News
Tesla’s Elon Musk highlights that wait for next-gen Roadster ‘will be worth it’
Elon Musk teased that the long wait for Tesla’s next-gen Roadster “will be worth it.” The CEO’s update came as a response to tech YouTuber Marques Brownlee’s tweet about the vehicle, which has seen delays in its deliveries.
Musk and Design Chief Franz von Holzhausen remain tight-lipped about the new Roadster’s improvements, but there is no doubt that it will be astonishing. Since the next-gen Roadster’s unveiling, there have been staggering improvements in Tesla’s other vehicles and the company’s technology, especially in the battery development front.
For instance, the Model S passed the 400 mile EPA range earlier this year and Tesla finally unveiled its own 4680 cell during Battery Day in September. Currently, some specs of the Model S Plaid almost overlap with the base next-gen Roadster.
The base Roadster has a 0-60 mph time of 1.9 seconds, while the Plaid Model S can do it under 2.0 seconds. The numbers speak for themselves. The base Roadster still beats the Plaid Model S in top speed and range, but not by a league. The all-electric supercar has a top speed of +250 mph and a range of 620 miles, while the Plaid Model S has a top speed of 200 mph and an estimated range of 520+ miles.
Then there is the Roadster with the SpaceX Package which will be another variant altogether. The host of YouTube channel Engineering Explained ran the numbers on the Roadster SpaceX Package using Issac Newton’s basic physics principles. He determined that the Roadster could hit 0-60mph in 1.1 seconds with SpaceX thrusters. Without a doubt, that much power will need sufficient energy and may rely heavily on the success of Tesla’s homegrown battery cell.
Elon Musk and Tesla Chief Designer Franz von Holzhausen have dropped some vague hints about the next Roadster over the last two years. In October 2019, Holzhausen teased that Tesla had already made improvements to the Roadster since its unveiling.
“It’s evolving deservedly so; it needs more time. It will be even better than what we’ve unveiled. In every way,” he said during an appearance in Ryan McCaffrey’s Ride the Lightning podcast. Unfortunately, Franz didn’t dive into specific details about the improvements that could be expected in the production version of the all-electric supercar.
Elon Musk said that the Cybertruck production and deliveries may start before the Roadster during an appearance at The Joe Rogan Experience podcast. Gigafactory Texas is expected to start Cybertruck production next year, though Model Y production will likely commence in the complex first. Tesla has been making great progress with the construction of Giga Texas so far.
After Tesla successfully ramps Cybertruck production, it may start working on manufacturing the next-gen Roadster and the Semi. Whether the Roadster’s production will precede the Semi’s remains unclear. Either way, Tesla has a lot of work left before its next-gen Roadster hits the road.
Since its unveiling in November 2017, the Tesla Roadster has been a long-awaited vehicle in the electric car community. Tesla’s next-gen Roadster is quite symbolic for the EV automaker. After all, it was the original Tesla Roadster that really kicked the company into gear so many years ago.
The EV automaker removing the Roadster from the main page of tesla.com may have worried some people, especially considering its historic position at Tesla. The noted tech YouTuber’s tweet about the change probably reflected most of the community’s feelings on the matter. “The Roadster being gone from tesla.com scares me,” Brownlee tweeted, tagging Elon Musk.
The Roadster has been removed from the front page of Tesla’s website, but can still be found using the hamburger menu. Elon Musk’s short reply to Brownlee’s tweet revealed that Tesla has not forgotten about the next-gen Roadster at all. Tesla may simply be waiting for all the pieces to come together before it produces the next iteration of its historic vehicle.
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
