News
The Tesla Semi’s 500 kWh battery and Convoy Mode are grossly underestimated
The Tesla Semi may be delayed for quite some time now, but it appears that Elon Musk’s all-electric Class 8 truck will be well worth the wait. And as the upcoming truck gets closer to mass production, it is becoming more and more evident that the Semi’s potential—particularly with regards to its batteries and FSD features—remains grossly underestimated.
During a recent appearance at the Joe Rogan Experience podcast, Elon Musk revealed that the Semi would be equipped with a 500 kWh battery pack. The Tesla CEO did not specify which variant of the Semi will be fitted with a 500 kWh pack, though speculations from the electric vehicle community suggest that the battery would be for the truck’s 300-mile variant. However, even if this were the case, such an update provides a glimpse at just how far Tesla has come when it comes to its battery technology.
“You want something in the order of probably a 500 kWh pack. What we have in the Model S and X is a 100 kWh pack and probably something like a 500 kWh pack in the Tesla Semi,” Musk said.
When the Semi was unveiled in late 2017, Tesla noted that the vehicle would consume less than 2 kWh per mile. Considering that the Tesla Semi’s two variants are listed with 300 and 500 miles of range, estimates pointed to the vehicle having a battery pack that’s likely around 600 kWh to 1,000 kWh. Musk’s recent update suggests that Tesla has improved its batteries to such a degree that the Semi now needs a smaller battery pack to accomplish its 300-mile range target. This may seem like a minor change, but a smaller battery pack presents numerous advantages, such as lower weight and significant production cost savings. These all contribute to make the 300-mile Tesla Semi a viable and competitive vehicle, especially considering its estimated $150,000 base price.
Of course, these advantages only become more prominent if one considers the benefits of Tesla’s structural 4680 battery packs. With structural batteries in place, the Semi could save weight and production costs even further. A structural battery could also make the Semi more rigid, allowing it to be even safer than its initial iterations. This goes hand in hand with another update on the vehicle that was mentioned by Tesla, and one that is also widely ignored or at most underestimated today.
During Tesla’s Q4 FY 2020 earnings call, Elon Musk confirmed that the Semi might very well be the first vehicle in the company’s lineup that would receive full autonomy features. This was a point highlighted by both Elon Musk and Automotive President Jerome Guillen, who noted that the FSD hardware on the Semi would be the same one used in Tesla’s other vehicles. Musk, for his part, pointed out that the Semi’s FSD features will require Tesla to modify the FSD software’s parameters according to the Semi’s large size.
Perhaps one thing that is rarely mentioned is that when the Semi was unveiled in 2017, Elon Musk remarked that the vehicle was already capable of utilizing a feature called “Convoy Mode,” which optimizes efficiency while allowing several uncrewed trucks to follow a lead, crewed vehicle. If Musk’s statements were accurate and Convoy Mode was already feasible with Enhanced Autopilot’s capabilities in late 2017, then such a function would likely be extremely plausible today with the Full Self-Driving Beta. This should make the Semi safer to use than traditional long-haulers, most of whom are still manually driven. Couple this with the Semi’s functions like its four electric motors, which help prevent incidents like jackknifing, and the upcoming all-electric Class 8 truck has a shot at becoming one of the safest large vehicles on the road today.
Don’t hesitate to contact us for news tips. Just send a message to tips@teslarati.com to give us a heads up.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
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
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
