Tesla’s salvaged vehicles make for an excellent project for rebuilders, or a chance to have an industry-leading electric car for a discounted price. Some members of the community have even made the act of rebuilding wrecked or damaged Teslas a career, like Rich Rebuilds, who runs a prominent YouTube channel. However, Tesla stopped allowing Supercharging on their salvaged vehicles in February 2020. This move ended fast charging capabilities for the owners of wrecked and refurbished Teslas, but now rebuilders are reporting that the electric vehicle company is taking away more functions.
We received a tip from a Tesla salvager who says the company is now refusing to update ownership records, nor will it activate the smartphone application, which enables some functions for the electric vehicle in question. However, Tesla has a reason for doing this, and it has to do with revenue and passenger safety, which is something the company is under a microscope for from its harshest critics.
But the real reason we are talking about it this week is because there is a valid argument for both points of view, and both should be examined in an open platform. When you decide which side you are on, please e-mail me and let me know your thoughts.
First, let’s look at the side of the salvagers. They have a few main points on why taking away vehicle privileges is wrong. One issue is the fact that salvaged Teslas, if not repaired and resold, will end up sitting in a landfill for basically the remainder of the time.
It is a shame that a car that is capable of repair could end up in a landfill to sit and rot away for the rest of time. Not only is it a waste of space, but its a waste of a perfectly good high-performance vehicle. Not to mention, project cars are a hobby and a career for some. Eliminating the possibility of preparing or working on a Tesla electric vehicle to bring it back to life reduces the industry of bringing the cars back to life.
Next, the revitalization of these salvaged vehicles creates an opportunity for a more affordable Tesla ownership experience for some. Rebuilding vehicles creates profit for the person responsible for bringing the car back to a driveable state. At the same time, the owner can sometimes receive a discounted price on a perfectly drivable vehicle that could have low miles.
The industry of rebuilding crashed, or damaged cars are advantageous for multiple parties financially. The issue is the cars are not always repaired by mechanics properly, which can lead to quality and safety issues down the line. However, this could be another opportunity for Tesla to train salvagers, mechanics, and collision repair technicians across the world. The idea of making repair seminars or courses available for those who plan to revitalize a Tesla vehicle could lead to an influx of people who are familiar with the cars inside and out.
To the flip side, Tesla’s arguments are just as reliable as those of the rebuilders. Tesla has maintained a reputation for having extremely safe vehicles that are capable of saving people from severe injuries when they are involved in scary and violent accidents. When cars are damaged and end up in salvage yards, ending up in the hands of those who are interested in repairing them, they are never really the same. The most severely damaged cars can have chassis and build issues that can never be fixed fully, only masked, and pushed as close to perfect as possible. They’ll never be “factory issue,” and they’ll never drive precisely how they would when they rolled out of a production facility. However, they can be fabricated, rewelded, and adjusted to specifications that are incredibly close to how Tesla intended them to be. But this is a case that would require the individual inspection of each repaired vehicle by a Tesla representative. With 1,000,000 Tesla vehicles manufactured in the company’s history, this would be near impossible, even if .01% of them were salvaged and repaired.
The likelihood of a Tesla rep traveling to the location of a rebuilt vehicle and going through hours of inspection: making sure all parts of the car are correctly installed, properly connected, and aligned safely would not be cost-effective, smart, or worth Tesla’s time. However, it would be necessary. Like I said before, this company has a reputation for building safe cars. When someone in a Tesla gets in an accident, the short sellers and the Elon haters come out of the woodwork looking for answers. Why? So if someone got hurt, or heaven forbid, killed in an accident, they could use it as justification that the cars are not as safe as Tesla advertises, and somehow that means Elon is a fraud.
It is a ridiculous train of thought. I’ll never understand Tesla’s short-sellers celebrating other people’s injuries. Instead of rooting for someone to get hurt, why not root for the company to make safer cars? It would only make other automakers want to match Tesla’s quality, and it wouldn’t be such a horrible thing to have more safe vehicles on the road.
