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.
Tesla shared a striking video showcasing the decommissioning of the original Model S and Model X assembly line at its Fremont Factory in Northern California. Completed in just 46 days, the teardown involved heavy machinery dismantling concrete pits, removing robotic arms and conveyors, and clearing the space for new production.
The post, captioned “End of an era,” captured both the end of a historic chapter and Tesla’s aggressive pivot toward its next major initiative, Optimus.
End of an era: Decommissioning the original Model S & X assembly line in just 46 days pic.twitter.com/kGEdfhl62h
— Tesla Manufacturing (@gigafactories) July 10, 2026
The decision to retire the Model S and Model X originated during Tesla’s Q4 2025 Earnings Call in late January 2026. CEO Elon Musk announced that production of the company’s flagship sedan and SUV would wind down by the end of Q2 2026, describing it as bringing the programs to an “honorable discharge.”
Custom orders ceased around early April 2026, with the final vehicles rolling off the line in early May. A special signature delivery ceremony on May 20 marked the emotional close for these vehicles, which had defined Tesla’s early success and luxury EV segment since the Model S launch in 2012.
The primary reason for tearing down the lines was to repurpose the valuable factory floor space for high-volume production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot. Musk had indicated on Earnings Calls that the Fremont S/X line would be replaced by a dedicated Optimus manufacturing line targeting a capacity of one million units per year.
This move aligns with Tesla’s broader strategic shift from traditional vehicle manufacturing toward robotics and artificial intelligence, leveraging the company’s expertise in autonomy, AI training, and high-volume production.
Optimus, Tesla’s general-purpose humanoid robot, is designed to perform repetitive or dangerous tasks in factories, warehouses, and eventually homes. Powered by Tesla’s AI and Neural Networks, it aims to be a versatile, affordable platform. Production of Optimus Gen 3 is already underway in limited form at Fremont, with full-scale output on the converted line expected to begin in late July or August.
Tesla is targeting rapid scaling, with internal ambitions pointing toward tens or even hundreds of thousands of units annually by the end of 2026.
Longer-term, Tesla is constructing a much larger second-generation Optimus facility at Giga Texas, with potential capacity reaching millions of units per year. The company views Optimus as a transformative product that could eventually surpass its automotive business in scale and value, enabling widespread deployment of useful robots across industries. CEO Elon Musk has even predicted it would be the most popular product of all-time.
As one era closes at Fremont, another is rapidly taking shape.
Elon Musk posted a candid admission on his social media platform X on June 9, declaring that he had been “clearly wrong” about Anthropic. The statement marked a notable reversal from his earlier skepticism toward the AI company.
In September, Musk had written, “Winning was never in the set of possible outcomes for Anthropic,” reflecting his view at the time that the startup had lacked the foundation or even the trajectory to succeed in what is an incredibly intense race for advanced artificial intelligence.
Musk’s latest post came amid discussion of Anthropic’s reliance on external compute resources. He praised the company’s progress, stating that Anthropic is “obviously currently the leader in AI” and that “no company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable,” with expectations of a strong follow-up in Mythos 2.
The tone shifted dramatically from dismissal to acknowledgement of superior performance.
I was clearly wrong about Anthropic. They are obviously currently the leader in AI. No company has released a model as good as Mythos/Fable and they will undoubtedly have Mythos 2 ready soon.
And I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor.…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 9, 2026
The context of Musk’s comments added significance. Anthropic has been operating under a recent compute deal with SpaceXAI, Musk’s AI infrastructure-focused venture. The pair entered a short-term GPU lease agreement initiated in May, providing Anthropic access to critical computing power for training and deploying its frontier models.
SpaceXAI signs agreement with Anthropic for massive AI supercomputer access
Some observers had speculated that Musk could leverage this dependency to disadvantage a rival. Musk directly addressed the possibility, writing, “I would never cut them off in a way that hurt them badly, even as a competitor. That’s not my style.”
To support his commitment to ethical competition, Musk referenced concrete examples from his other companies. Tesla famously open-sourced its entire portfolio of electric vehicle patents in 2014. The move was designed to accelerate the global adoption of sustainable transportation technology rather than protect proprietary advantages.
Tesla also made its Supercharger network available to competing electric vehicle manufacturers, transforming what could have remained an exclusive charging ecosystem into a shared infrastructure that benefits the broader industry and reduces barriers for EV adoption.
Musk further pointed to SpaceX’s practices, noting that the company launches satellites for competing commercial systems “with no increase in price or use of unfair terms.” He extended the principle to his social platform, observing that “even my worst enemies attack me on this platform,” underscoring preference for open discourse over retaliation.
These examples have illustrated Musk’s long-standing philosophy that long-term technological progress is best served by open competition and infrastructure sharing rather than leveraging market power to stifle rivals. In the fast-evolving AI sector, where compute resources and model capabilities determine leadership, Musk’s stance suggests a willingness to compete on innovation and performance alone.
Musk’s admission arrives as SpaceXAI itself advances its own frontier models while maintaining business relationships across the ecosystem. By publicly correcting his earlier assessment and reaffirming principles of fair play, Musk highlights a model of competition that prioritizes advancement of the field over short-term tactical advantages.
A Tesla analyst believes the company’s Full Self-Driving suite is close to an “inflection point,” where people will finally realize that it is more than what it appears, similar to how many view the iPhone.
Pierre Ferragu, an analyst who has covered Tesla for many years at New Street Research, says the Full Self-Driving suite is one piece of evidence supporting the view that a Tesla is more than a car. He compared it to the iPhone and noted that the high price tag seemed like a lot for a phone early on. Then people realized the iPhone was more than just something you make calls with. It made their lives simpler.
🚨 Analyst @p_ferragu says Tesla Full Self-Driving is at an “inflection point” in a recent commentary:
“A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone. As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive. Give us 2 more quarters to see… pic.twitter.com/tm6xFrjVPV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 10, 2026
Suddenly, that price tag was justified.
Tesla offers several models under the average transaction price for a new vehicle, which was above $49,000, according to Kelley Blue Book. However, that does not take into account that many people can still not afford a $35,000 vehicle. Ferragu offers his thoughts:
“Remember when the addressable market of the iPhone was 10 million units? Then people realized how good it was, and now, nearly 250m are sold every year.
A similar evolution for Tesla is still on the table. A Tesla is not a car, the same way an iPhone was not a phone.
A model 3 at $35k + $100 per month is too expensive for most, but only as a car, the same way a $600 iPhone was too expensive for most, until most realized it was much more than a phone.
As a tool that gets you to work peacefully every morning, it is not expensive.”
This point is valid, especially considering the iPhone’s impact on the cell phone market. There are still a handful of players, but most people you know have an iPhone. The iPhone ties into Apple’s other ecosystem of products.
This is how Tesla plans to infiltrate the automotive market, and once the company offers a fully autonomous suite, or something that can allow for unsupervised self-driving, more and more people will flock to Tesla.
Ferragu believes Tesla needs two additional quarters of development before things will truly change. He didn’t elaborate on what will happen in two quarters, but he said it will give us all time to “see where this is heading.”
It is really quite interesting to see people’s reactions when they find out what a Tesla is capable of. Full Self-Driving is a great tool for taking stress out of travel; I use it daily, and it has made it really difficult to consider taking any other car on a drive of practically any length.
To me, it is really hard to believe that people will not at least seriously consider a Tesla as their next car if they experience Full Self-Driving. This is a major point for those who argue that Tesla should advertise in some way.
Tesla shows rapid teardown of Model S and X lines, paving the way for Optimus at Fremont
Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic
