News
Tesla vehicle reviews are pointless…Here’s why
This is a preview from 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.
Tesla vehicle reviews are probably one of the most worthless things to read, in my own opinion, especially if they’re coming from a large group or entity with interests that anyone can trace through the money. Earlier this week, Edmunds put up a scathing review of the Model S Plaid, calling it “a waste of money” and saying it was nothing more than a marketing tool to make an aging vehicle relevant once again. Despite these words, which caught the attention of many readers within the first 48 hours, the Edmunds driver couldn’t wipe the large, shining smile from his face as he felt the instant torque of the vehicle take off like a rollercoaster.
For something that is such a waste, it sure provided a lot of enjoyment to the Edmunds staff. Of course, vehicle performance is not necessarily a baseline for whether an automobile is “good” or not. If a car is fast, people will like it because fast cars are just fun to be in, whether you’re a driver or a passenger. However, reviews on electric cars, Teslas in specific, do not get a fair shake, and it’s not necessarily anyone’s fault, per se. Instead, I see it as an opportunity for people to put their opinions out there without speaking in generalities or thinking their point of view is a fact. Of course, you could say the same about this newsletter.
For me, the comprehension of electric cars, Teslas in specific, needs to be examined by someone seasoned and completely understanding what is going on under the hood (I use that term loosely, now) because without the basic comprehension of what you’re driving, you really are not qualified to speak on it. Additionally, whether something is a “waste of money” really comes down to the consumer. If you’re buying a Model S Plaid for the performance statistics, you’re getting the fastest car in the world for millions of dollars less than its competitors. Sure, if you’re buying it for range and a daily driver, it could be considered a “waste” as the Long Range variant is likely a better option. However, some people realize they won’t have their money forever, and the additional $40,000 cost is simply arbitrary in their point of view.
For me, there are just too many factors as to why reviews are pointless when it comes to certain cars, especially with fast ones. I will discuss a few of them here, and I look forward to hearing your point of view with the others.
Credit: Tesla
Internal Interests
Tesla fans are quick to point out when a product gets a negative review or any sort of pushback. Many of them claim inside interests without really doing their own due diligence, claiming that some entities have their pockets lined with oil money or anything else the mind can grasp. Sometimes, however, they’re not far off. CarMax purchased Edmunds back in April, which means that the company is no longer independent and is owned by a large company with ties with Chrysler, Mitsubishi, Toyota, and Nissan.
It is always important to see what interests some entities have when they speak about a car or any product, for that matter. Simply enough, people with the ability to put their name on an article or a video and put it out there for millions of people to digest have a responsibility to remain partial. It doesn’t always work that way.
Opinionated Points on Features
This is one of my biggest points. Edmunds was quick to dismiss the usefulness of the Yoke, claiming that “the Yoke was a Joke.” Yes, they really wrote that on Twitter.
The Tesla Model S Plaid is nothing more than a marketing exercise designed to draw attention to an aging car. Also, the yoke is a joke. Our full review of the fastest car we’ve ever tested: https://t.co/f1SkdDmRhI pic.twitter.com/A1UUKWODEV
— Edmunds (@edmunds) September 7, 2021
The thing is, I have monitored the Yoke since it was going to be included in the Model S, and while I have spoken to numerous government agencies and Tesla employees about the Yoke, the wheel is really personal preference. The car is obviously built for performance, and performance vehicles, especially open-wheeled cars, like F1 series vehicles, use a Yoke for complete control at high speeds. It is likely Tesla didn’t go with the Yoke for this reason, but it may have included it as a hint toward a steering wheel-less cockpit in the future. That’s my idea, anyway, especially as the company surges toward autonomy.
I have NEVER come across a single person who has disliked driving the Yoke for what it’s worth.
Of course, a review does include some personal preference, and that’s expected. However, to slash a vehicle in this way that is likely the most advanced car on the market in terms of software, performance, and technology in this way smells of too much opinion, for me. Stick to the facts, is it a good car? Is it functional? Does it do what the automaker said it would do?
