Connect with us

News

OPINION: Tesla’s ‘Safety Score’ Beta needs broader terms for factoring your score

(Credit: Angel Wong/YouTube)

Published

on

Tesla’s “Safety Score” Beta is one of the most impressive ideas to improve driving safety, in my opinion. An article from Model 3 owner and Tesla enthusiast Nick Howard explained that Tesla is essentially gamifying the act of driving, encouraging owners to drive in a manner that would allow their scores to be higher. If you know anything about the Tesla community, you know that it is filled with die-hard fans who are satirically battling it out for the elusive 100 scores. While Tesla has outlined the ways that driving behaviors could affect the score for better or for worse, I believe that other instances may need to be outlined so owners are perfectly clear on how their score could be affected based on their hobbies or driving style. While I disagree with Consumer Reports’ assumption that the Safety Score is a bad idea (which, in reality, makes no real sense to me), I do believe that some owners are confused on what makes their score higher or lower, especially as many owners are attempting to enter the elusive Full Self-Driving Beta program.

If you’ve taken a peek at Tesla’s Support page that outlines the numerous factors that can affect a driver’s Safety Score, it seems pretty straightforward. There are cut and dry behaviors that tend to be recognized universally as “aggressive,” including tailgating, hard braking, and aggressive turning. Additionally, Forward Collision Warnings per 1,000 miles and forced Autopilot disengagements are also included in the behaviors that could affect your score, but these are exclusive to Tesla, of course, due to their use of Forward Collision Warnings and Autopilot disengagements.

Tesla introduces Safety Score (Beta) system that incentivizes safe driving

It’s very self-explanatory: Drive safely and receive a higher score. But are there not instances where things could get a tad confusing for some drivers, especially those with scores just below the perfect 100 threshold?

Advertisement

One example that I saw over the weekend was from Richard Marrero, a Tesla owner who was curious about taking his vehicle to the local racetrack. While Tesla owners are occasionally hitting the accelerator when a stoplight turns green, it may be understandable for Safety Scores to be affected. However, what if the nature of the driving occurs on a closed circuit? Marrero may drive like a saint on the road but might want to push his vehicle to the limit at a local dragstrip or raceway. After all, why have a high-performance car with face-melting acceleration if you can’t test it from time to time?

There are other examples that could affect a Safety Score that are technically out of the driver’s control. In some instances, it may be an action taken by the driver that is technically safer than other options, yet it could reduce the Safety Score. Tesla Joy, a Model 3 owner, encountered this predicament on October 1, according to a Tweet. Her Safety Score was reduced due to hard braking at a “quick changing yellow light.” I believe nearly everyone who has a driver’s license can attest that some stoplights are slightly more accelerated than others. Quick changing yellow lights are one of the most polarizing events in a daily drive. Some will tell you just to run through it, others will argue that the safer thing to do is just slow down and stop. Whichever way you choose to handle this scenario, you are likely to encounter someone who shares a point of view on how to handle the premature yellow light in a different manner.

Advertisement

However, I don’t necessarily believe that there is a “wrong” way to handle it. While the right way to do it, according to my knowledge as a driver of over 11 years, would require you to slow down and come to a stop, especially since the yellow light is a key indicator of “slow down.” Tesla Joy did it as most Learner’s Permit booklets would describe, yet she was still docked points.

There are undoubtedly more examples of how Tesla could do a better job of explaining what actions are not favorable for the Safety Score system, and I would love to hear your thoughts or examples on things that have occurred that affected your score. Tesla did a wonderful job of outlining the most face-value actions that Safety Scores will be affected by, but there are other questions that need to be confronted so drivers are clear on what other things could hurt their scores. After all, the wider the FSD Beta testing group is, the more data Tesla will obtain through its Neural Network.

Advertisement

Don’t hesitate to contact us with tips! Email us at tips@teslarati.com, or you can email me directly at joey@teslarati.com.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

News

Doug DeMuro names Tesla Model S the Most Important Car of the last 30 years

In a recent video, the noted reviewer stated that the choice was “not even a question.”

Published

on

Popular automotive reviewer and YouTuber Doug DeMuro has named the 2012 Tesla Model S as the most important car of the last 30 years.

In a recent video, the noted reviewer stated that the choice was “not even a question,” arguing that the Model S did more to change the trajectory of the auto industry than any other vehicle released since the mid-1990s.

“Unquestionably in my mind, the number one most important car of the last 30 years… it’s not even a question,” DeMuro said. “The 2012 Tesla Model S. There is no doubt that that is the most important car of the last 30 years.”

DeMuro acknowledged that electric vehicle adoption has faced recent headwinds. Still, he maintained that long-term electrification is inevitable.

Advertisement

“If you’re a rational person who’s truthful with yourself, you know that the future is electric… whether it’s 10, 20, 30 years, the future will be electric, and it was the Model S that was the very first car that did that truthfully,” he said.

While earlier EVs like the Nissan Leaf and Chevrolet Volt arrived before the Model S, DeMuro argued that they did not fundamentally shift public perception. The Model S proved that EVs “could be cool, could be fast, could be luxurious, could be for enthusiasts.” It showed that buyers did not have to make major compromises to drive electric.

He also described the Model S as a cultural turning point. Tesla became more than a car company. The brand expanded into Superchargers, home energy products, and a broader tech identity.

