV maker Tesla doesn’t get the recognition or credit it deserves, particularly regarding their technological advancements like its artificial intelligence development. Second, legacy OEMs such as General Motors and Ford don’t have the technology to beat Chinese automakers in the global car market, specifically when talking about autonomous driving technologies.
Munro’s Tesla AI Day Review
Munro seemed very impressed by the technology and progress Tesla revealed during its AI day event. In his video, he particularly focused on Tesla’s D1 chip, which was developed in-house.
“It defies the imagination. One chip, one chip that Tesla has developed in recent history here could take the place of pretty much any major computer that might’ve been hanging around in the early 2000’s. These advancements are things that will save lives. Lots of lives,” he said.
While Tesla AI Day seemed to be a success by Munro’s standards, the government’s reaction to Tesla incurred his ire. He noticed that the same week Tesla AI Day took place, both the NHTSA and US Congress started investigating the EV maker’s Autopilot system.
To put things in perspective, Munro spit out some facts about vehicle safety. He shared that 212,500 vehicles fires were responsible for 560 civilian deaths in 2018. Teslarati was able to confirm Munro’s numbers on vehicle fires with National Fire Protection Association (NFPA).
In 2018, a little over 17 million vehicles were sold in the United States, and EVs only made up 2% of total vehicle sales. A total of about 360,000 electric vehicles were sold in 2018, and 38% of that number was just the Tesla Model 3.
Over the years, Tesla vehicles and fires have been a mainstay in mainstream media (MSM). With regards to EV fires, Munro pointed out that gasoline burns easier than batteries and even invited people to try it out—although his video editors warned people against doing so at home. According to the NFPA, collisions were the main cause of vehicle fires that resulted in death.
Munro’s Rant
After spitting some facts about electric vehicle safety. Munro drove his point home. “I’ve driven almost every self-driving car or even autopilot car and it’s crap,” Munro said about the progress legacy OEMs have made with autonomous technology. He chided the government for continuously praising traditional automakers for their “participation” in self-driving development while continuously bashing Tesla for making actual progress in the field.
He also noted that Tesla was the only US car company that still made true, blue American vehicles that could trump the main competition in the global autonomous car market: China’s upcoming EV makers that are just as focused on tech as Tesla.
“The Chinese are creating [self-driving] systems right now that are equivalent or better than anything GM, VW, BMW, Daimler, Toyota, Honda, Kia, Ford, and anybody else that’s out there is gonna be making, and we’re crushing the only source of real American ingenuity? Are you kidding me?” Munro remarked.
Overall, Munro’s message was clear: veteran OEMs in the United States and the traditional auto sector in general are on track to be overtaken by fast-moving, upstart automakers in China that prioritize tech and innovation in their vehicles. Tesla is ahead of the pack right now, but if the company slows down due to continued resistance from the powers-that-be, then it would not be surprising if China’s champions like NIO and Xpeng become the golden standard for in-car tech and autonomous driving in the near future.
Watch Sandy Munro’s self-described “rant” in the video below.
The Teslarati team would appreciate hearing from you. If you have any tips, reach out to me at maria@teslarati.com or via Twitter @Writer_01001101.
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
