News
Tesla responds to Reuters’ claims of faulty suspension issues
Tesla has posted a rebuttal to a Reuters investigation which alleged that the company had been blaming drivers for alleged vehicle abuse despite knowing that its cars’ suspension components were faulty. The issue has caught the attention of many, including Democratic Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Edward Markey (D-Mass.), both of whom have called on Tesla to initiate a recall about the reported issue.
Reuters‘ investigation indicated that Tesla had informed the NHTSA that frequent failures of components like its vehicles’ aft link were due to drive misuse. Despite this, the publication claimed that Tesla’s own engineers have tracked frequent failures of the components over the years. Tesla’s response, which was posted on X, provided a thorough rebuttal of the publication’s claims.
Tesla highlighted several issues with Reuters‘ investigation, such as its misleading headline and the lack of important context about the issue. The company also reiterated its service principles, which aim to provide the best support possible to its consumer base.
Reuters published an article that leads with a wildly misleading headline and is riddled with incomplete and demonstrably incorrect information.
This latest piece vaguely and nonsensically suggests there are thousands upon thousands of disgruntled Tesla customers. It’s…— Tesla (@Tesla) December 27, 2023
Following is Tesla’s response to Reuters‘ investigation.
Reuters published an article that leads with a wildly misleading headline and is riddled with incomplete and demonstrably incorrect information.
This latest piece vaguely and nonsensically suggests there are thousands upon thousands of disgruntled Tesla customers. It’s nonsensical because it’s nonfactual—the reality is Tesla’s customer retention is among the best and highest in the industry.
Misleading headline:
“Tesla blamed drivers for failures of parts it long knew were defective.”
Reality (buried in the article):
Tesla paid for most of the 120,000 vehicle repairs under warranty.
Manufactured story:
The customer photo represents not a failed component, but instead a post crash component that was damaged in the course of reducing the adverse effects of a collision. The customer was informed that Tesla was able to review the telemetry and understood there was a crash that resulted in this repair not being covered by warranty.
Most, if not all, manufacturer warranties exclude damages caused by a crash because that is the point of insurance coverage.
Helpful context:
Tesla has the most advanced vehicle telemetry system that can identify emerging issues, determine scope, and allow for faster vehicle and service improvements than has ever been seen in the auto industry. We take action as soon as we see a problem, something that should be celebrated as best-in-class, and is often cited by our regulators as a major safety advantage.
False accusation:
The author has conflated a noise-related (non-safety) issue with a range of unrelated and disconnected service actions. Contrary to the article’s statements based on erroneous data, Tesla is truthful and transparent with our safety regulators around the globe and any insinuation otherwise is plain wrong.
Tesla Service Principles:
a. Our service technicians and advisors diagnose, maintain and fix our customers’ cars efficiently and are not incentivized to profit off customers’ repair needs.
b. Tesla provides our service employees with excellent compensation and benefits packages. They don’t work off of commission like at other dealers who are incentivized to upsell or overcharge their customers.
c. The best service is no service. When service must be done, we fix 90%+ problems without even needing the customer present – either through over-the-air updates or with mobile service at a customer’s house or workplace.
To see Tesla’s approach in action, one can refer to this maintenance study from earlier this year, “Tesla was named the cheapest luxury car brand to maintain..” → https://autos.yahoo.com/tesla-named-cheapest-luxury-car-110000613.html
This cherry-picking approach to journalism results in missing the truth, which is a pattern in many of the negative articles about Tesla.
Using one customer’s one-sided version of events as the universal experience of all customers paints a false and misleading picture of Tesla. In reality, for every upset customer, there are hundreds more who are thrilled with their Tesla and eager to repeat their business. The numbers don’t lie in terms of repeat sales and customer satisfaction.
We strive to make every customer a lifelong member of the Tesla family.
While others may have their own agendas, our principles have been the same since the beginning: to make the safest cars in the world, which are easiest to maintain, while accelerating the world’s transition to sustainable energy.
Don’t hesitate to contact us with news tips. Just send a message to simon@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk
Tesla’s Elon Musk: 10 billion miles needed for safe Unsupervised FSD
As per the CEO, roughly 10 billion miles of training data are required due to reality’s “super long tail of complexity.”
Tesla CEO Elon Musk has provided an updated estimate for the training data needed to achieve truly safe unsupervised Full Self-Driving (FSD).
As per the CEO, roughly 10 billion miles of training data are required due to reality’s “super long tail of complexity.”
10 billion miles of training data
Musk comment came as a reply to Apple and Rivian alum Paul Beisel, who posted an analysis on X about the gap between tech demonstrations and real-world products. In his post, Beisel highlighted Tesla’s data-driven lead in autonomy, and he also argued that it would not be easy for rivals to become a legitimate competitor to FSD quickly.
“The notion that someone can ‘catch up’ to this problem primarily through simulation and limited on-road exposure strikes me as deeply naive. This is not a demo problem. It is a scale, data, and iteration problem— and Tesla is already far, far down that road while others are just getting started,” Beisel wrote.
