News
Tesla teardown specialist Sandy Munro lays the law on TSLAQ over false allegations
When Sandy Munro started his analysis of an early production Tesla Model 3, he was aghast at the vehicle’s quirks, and he made his disapproval known. Munro did not pull his punches back, pointing out the vehicle’s build quality issues and outlining exactly what was wrong with the all-electric sedan. Yet as soon as his analysis took him beyond the Model 3’s bodywork, Munro found something remarkable: Tesla’s tech was beyond everyone else’s in the automotive industry, and it’s not even close.
By the time he was finished tearing down the Model 3, Munro was already quite impressed with Tesla. Everything, he noted, from the Model 3’s suspension down to its batteries was on point, and the company’s tech was insane. Munro suggested that if Tesla had only paid more attention to its basics like build quality, the electric car maker would have wiped the floor with legacy automakers. These developments could all be reviewed through Munro’s multiple appearances at Autoline After Hours, where he is featured as a guest from time to time.
Munro and his company, Munro and Associates, eventually took on their next Tesla project by tearing down an early production Model Y. The veteran was gracious enough to share his insights on the vehicle through a series that he and his team uploaded on YouTube. The video series documented every step of the Model Y’s teardown process, and while Munro still observed a number of build quality-related points for improvement in the all-electric crossover, he was impressed overall. So impressed, in fact, that Munro opted to share his enthusiasm for the vehicle openly. Recent videos even include “tips” for Tesla that could improve their vehicles further.
#MunroAssociates Tips For #Tesla E3 – Night Vision HUD & Wire Reductionhttps://t.co/WlzodSDwWO pic.twitter.com/5dDEu9LzU9— Munro & Associates (@MunroAssociates) July 25, 2020
This did not sit well with Tesla critics, particularly the online TSLAQ group. Tesla critics and short-sellers are known to propagate the occasional conspiracy theory, whether that involves accusations of abuse by the Tesla CEO to alleged cover-ups by government agencies that are supposedly paid by the electric car maker to do their bidding. Granted, most of these conspiracy theories are just noise, but sometimes, this noise can result in very real repercussions. Unfortunately, this exact thing happened to Sandy Munro.
When it became evident that Munro was openly supportive of Tesla and the Model Y, it did not take long for the TSLAQ Twitter community to insinuate that the teardown expert was actually being paid by the electric car maker for good publicity. Notable short-sellers joined in on the insinuations, TSLAQ trolls dared Munro to file a lawsuit against them, and some members of the media who are known to be critical of the electric car maker brought up the fact that the teardown expert’s stance on Tesla changed over time.
These, of course, neglect to explore one possible explanation for Munro’s shift on his stance about Tesla. While Munro was openly critical of the Model 3 during his first look at the car, he was eventually won over by the tech and innovation that was put into the vehicle. The Model Y, which followed the Model 3, embodied many of Munro’s own points for improvement that he raised during his analysis of the all-electric sedan. Perhaps, just perhaps, Tesla is improving as an automaker, and the company’s electric cars are really in the bleeding edge of automotive tech.
-
Ever the fighter, Munro has posted a stern response to the insinuations leveled against him by Tesla critics. In a YouTube video, Munro laid down the law on TSLAQ, declaring that neither he nor his company is being paid to talk positively about the electric car maker. And in true Munro fashion, the teardown expert came with evidence, explaining exactly how innovations like the Octovalve are only possible in a company that works like Tesla. Following is his statement.
“Munro and Associates is not, I repeat, is not paid by Tesla to say or do or receive anything that we have. I know that some people are saying things like that. They don’t know what they’re talking about. I have to try and defend myself periodically, and this is it. So, I can tell you a little something right now that the Tesla haters or basically the people that are trying to drive me out of business are saying — that Tesla would never tell you.
“So this is part of the Octovalve. And what we’ve noticed is, we had one of our customers come in with a brand new Tesla. It was built about one month ago and we noticed that their product, the product that you’re seeing here — the aluminum supermanifold — their product had 13 design changes associated with it. Thirteen. I’m going to tell you. I couldn’t get one design change through in a year when I was at Ford Motor Company. They (Tesla) did 13 in three months. That’s why they’re kicking some serious butt.
“Another thing that we found was when we got our vehicle, there was no shroud around the compressor. Their vehicle had an excellent design for a shroud, and it looked spectacular. Now am I saying things that Tesla told me to tell you? I don’t think so… Munro and Associates and myself as the number one associate, we are in this strictly for the right reasons. I am not bought by anyone. No one in this company is bought by anyone. We are a consulting house that tells the truth all the time — good, bad, or ugly — and I’m just starting to find out about this. It’s all crap. Don’t believe any of it.”
Most of the tweets posted online which suggested that Munro was a paid shill for Tesla have already been deleted, though some screenshots of the posts have made the rounds online. It is through these that it was revealed that Sandy Munro has started preparing a lawsuit to hold the TSLAQ members liable for damages, seeing as one of his key clients was affected by the accusations. Based on a message sent by the veteran teardown specialist to a key Tesla critic, it appears that Munro is dead serious, and he is looking to hold those involved in the issue accountable.
