Tesla has had nineteen total vehicle recalls in 2022, affecting 3,769,572 vehicles. While there are plenty of misconceptions and false information floating around about Tesla’s recalls population, there are plenty of truths to be told.
Automotive recalls can be put into effect for some of the most insignificant reasons, but vehicles are required to be as safe as possible and must abide by the NHTSA’s rigorous standards. The goal of the agency is to protect consumers by holding manufacturers accountable, and while recalls are pushed every day, Tesla’s are undoubtedly a focus of media as the company fends off many of the mistakes with software updates.
However, some instances require owners to bring vehicles into a Service Center for repair. This happens less often to Teslas, as many issues can be fixed through a simple firmware download while an owner sleeps.
That still does not stop the narrative regarding Tesla and many other EV makers and nearly-routine OTA updates to fix vehicle issues. Recall definitions have been questioned over the past few years as companies adopt a software-first mentality, contributing to the overall narrative of poor vehicle quality in EVs.
Tesla Recall Misconception #1: The Car Company with the Most Recalls? Not Quite.
Some relatively influential figures have said Tesla recalls cars more frequently than any other company on Earth, but that is not true.
Even with its most recent recall, which fixed over 300,000 cars with faulty tail lights, Tesla is not the most recalled automaker. The NHTSA currently lists Ford Motor Company as the most recalled automotive brand in 2022 thus far.
Ford has issued 63 recalls this year, affecting over 8,000,000 vehicles. This is 21 more recalls than Volkswagen, the automaker with the second-most for the year. VW’s recalls have affected less than 1,000,000 vehicles in the United States.
-
- NHTSA data
-
- NHTSA data
Tesla Recall Misconception #2: How many Tesla recalls actually require physical service?
Of Tesla’s 19 recalls in 2022, 12 were fixed through Over-the-Air software updates, which download and are installed automatically to fix any qualifying issue. Tesla has fixed everything from windshield defrosting issues, to rolling stops for Full Self-Driving, to delays in backup cameras with software updates.
Six of Tesla’s nineteen recalls in 2022 have required physical repairs from Tesla Service. In total, 31,427 cars have been affected by these types of recalls. That is less than 1 percent of Tesla’s total recall population for the year in the United States, NHTSA data shows.
The final recall was a vehicle replacement for a single Model X owner whose unit lacked a body structure reinforcement bracket in the second row of seating.
Tesla Recall Misconception #3: Over-the-Air Updates are not recalls
While the definition of a recall has been called into question by a number of notable people, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk, OTA updates do still qualify as recalls, technically.
The NHTSA gave more details to Teslarati in February about what qualifies as a vehicle recall. The agency said manufacturers must disclose an unreasonable safety risk to consumers, vehicle owners, dealers, and others when it is discovered. A recall qualifies as any unreasonable safety risk present in a vehicle, and if it is remedied in any way, even by a software update, it counts as a recall.
Recall definitions are highly controversial, with many notable Tesla community members making light of the situation.
I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.
If you have any questions about Tesla recalls, be sure to reach out to me through email. I’ll do my best to clear up any confusion or concerns you might have.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
