News
Tesla is ending the era of half-hearted, compliance electric cars
Carried forward by the momentum of electric vehicles like the Tesla Model 3, upcoming EVs from experienced carmakers such as Porsche and Volvo are showing a trend in the auto industry — from this point on, the automotive market will be fought with electric cars, and there will be no turning back.
It might be difficult to imagine today considering the success of the Model 3 and the influx of electric vehicles from veteran carmakers, but there was once a time when EVs were mostly half-hearted attempts whose primary purpose was to meet the mandates set by the California Air Resource Board (CARB). The EVs produced during this period even earned a very appropriate moniker — compliance cars. Among these were the Ford Focus EV, GM’s Spark EV, the Fiat 500e, the RAV4 EV, and the Honda Fit EV, all of which were adequate vehicles, but are costly and compromised in range and cargo compared to their gas-powered counterparts.
During the height of the compliance car era, some companies opted to pursue a different path. Among these is Nissan, whose all-electric vehicle, the Leaf, was sold across the United States. The Leaf would go on to be one of the best-selling EVs in the market. Tesla also saw a lot of growth in but a few years, bringing to market the Model X SUV and the Model 3 midsize sedan. Just like the Leaf, Tesla’s electric cars sold well, finding a strong following among consumers for who prefer the company’s no-compromises approach when it comes to the safety, performance, tech, and features of its vehicles. Tesla’s momentum never really stopped, as seen in the earlier-than-expected launch of the $35,000 Standard Model 3 recently.
It could be said that Elon Musk’s tenacity and his stubborn refusal to give up when faced with large challenges is a reason behind Tesla’s success. With Tesla all but proving that there is a demand for well-designed electric vehicles, other carmakers followed suit. In 2018 alone, several electric cars from established manufacturers were released, headlined by the Jaguar I-PACE, the Audi e-tron SUV, and the Mercedes-Benz EQC. Unlike compliance cars of years past, these vehicles were hyped as essential entries into their respective companies’ shift towards electric mobility. Nevertheless, some of these vehicles, such as the EQC, still carried over much of its gas-powered siblings’ characteristics, such as a front trunk full of components.
More recent electric vehicles from experienced carmakers seem to be better-designed. The Polestar 2 from Volvo, for one, proved impressive during its launch. With its dual motors that produce 408 hp, its deep integration of Google’s Android software, and a starting price of $45,000, the Polestar 2 can serve as an alternative for buyers who do not wish to purchase a Model 3. The Porsche Taycan, which is expected to be unveiled later this year, was also carefully designed from the ground-up as a high-performance electric car. Porsche has fully committed to electrification, with the company retiring its diesel lineup in favor of greener options. In the same way that the Polestar 2 can be an alternative to the Model 3, the Taycan can also be the perfect vehicle for buyers who wish to purchase a large sedan that is not a Tesla Model S.
-
- Porsche Taycan rendering via TaycanForum.com
The Polestar 2 and the Porsche Taycan. (Photo: Polestar, TaycanForum.com)
If there is anything more that experienced automakers can do, it is to produce their premium electric vehicles in large quantities. Porsche, despite being a low-volume carmaker, is adopting this strategy, with the Taycan’s initial 20,000 a year output being changed to 40,000 per year. Volvo is planning to produce a decent number of Polestar 2 every year as well, with the company planning on an output “north of” 50,000 units per year. This is something highlighted by Elon Musk in a tweet earlier this year, when he noted that Tesla’s competition is “not the small trickle of non-Tesla electric cars being produced, but rather the enormous flood of gasoline cars pouring out of the world’s factories every day.”
Elon Musk will be the first person to remind anyone that Tesla’s primary goal has always been to accelerate the advent of sustainable transport. Considering the influx of electric vehicles from veteran carmakers, as well as seemingly solid entries from younger companies like Rivian, it appears that finally, after years of swimming against the current, the auto industry is finally getting on board with Tesla’s mission. For Elon Musk, at least, it appears that his Master Plan, which outlines his vision for sustainable transportation, is coming together.
Turn-by-turn navigation is not new technology.
For over two decades, drivers have relied on Garmin, TomTom, and later smartphone apps like Google Maps and Waze to receive precise, reliable directions. These systems have guided millions safely through unfamiliar cities, highways, and backroads with remarkable effectiveness. They handle real-time traffic, construction detours, and complex intersections with minimal fuss.
Yet Tesla, the company that promised revolutionary Full Self-Driving (FSD), continues to struggle with this foundational capability. As FSD (Supervised) v14.3.4 has started rolling out to cars this week, navigation remains its glaring Achilles’ heel, undermining the entire autonomous vision.
Tesla Summon got insanely good in FSD v14.3.2 — Navigation? Not so much
Tesla’s FSD excels in many driving behaviors—smooth acceleration, confident lane changes in ideal conditions, and responsive handling of visible obstacles. However, when it comes to following a route accurately, the system falters repeatedly.
Owners report wrong turns, missed exits, inefficient routing through local roads instead of highways, phantom speed limit errors, and even directing vehicles to building rear entrances. Interventions for navigation issues often outnumber those for core driving maneuvers. Tesla has begun surveying owners specifically about these errors, acknowledging the problem after years of complaints.
Navigation is perhaps my biggest complaint when it comes to FSD, because sometimes, we do know better. Some of us have been living in our areas for our entire lives, but even those who have not have years or even decades of experience driving on local roads. We might know a little better about routing.
But the navigation mistakes are more than just FSD potentially taking a slightly different route that may or may not save you a few minutes. Sometimes, they’re genuinely mind-boggling.
This isn’t just annoying; it cascades into broader failures. A flawed route plan confuses the AI’s decision-making, leading to hesitant behavior, unnecessary disengagements, or dangerous maneuvers like attempting impossible U-turns or ignoring clear ramps. In a system meant to operate with minimal supervision, unreliable navigation erodes trust.
More often than not, false or plain incorrect navigation is what causes me to interrupt FSD operation. Unfortunately, I believe the latest FSD version is the worst example of it, and it leads me to believe that Tesla might be making some changes; they’ve just made them in the wrong direction.
It makes you wonder: Why is a company that has done so much with the progress of FSD and autonomy struggling so much with navigation, something that is not new and has been around a long time?
Multiple Data Sources
First, Tesla’s navigation relies on a fragile patchwork of multiple data sources—Google Maps, TomTom, OpenStreetMap, Valhalla, and its own fleet-derived data—stitched together rather than a single authoritative map. When these conflict on lane geometry, road status, or turn details, the system hesitates or chooses incorrectly.
Traditional GPS providers maintain centralized, regularly validated databases with professional curation and rapid updates. Tesla’s hybrid approach, while innovative in crowdsourcing, introduces inconsistencies that a purely vision-based or end-to-end AI approach may not easily reconcile in real time.
Persistent Learning
FSD seems to struggle with persistent learning from driver interventions.
Unlike consumer apps that quickly adapt to repeated corrections or user preferences (e.g., avoiding certain routes or remembering habitual detours), Tesla’s FSD often fails to internalize fixes on the same trip or across similar scenarios. Owners note making the same manual override multiple times without the routing engine updating its behavior meaningfully.
This stems from the neural architecture prioritizing real-time perception and control over long-term route memory and personalization, making navigation feel rigid and “opinionated” compared to the adaptive logic in Waze or Google Maps.
I noticed that when I asked Grok to try and get me home a certain way (a way that FSD routinely took in the past because it was the most efficient), it had to place a waypoint between my location at the time and my house. When I went to edit the waypoint out, as Grok had placed it for a way to get FSD to get off the highway at the right exit, it was stumped again, rerouted, and took a longer way home.
The next thing I’ve noticed, and this might be controversial, is that Nav has gotten even worse.
I think that might actually be a good thing; Tesla seems to be adjusting it. They just need to adjust it the opposite way.
The car is taking extremely strange routes to very… https://t.co/UHg3tVfNA2
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
Reasoning, Scaling, and Intuition
Third, scaling navigation for unsupervised or robotaxi ambitions requires not just accuracy but adaptability and user-like reasoning. Current FSD often defaults to single routes that ignore driver preferences or real-world nuances like time-of-day traffic patterns. It fails to match the intuitive, context-aware planning that traditional systems have refined over the years.