Watch Munro’s statement on the allegations in the video below.
-
Tesla has continued to flex the strength, rigidity, and robustness of its all-electric pickup, the Cybertruck. In fact, since 2019, Cybertruck’s ability to avoid dents, dings, and even gunfire has been one of the main selling points Tesla has used to attract buyers who are looking for a vehicle that can handle the most intense challenges.
But that does not mean Tesla is not still actively trying to make it even better.
In a new hardware update, Tesla has decided to change the material of the Cybertruck’s underbody panels from aluminum to carbon fiber, a move that aims to not only increase pricing efficiency but also improve strength.
RELATED:
Cybertruck Lead Engineer Wes Morrill confirmed the change was made to the Cybertruck recently after it was spotted by Coleton Guerin of Out of Spec. This particular trim level was a Cyberbeast, but it is being applied to all trims to keep supply chain efficiency high and have less variance across trim levels.
Morrill said that Tesla tested different materials for the underbody panel protection, and carbon fiber performed better than aluminum, which is what the company was using since its first deliveries in 2023.
Additionally, there are some efficiency improvements because Tesla can better form the areas around the bolts to keep underbody airflow cleaner than previously.
good eye – it’s a new material. Testing showed it to be more durable than the aluminum while being lower weight and cost. Also slight efficiency improvement since we can better form the areas around the bolts to keep the underbody airflow cleaner than what stamped aluminum allows
— Wes (@wmorrill3) July 30, 2026
Carbon fiber is traditionally lighter and more durable than aluminum, which is why it is such a popular material among luxury automakers, and EV makers will utilize some of the materials around battery packs to save weight.
This is the first instance of Tesla utilizing carbon fiber on the Cybertruck’s exterior to help with overall performance and strength. As previously mentioned, Tesla used aluminum to protect the underside of the body, but it is pretty typical for the company to continue making engineering changes that will improve the car in the future.
Tesla released Full Self-Driving version 14.3.7 yesterday, and after about 90 miles of testing today, it is evident there are some definite fixes from version 14.3.6, which I wrote about last week and called a regression.
Within the first 40 minutes of my drive on v14.3.7, it saved me from getting into an accident with an unaware Dodge Charger driver, and some of the things Tesla seemed to miss in v14.3.6 were definitely improved. All in all, the release so far has some really great performance, and I’m looking forward to testing it further.
For now, here’s everything I noticed with v14.3.7:
Overall Improvement
Just generally speaking from a ride perspective, this was a really great experience. A lot of the hesitancy I experienced on v14.3.6 was gone. There were no instances of brake-stabbing, wheel-jerking, or any uncertain or unconfident movements. It was void of anything that I felt made it timid with v14.3.6.
The one thing I do hope to see down the road is a smaller need to adjust Speed Profiles so often. Because Tesla calls FSD “Supervised,” I’m okay with needing to hit the scroll wheel a few times a drive.
However, I hope that things can be incrementally improved upon with speed. Sometimes it’s too fast; other times it’s too slow. It’s a difficult thing to hone in and refine, but I hope it eventually gets there.
I didn’t notice any significant left lane camping or any behaviors that were completely out of line. I am hopeful that this opinion does not change, but after driving a few days with this version and putting it in a variety of different situations, you are exposed to more behaviors, some of which are not necessarily what I’d prefer.
The big things to notice, at least in my experience thus far, are that the major issues with previous versions — meaning the braking stabbing and wheel jerking — simply weren’t there. That’s enough to already consider this progress compared to .6.
Manual Signal Override is More Responsive
On .6, I had quite a few issues with FSD ignoring my manually input turn signals. If Tesla wants to call it “Supervised,” then the car should not ignore any input the driver gives. If I touch the accelerator on FSD, the car speeds up.
🚨 Tesla FSD v14.3.7 obeying manual turn signals https://t.co/6eqToXpQfC pic.twitter.com/vHBlFQ4PDV
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
The car did a great job of obeying my turn signals when I wanted it to change lanes, which is welcome.
Parking Lot Performance
Before .6, I traditionally took over in nearly every parking lot my car entered, because I knew it would not park somewhere that I wanted, and usually, it was just a tad too timid in this setting.
The one bright spot of .6 was how well it handled parking lots. This continued with v14.3.7:
I’m always really happy to see progress at all, but once parking preferences come to FSD, as long as this performance is still around, that could potentially be the biggest improvement I’ve seen in FSD in the year I’ve been using it personally on a daily basis.
Full Self-Driving Averts Disaster
A Dodge Charger changed into my lane without checking if I was there, running me off the road. FSD made the initial avoidance maneuver; I grabbed the wheel out of instinct, looked in my side mirror to ensure I had nobody following closely behind, hit the brake, and straightened the car back up to avoid a curb:
🚨 Guys this is why you all NEED to stay vigilant behind the wheel, even on Tesla Full Self-Driving
Human drivers are UNHINGED and have no idea what they’re doing anymore. This was a kid obviously younger than 20 years old with zero awareness.
First drive with v14.3.7 https://t.co/1vTbCMpCn8 pic.twitter.com/lz7KKEF6bj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
There have been quite a few responses to this video stating that I should never have grabbed the wheel. To be honest, I really wish I had not done so, because I do believe FSD would have avoided any sort of collision with anything, including the car or the curb.
However, this was the first time I had ever been this close to being hit while using FSD. My natural reaction was to take over. I think if I had had something like this happen before, my reaction might have been different.
Hitting the brake avoided hitting the curb, while FSD swerved to avoid the car. My concern after the car was clear of my front end was the curb. All in all, I’m really happy with how things turned out, and I think anyone could be a critic of how I handled it. I only had a split second to really make a decision, and thankfully, any damage was avoided.
It is clear FSD managed to avoid the car coming down before I was able to. I truly credit FSD for avoiding the collision.
What Needs to Improve
Better Recognition of Potholes, Uneven Roads, Sharp Changes in Roadway/Bumps
On Friday, my Fianceè and I were in the car, and FSD was driving us. We crossed over a roadway that has a traffic light, and FSD was traveling at 40 MPH on Standard, 5 MPH over the speed limit. Everything was more than reasonable.
However, the road we were crossing at the light has a major bump both as you start and finish crossing it. Without a speed reduction, your car can go airborne. The Tesla did just this on Friday on v14.3.6; it was an uncomfortable bounce that pretty much confirmed I would not ever let FSD go over again unless we were sitting at that intersection when there is a red light.
I even tried scrolling down into Sloth quickly, but I ended up just taking over:
This is that big bounce that I mentioned in the quoted post.
It’s just a tad too drastic to take at the speed FSD wants to go over it. You can see me quickly swipe down into Sloth, but I intervened. https://t.co/K20PK9ysBg pic.twitter.com/81Oc82ZJcZ
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
A few people have said it remains related to the vision-based approach and its difficulty comprehending 3D. This is a huge issue because this can cause serious damage at certain speeds.
Navigation
Nothing new here. I still turn off “Online Routing” quite frequently to get the car to take logical routes from time to time.
Auto Wipers
Auto Wipers are just plain bad. I really hope Tesla just uses a rain sensor. I thought they had improved at one point, but I still get dry wipes, Speed 4 on a drizzle, and Speed 2 on a steady rain. In reality, these should be switched.
You can watch our full review of Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 below:
🚨 Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 saved me from an accident! FULL REVIEW: https://t.co/1vTbCMpCn8 pic.twitter.com/9mHmKVoMVA
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) August 2, 2026
SpaceX will report second quarter results after the market closes on Tuesday, August 4, marking the first time the company has opened its books to the public since its record IPO in June. Management will host a live audio only webcast at 4:30 p.m. ET, streamed on X, with no dial in option.
The debut carries more weight than a typical first quarter as a public company. Two trading days after the release, on August 6, the first tranche of SpaceX’s lockup expires, freeing roughly 911.5 million insider and employee shares, worth well over $100 billion at current prices and the largest such release in Wall Street history. A second, larger tranche tied to the stock trading 30 percent above its $135 IPO price never triggered, since shares have spent most of July trading below that price.
Wall Street’s models point to revenue near $6.9 billion for the quarter, up sharply from the $4.69 billion SpaceX reported in the first quarter, with a narrower per share loss than the $1.27 posted three months earlier, according to estimates compiled by Motley Fool. Those numbers will be the first look at how SpaceX’s three segments, Starlink, launch and AI, are performing independently.
SpaceX scores another massive Pentagon deal to support military satellites
Investors heading into the call have a specific list of questions. How many net new Starlink subscribers did SpaceX add after ending March with 10.3 million, and is average revenue per user holding up as the service expands into lower income markets. How much of the AI segment’s revenue reflects contract signings with Anthropic, Google and Reflection AI this year, deals that combined could annualize to nearly $28 billion if fully ramped. Whether capital expenditures, which nearly doubled in the AI segment alone between 2024 and 2025, are still accelerating or starting to plateau. And whether management offers any forward guidance at all, something SpaceX has never done publicly.
The report will also land days after Elon Musk publicly denied a Wall Street Journal report describing internal planning to separate Tesla’s China business ahead of a potential Tesla-SpaceX merger. Whether Musk or SpaceX executives address that speculation on the call, even indirectly, maybe something investors will be listening for on Tuesday.
As Teslarati reported after Musk’s own warning to short sellers last week, the CEO has made clear he expects skeptics to be proven wrong over time. Tuesday will be the first chance for the numbers themselves to make that case.
Tesla quietly made the Cybertruck even stronger
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.3.7 early review: FSD saved me from an accident