DeMuro noted that the Leaf and Volt “made a huge splash and taught us that it was possible.” However, he drew a distinction between being first and bringing a technology into the mainstream.

Advertisement

“It’s rarely about the car that does it first. It’s about the car that brings it into the mainstream,” he said. “The Model S was the car that actually won the game even though the Leaf and Volt scored the first.”

He added that perhaps the Model S’ most surprising achievement was proving that a new American automaker could succeed. For decades, industry observers believed the infrastructure and capital requirements made that nearly impossible.

“For decades, it was generally agreed that there would never be another competitive American car company because the infrastructure and the investment required to start up another American car company as just too challenging… It was just a given basically that you couldn’t do it. And not only did they go it, but they created a cultural icon… That car just truly changed the world,” he said. 

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk doubles down on Tesla Cybercab timeline once again

“Cybercab, which has no pedals or steering wheel, starts production in April,” Musk said.

Published

on

Credit: @JT59052914/X

CEO Elon Musk doubled down once again on the timeline of production for the Tesla Cybercab, marking yet another example of the confidence he has in the company’s ability to meet the aggressive timeline for the vehicle.

It is the third time in the past six months that Musk has explicitly stated Cybercab will enter production in April 2026.

On Monday morning, Musk reiterated that Cybercab will enter its initial manufacturing phase in April, and that it would not have any pedals or a steering wheel, two things that have been speculated as potential elements of the vehicle, if needed.

Musk has been known to be aggressive with timelines, and some products have been teased for years and years before they finally come to fruition.

One of perhaps the biggest complaints about Musk is the fact that Tesla does not normally reach the deadlines that are set: the Roadster, Semi, and Unsupervised Full Self-Driving suite are a few of those that have been given “end of this year” timelines, but have not been fulfilled.

Nevertheless, many are able to look past this as part of the process. New technology takes time to develop, but we’d rather not hear about when, and just the progress itself.

However, the Cybercab is a bit different. Musk has said three times in the past six months that Cybercab will be built in April, and this is something that is sort of out of the ordinary for him.

In December 2025, he said that Tesla was “testing the production system” of the vehicle and that “real production ramp starts in April.

Elon Musk shares incredible detail about Tesla Cybercab efficiency

On January 23, he said that “Cybercab production starts in April.” He did the same on February 16, marking yet another occasion that Musk has his sights set on April for initial production of the vehicle.

Musk has also tempered expectations for the Cybercab’s initial production phase. In January, he noted that Cybercab would be subjected to the S-curve-type production speed:

“…initial production is always very slow and follows an S-curve. The speed of production ramp is inversely proportionate to how many new parts and steps there are. For Cybercab and Optimus, almost everything is new, so the early production rate will be agonizingly slow, but eventually end up being insanely fast.”

Cybercab will be a huge part of Tesla’s autonomous ride-sharing plans moving forward.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Tesla owners explore potential FSD pricing options as uncertainty looms

We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla is starting the process of removing the ability to purchase the Full Self-Driving suite outright, as it pulled the purchase option in the United States over the weekend.

However, there has been some indication by CEO Elon Musk that the price of the subscription will increase as the suite becomes more robust. But Tesla finds itself in an interesting situation with this: the take rate for Full Self-Driving at $99 per month is about 12 percent, and Musk needs a significant increase in this rate to reach a tranche in his new compensation package.

This leaves Tesla and owners in their own respective limbos: Tesla needs to find a price that will incentivize consumers to use FSD, while owners need Tesla to offer something that is attractive price-wise.

We asked Tesla owners what the company should price Full Self-Driving moving forward, as now it’s going to be subscription-based. There were some interesting proposals.

Price Reduction

Although people are willing to pay the $99 per month for the FSD suite, it certainly is too high for some owners. Many suggested that if Tesla would back down the price to $49, or somewhere around that region, many owners would immediately subscribe.

Others suggested $69, which would make a lot of sense considering Musk’s obsession with that number.

Different Pricing for Supervised and Unsupervised

With the release of the Unsupervised version of Full Self-Driving, Tesla has a unique opportunity to offer pricing for different attention level requirements.

Unsupervised Full Self-Driving would be significantly more expensive, but not needed by everyone. Many people indicate they would still like to drive their cars manually from time to time, but others said they’d just simply be more than okay with only having Supervised FSD available in their cars.

Time-Based Pricing

Tesla could price FSD on a duration-based pricing model, including Daily, Weekly, Monthly, and Annual rates, which would incentivize longer durations with better pricing.

Annually, the rate could be $999 per year, while Monthly would stay at $99. However, a Daily pass of FSD would cost somewhere around $10, while a $30 per week cost seems to be ideal.

These all seem to be in line with what consumers might want. However, Tesla’s attitude with FSD is that it is the future of transportation, and with it offering only a Monthly option currently, it does not seem as if it will look as short-term as a Daily pass.

Tiered Pricing

This is perhaps the most popular option, according to what we’ve seen in comments and replies.

This would be a way to allow owners to pick and choose which FSD features they would like most and pay for them. The more features available to you, the more it costs.

For example, if someone only wanted Supervised driving and Autopark, it could be priced at $50 per month. Add in Summon, it could be $75.

This would allow people to pick only the features they would use daily.

Continue Reading