Resolving navigation is critical for several reasons. Practically, it is the backbone of any autonomous journey: without trustworthy routing, the car cannot reliably reach destinations, rendering FSD useless for robotaxis or hands-free commutes. Safety depends on it—mismatched plans create hesitation in merges or intersections, increasing accident risk.
Economically, Tesla’s valuation and future hinge on FSD delivering unsupervised driving; persistent navigation flaws delay regulatory approval and erode consumer confidence. For owners who paid premiums for FSD, these issues represent unfulfilled promises. While it is unlikely Tesla will lose too many customers due to bad navigation, some will be frustrated with the constant need for human input.
Tesla has achieved miracles in electric vehicles and battery tech. Mastering turn-by-turn—technology Garmin nailed in the early 2000s—should not be this hard. By investing in tighter data integration, faster learning loops from interventions, and more intuitive routing algorithms, Tesla could close this gap.
Until then, FSD’s navigation struggles highlight a humbling truth: even the most ambitious innovator must sometimes master the basics before conquering the future.
A Tesla Cybertruck driver in the United Kingdom had their all-electric pickup seized by local police in the Greater Manchester area after the department cited “legitimate concerns.”
Last Thursday, police saw the pickup on the roads and decided to pull the driver over. Greater Manchester Police said:
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a collision with the Cybertruck.”
🚨 A Tesla Cybertruck, which is illegal to drive in the UK due to safety concerns, has been seized by police in Greater Manchester
“Whilst this may seem trivial to some, legitimate concerns exist around the safety of other road users or pedestrians if they were involved in a… pic.twitter.com/cqhdPok3DM
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) June 16, 2026
The Cybertruck in question was, according to the BBC, registered and insured abroad and was confiscated. The driver, who is a UK resident, was reported.
The Greater Manchester Police Department then added:
“The Tesla Cybertruck is not road-legal in the UK and does not hold a certificate of conformity.”
The Cybertruck cannot be legally driven in the UK because it has no UK Type Approval for operation in the country. This is due to some safety concerns, which are related to its angular shape and design. The stainless steel exoskeleton has sharp edges and projections that violate UK/EU rules on pedestrian protection.
Tesla has considered creating what it referred to as an “international version” that would be approved for operation in Europe. However, there has been no real movement on that front by the company, as it has been focused on the Robotaxi rollout primarily.
A new report claims that Apple is in the process of developing what would be the missing link for Tesla to get CarPlay.
Apple and Tesla have been reportedly working together for some time to give Tesla owners the opportunity to utilize CarPlay within their vehicles. While many owners are more than happy with Tesla’s in-house UI, which is seamless, effective, and smooth, some still want CarPlay, which does have its advantages.
A report from 9to5Mac now states that a new CarPlay technology that was highlighted during the Worldwide Developers Conference (WWDC) would potentially be the bridge between Tesla and Apple. With the addition of a feature known as “Route Sharing,” which gives a navigation app the ability to share routing data with the vehicle, Tesla would be able to launch CarPlay in its vehicles, the report states.
CarPlay has not been a priority for Tesla because it has done extremely well with its in-house UI, but some drivers are just used to it. Additionally, it could improve Tesla’s subpar Navigation or offer improved app capabilities, especially with iMessage.
Route Sharing is an intended addition to CarPlay’s iteration in iOS 26.4, which was released in March:
The addition of CarPlay would undoubtedly be welcome, but at the same time, it seems like Tesla realizes it is not of the utmost priority. There are so many things that Tesla is working on currently within its own vehicles, especially attempting to solve self-driving.
Back in February, Bloomberg had reported that Tesla was still working on bringing CarPlay to its vehicles, but it had not due to app compatibility issues and incredibly low adoption rates of iOS 26.
This bottleneck could buy Tesla the proper amount of time to develop CarPlay for its vehicles. It would be a welcome addition, and could be brought on with either the Summer or Fall 2026 Software Updates.
Tesla’s Navigation Nightmare: Why the easiest part of FSD might be the hardest
Tesla Cybertruck driver gets pickup seized for ‘legitimate concerns’ in UK