Musk responded to Beisel’s post, stating that “Roughly 10 billion miles of training data is needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving. Reality has a super long tail of complexity.” This is quite interesting considering that in his Master Plan Part Deux, Elon Musk estimated that worldwide regulatory approval for autonomous driving would require around 6 billion miles.
FSD’s total training miles
As 2025 came to a close, Tesla community members observed that FSD was already nearing 7 billion miles driven, with over 2.5 billion miles being from inner city roads. The 7-billion-mile mark was passed just a few days later. This suggests that Tesla is likely the company today with the most training data for its autonomous driving program.
The difficulties of achieving autonomy were referenced by Elon Musk recently, when he commented on Nvidia’s Alpamayo program. As per Musk, “they will find that it’s easy to get to 99% and then super hard to solve the long tail of the distribution.” These sentiments were echoed by Tesla VP for AI software Ashok Elluswamy, who also noted on X that “the long tail is sooo long, that most people can’t grasp it.”
News
Tesla earns top honors at MotorTrend’s SDV Innovator Awards
MotorTrend’s SDV Awards were presented during CES 2026 in Las Vegas.
Tesla emerged as one of the most recognized automakers at MotorTrend’s 2026 Software-Defined Vehicle (SDV) Innovator Awards.
As could be seen in a press release from the publication, two key Tesla employees were honored for their work on AI, autonomy, and vehicle software. MotorTrend’s SDV Awards were presented during CES 2026 in Las Vegas.
Tesla leaders and engineers recognized
The fourth annual SDV Innovator Awards celebrate pioneers and experts who are pushing the automotive industry deeper into software-driven development. Among the most notable honorees for this year was Ashok Elluswamy, Tesla’s Vice President of AI Software, who received a Pioneer Award for his role in advancing artificial intelligence and autonomy across the company’s vehicle lineup.
Tesla also secured recognition in the Expert category, with Lawson Fulton, a staff Autopilot machine learning engineer, honored for his contributions to Tesla’s driver-assistance and autonomous systems.
Tesla’s software-first strategy
While automakers like General Motors, Ford, and Rivian also received recognition, Tesla’s multiple awards stood out given the company’s outsized role in popularizing software-defined vehicles over the past decade. From frequent OTA updates to its data-driven approach to autonomy, Tesla has consistently treated vehicles as evolving software platforms rather than static products.
This has made Tesla’s vehicles very unique in their respective sectors, as they are arguably the only cars that objectively get better over time. This is especially true for vehicles that are loaded with the company’s Full Self-Driving system, which are getting progressively more intelligent and autonomous over time. The majority of Tesla’s updates to its vehicles are free as well, which is very much appreciated by customers worldwide.
Elon Musk
Judge clears path for Elon Musk’s OpenAI lawsuit to go before a jury
The decision maintains Musk’s claims that OpenAI’s shift toward a for-profit structure violated early assurances made to him as a co-founder.
A U.S. judge has ruled that Elon Musk’s lawsuit accusing OpenAI of abandoning its founding nonprofit mission can proceed to a jury trial.
The decision maintains Musk’s claims that OpenAI’s shift toward a for-profit structure violated early assurances made to him as a co-founder. These claims are directly opposed by OpenAI.
Judge says disputed facts warrant a trial
At a hearing in Oakland, U.S. District Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers stated that there was “plenty of evidence” suggesting that OpenAI leaders had promised that the organization’s original nonprofit structure would be maintained. She ruled that those disputed facts should be evaluated by a jury at a trial in March rather than decided by the court at this stage, as noted in a Reuters report.
Musk helped co-found OpenAI in 2015 but left the organization in 2018. In his lawsuit, he argued that he contributed roughly $38 million, or about 60% of OpenAI’s early funding, based on assurances that the company would remain a nonprofit dedicated to the public benefit. He is seeking unspecified monetary damages tied to what he describes as “ill-gotten gains.”
OpenAI, however, has repeatedly rejected Musk’s allegations. The company has stated that Musk’s claims were baseless and part of a pattern of harassment.
Rivalries and Microsoft ties
The case unfolds against the backdrop of intensifying competition in generative artificial intelligence. Musk now runs xAI, whose Grok chatbot competes directly with OpenAI’s flagship ChatGPT. OpenAI has argued that Musk is a frustrated commercial rival who is simply attempting to slow down a market leader.
The lawsuit also names Microsoft as a defendant, citing its multibillion-dollar partnerships with OpenAI. Microsoft has urged the court to dismiss the claims against it, arguing there is no evidence it aided or abetted any alleged misconduct. Lawyers for OpenAI have also pushed for the case to be thrown out, claiming that Musk failed to show sufficient factual basis for claims such as fraud and breach of contract.
Judge Gonzalez Rogers, however, declined to end the case at this stage, noting that a jury would also need to consider whether Musk filed the lawsuit within the applicable statute of limitations. Still, the dispute between Elon Musk and OpenAI is now headed for a high-profile jury trial in the coming months.
Tesla’s Elon Musk: 10 billion miles needed for safe Unsupervised FSD
Tesla earns top honors at MotorTrend’s SDV Innovator Awards