Cars are made to be tested individually
The most logical way to know if a car is for you is to drive it yourself. You should never go off of someone else’s opinion completely. It makes no sense to do this. If cars were meant to be bought off of the basis of someone else’s experience, nobody would drive PT Cruisers (they’re horribly ugly), and everyone would drive what someone else wanted them to drive. Let’s not forget: Cars, while a meaningful portion of life because they get us to work, events, and anywhere we need to go, are supposed to be enjoyable and fun. Not one person on this Earth wants to drive a car they hate if they don’t have to. Hell, when my Dad bought me a 2003 Taurus in college because my Jetta died, I hated it. It was like driving a boat. I was embarrassed by the putrid blue color. I hated the seats, the stereo, and in the winter, I had to keep one hand on the driver’s door because the latch wouldn’t work, and the part was on backorder. There is nothing like driving on the interstate to get to class on time and holding the door shut for dear life, hoping you don’t roll out. I had no other choice, I was a broke college kid, and it was a car that got me from Point A to Point B. But I will never again drive a car I hate.
The thing is, someone I went to high school with loved their 2003 Taurus. They talked about its powerful V6 engine and its fine leather interior. It was a car they enjoyed. I am sure it was a nice car, I didn’t like it.
This goes to my point: Just because someone else hates it and thinks it is a pile of junk doesn’t mean it actually is. It’s just an opinion. Do you want to know if a car is good or not? Drive it yourself and tell your friends what you thought of it. Your opinion of the car won’t change theirs.
I will say this: It is important to have these pieces of literature to show us the negative portions of a car. Like if the software isn’t great, or the touchscreen is not very responsive, or if the center console doesn’t move properly. Those are understandable pieces of criticism, but none of them are opinionated. If the software isn’t great, people will see that. It might keep them from buying a car prematurely.
With all of that being said, there is plenty of evidence to suggest the Plaid Model S is a great vehicle, and there is other evidence that suggests Tesla has things to work on. Whichever side of the ball you’re on, believe in your opinion, but be open to other’s points as well. Additionally, make the final decision about a car on your own time, don’t go off of someone else’s words. That’s how you end up with something that you really do not enjoy driving.
A big thanks to our long-time supporters and new subscribers! Thank you.
I use this newsletter to share my thoughts on what is going on in the Tesla world. If you want to talk to me directly, you can email me or reach me on Twitter. I don’t bite, be sure to reach out!
SpaceX is gearing up for the 13th Starship integrated flight test, which is currently scheduled for Thursday, July 16, with the launch window opening up at 6:30 PM E.T. from Starbase in South Texas.
This mission, the second with the V3 Starship and Super Heavy vehicles, builds directly on the foundation of Flight 12 while introducing ambitious new objectives, including the debut deployment of next-generation Starlink V3 satellites.
The rapid iteration between flights underscores SpaceX’s “fail fast, learn faster” philosophy, with engineers addressing specific anomalies from the previous test to push reusability and payload capabilities further.
Starship’s thirteenth flight test is preparing to launch as early as Thursday, July 16 → https://t.co/Rp7VwBzpWx pic.twitter.com/jdpFlQUEpF
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) July 11, 2026
Flight 12 occurred earlier in 2026 and encountered notable challenges that became catalysts for Flight 13’s improvements. Issues included booster course deviations during the flip maneuver after stage separation, reusability problems with Super Heavy’s Raptor engine relights for the boostback burn, and an engine-out event on the Starship upper stage during its propulsion phase.
These hiccups, while they did not prevent overall mission success, highlighted areas needing refinement for more consistent performance and higher safety margins in future operational flights.
Elon Musk called it Epic: The full story of SpaceX’s Starship Flight 12
In response, SpaceX implemented a comprehensive suite of both hardware and software upgrades.
For the booster, engineers developed a more robust stage separation flip sequence to maintain stable orientation and prevent off-course rotation. Hardware modifications have enhanced Raptor re-light reliability during the boostback burn, complemented by updated engine alarms and abort logic tailored for multi-engine operations. On the Starship side, propulsion system changes directly tackle the Flight 12 engine-out scenario, improving redundancy and operational resilience.
Another major focus of SpaceX for Flight 13 was the advancements in the heat shield. New tile designs and attachment mechanisms, including tests of aft flaps and skirts, aim to boost durability.