Regardless, Tesla has to account for the fact that if someone gets hurt in a revitalized vehicle that was formerly a salvage, it will be a never-ending storm of media harassment. I can see the misleading headlines now…”Driver killed in Tesla proving cars aren’t so safe after all,” or something to that effect. It is a risk that they simply cannot take, and it is not worth the company’s future.
Additionally, Tesla makes money when they sell new cars, not when people buy wrecked ones and decide to rebuild them. Let’s not forget, this is a car company, and ultimately a business. While Tesla’s mission is to provide people with safe and affordable electric vehicles that benefit our environment and our well-being, they need to make money.
In the end, Tesla’s decision, while financial, is also a safety issue. Sure, Elon would love to see some custom projects. I’d bet he would like to see his cars developed into something different than what Tesla builds in their factories. But I also bet that he wouldn’t want someone to get hurt or killed as a result of negligence while refurbishing a vehicle. Ultimately, it would end up being blood on his hands, and this risk makes it entirely too risky from a business standpoint.
While people are still free to rebuild the cars, they will undoubtedly run into roadblocks—no Supercharging, issues with transferring ownership titles, so on and so forth. Tesla is doing it for money, but it is also doing it for safety. In the big picture, that’s why I think what they are doing is okay, even though I feel for the rebuilders.
Welcome to a FREE preview of our weekly newsletter. Each week I go ‘Beyond the News’ and handcraft a special edition that includes my thoughts on the biggest stories, why it matters, and how it could impact the future.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
Lifestyle
Tesla saves its passengers again – This time after a 300-foot cliff fall in Malibu
A Tesla Model 3 fell 300 feet off a Malibu cliff and both passengers survived.
A Tesla Model 3 plunged roughly 300 feet off a cliff on Mulholland Highway in Malibu on Friday morning, May 29, 2026, and both occupants survived. The crash was reported at approximately 7:30 a.m. near the 2500 block of Mulholland Highway, triggering a multi-agency rescue operation involving Malibu Search and Rescue, the Los Angeles County Fire Department, the California Highway Patrol, and McCormick Ambulance.
When first responders arrived, the male driver was outside the vehicle shouting for help while the female passenger remained pinned inside the Tesla. Rescue crews rappelled down the cliffside on ropes to reach the wreckage. A flight medic was lowered by helicopter to begin treating both victims, and the driver was hoisted up to the roadway before crews used the Jaws of Life to free the trapped passenger. Both were airlifted to a local trauma center with moderate injuries despite a remarkable result for a fall that steep.
The outcome is not surprising, considering Model 3 earned an overall 5-star rating from NHTSA in every category and sub-category, and recorded the lowest probability of injury of any car ever evaluated by the U.S. New Car Assessment Program. The absence of a traditional engine in the front of the vehicle creates a longer crumple zone that absorbs impact energy before it reaches occupants, and the battery pack running along the floor gives the car an unusually low center of gravity that reinforces structural rigidity.
This is not the first time a Tesla has kept passengers alive after going off a cliff. A Tesla Model Y carrying a family of four survived a plunge off a cliff at Devil’s Slide near San Francisco in January 2023, with two adults and two children walking away from a 250-foot fall. That incident drew widespread attention to how the structural integrity of Tesla’s electric platform performs in extreme crash scenarios that most vehicles would not survive.
Tesla Model Y driver who drove off cliff with family attempts to avoid criminal conviction
Elon Musk
NASA’s first human outpost on the Moon starts now – SpaceX on deck
NASA named the rovers, landers, and vendors that will build America’s first Moon Base.
NASA has laid out its most detailed Moon Base plan to date, describing a permanent outpost near the Moon’s south pole that the agency intends to build over the coming decade as a direct stepping stone to Mars. “The Moon Base will be America’s and humanity’s first outpost on another celestial world,” NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman said, adding that every mission crewed and uncrewed “will be a learning opportunity as we return to the lunar surface, build the infrastructure to stay, and master the skills required to live and operate in one of the most demanding and dangerous environments imaginable.”
The plan is structured in three phases involving both uncrewed and crewed missions to deliver equipment, vehicles, and infrastructure to the surface, with the first three moon base missions targeted to launch before the end of 2026.
Moon Base I, targeting fall 2026, will use Blue Origin’s Blue Moon Mark 1 lander to deliver scientific instruments to the Shackleton Connecting Ridge, the same region where Artemis astronauts will land. Moon Base II will send Astrobotic’s Griffin lander carrying more than 1,100 pounds of cargo including Astrolab’s FLIP rover to begin developing mobility systems on the surface. Moon Base III will carry the Lunar Vertex science mission on Intuitive Machines’ Nova-C Trinity lander to study lunar swirls near the south pole, with ESA and Korean science payloads aboard.
On the rover side, NASA awarded Astrolab $219 million and Lunar Outpost $220 million to build the first phase of Lunar Terrain Vehicles, with both rovers targeted for deployment to the lunar surface by 2028. Astrolab’s crewed rover weighs roughly 2,000 pounds and can reach over 6 mph. Lunar Outpost’s Pegasus rover can operate autonomously or via remote control at over 9 mph. Blue Origin separately received $188 million with an option worth $280.4 million to deliver cargo landers for rover transport.
NASA also confirmed that MoonFall, a mission deploying four survey drones to scout Artemis landing sites, has selected Firefly Aerospace to build the transport spacecraft, with a 2028 launch target.
SpaceX sits at the center of that commercial layer. SpaceX holds the NASA Human Landing System contract for the Starship-derived lander that will put astronauts on the surface under Artemis IV, currently targeting 2028. Before that can happen, SpaceX must demonstrate in-orbit propellant transfer at scale, a process requiring multiple Starship tanker launches to fuel a single mission. Water ice at the lunar south pole is central to the base’s long-term viability, as it can be converted into drinking water, breathable oxygen, and rocket fuel, directly reducing dependence on Earth resupply. That resource loop becomes far more practical if Starship can land and be refueled on or near the Moon itself.
Elon Musk has publicly stated that Starship V3, which recently completed its first flight, should be capable enough for initial Mars missions. The Moon Base plan announced Tuesday is the infrastructure layer that connects everything between those two ambitions, and SpaceX is the only American company currently contracted to build the rocket that gets humans to either destination.
Elon Musk
Tesla ditches India after years of broken promises
Tesla has ditched its plans to build a factory in India after years of failed negotiations.
Tesla’s long-running effort to establish a manufacturing presence in India is officially over. India’s Minister of Heavy Industries H.D. Kumaraswamy confirmed on May 19, 2026 that Tesla has informed authorities it will not proceed with a manufacturing facility in the country.
Tesla first signaled serious interest in India around 2021, when it began hiring local staff and lobbying the Indian government for lower import tariffs. The ask was straightforward: reduce duties enough for Tesla to test the market with imported vehicles before committing capital to a local factory. India’s position was equally firm, with an ask of Tesla to commit to manufacturing first, then receive tariff relief. Neither side moved, and the talks quietly collapsed.
Tesla to open first India experience center in Mumbai on July 15
India had offered a policy that would reduce import duties from 110% down to 15% on EVs priced above $35,000, provided companies committed at least $500 million toward local manufacturing investment within three years. Tesla declined to participate. The tariff standoff was only part of the problem. Analysts pointed to significant gaps in India’s local supply chain, inadequate industrial infrastructure, and a mismatch between Tesla’s premium pricing and the purchasing power of India’s automotive market as additional factors that made the investment difficult to justify.
First signs of an unraveling relationship came in April 2024, when Musk abruptly cancelled a planned trip to India where he was set to meet Prime Minister Modi and announce Tesla’s market entry. By July 2024, Fortune reported that Tesla executives had stopped contacting Indian government officials entirely. The government at that point understood Tesla had capital constraints and no plans to invest.
The more fundamental issue is that Tesla’s existing factories are currently operating at approximately 60% capacity, making a commitment to building new manufacturing capacity in a new market difficult to defend to investors. Tesla will continue selling imported Model Y vehicles through its existing showrooms in Mumbai, Delhi, Gurugram, and Bengaluru, but local production is no longer part of the plan.
SpaceX’s amended S-1 is sparking a major Tesla merger conversation
Tesla’s European Comeback: Registrations soar in May as recovery gains momentum