Load-sensing tiles will measure real-time stresses during atmospheric entry, while white-painted tiles simulate missing ones as imaging targets. Six of the 20 Starlink V3 satellites carried aboard will feature specialized cameras to scan and transmit heat shield imagery back to ground teams, providing critical data for future return-to-launch-site attempts.
The mission profile also includes a higher dynamic pressure ascent to stress-test the thermal protection system and increase payload potential, alongside a planned in-space Raptor engine relight demonstration.
The V3 Starlink satellites themselves mark a leap forward, equipped with laser links, deployable solar arrays, and improved antennas to expand network capacity and speeds.
The company wrote:
“For the first time, Starship will carry V3 Starlink satellites to space, which aim to greatly expand the network’s capacity and user speeds. As part of this initial test, Starship is planned to deploy 20 satellites which will extend solar arrays and antennas and will attempt to connect with ground stations in South Africa and the larger Starlink constellation via high-capacity lasers. Six of the satellites have been modified with a suite of cameras to scan Starship’s heat shield and transmit imagery down to operators to continue testing methods of analyzing Starship’s heat shield readiness for return to launch site on future missions. Several tiles on Starship have been painted white to simulate missing tiles and serve as imaging targets in the test.”
This dual-purpose flight tests both vehicle reliability and satellite tech in one integrated operation.
These iterative changes, catalyzed by Flight 12’s data, position Starship closer to rapid reusability goals essential for ambitious programs like Artemis lunar missions and global Starlink coverage.
As SpaceX continues its aggressive test cadence, Flight 13 exemplifies how targeted engineering responses to real-flight anomalies accelerate progress toward fully operational, high-cadence launches. Success here could mark another milestone in the Starship program for SpaceX.
Tesla received a price target upgrade just on the heels of what was a crazy successful quarter for its automotive business, as the company reported a delivery beat of over 15 percent for Q2.
Jefferies analysts are upping Tesla’s price target (NASDAQ: TSLA) to $400 from $375, while maintaining their “Hold” rating on shares, and the strong automotive deliveries from Q2 is a big reason. However, there are some other catalysts that Jefferies believes position Tesla for a strong position in the second half of the year.
Strong Deliveries
Tesla reported 480,000 deliveries for Q2, while Wall Street was between 395,000 and 405,000, as an overall consensus. It was an incredibly strong quarter from a delivery perspective, and Tesla sold well more than it produced during the three months.
Tesla crushes Wall Street expectations, beats delivery estimates by over 15 percent
While vehicle deliveries are not necessarily looked at in the light that they used to be, Tesla still maintains a lot of advantages for keeping deliveries strong. With the loss of the $7,500 EV Tax Credit last year, Tesla still maintains a strong demand case for its EVs.
Robotaxi Performance
Tesla has been operating Robotaxi for over a year now, as it launched in Austin in mid-2025. That program has expanded to Houston and Dallas, the San Francisco Bay Area, and, most recently, Miami, Florida, the suite’s first appearance in the Sunshine State.
While the Robotaxi suite is still in its early phases and Tesla is working through things like fleet size and wait times, the company has been able to undercut the pricing of its competitors and has a great safety record.
Merger Speculation with Tesla and SpaceX
This is perhaps the biggest topic that many are speaking about with Tesla and SpaceX, and it is the one thing that seems to be on the mind of every investor.
Jefferies warns that growing talk of a Tesla-SpaceX merger could cause Tesla stock to trade more like a SpaceX proxy, which may disconnect it from underlying automotive fundamentals. SpaceX has a lot going for it, especially its compute deals that have been widely publicized as of late.
Profitability in New Projects Could Take Some Time
Tesla has a few long-term ventures in the pipeline, most notably the Optimus project and Robotaxi, which is launched but will take several years to expand to a meaningful level that resonates with everyday people.
This is something that investors need to be careful of. Tesla’s projects could take some time to round out, so Jefferies advises that these may carry initial losses, rather than immediate profit. Seasoned Tesla investors have echoed something like this for a long time; they knew going in it would not be an open-and-shut strategy. It was going to take time.
These new projects are no different.
News
Tesla readies its autonomous Cybercab and Robotaxi cleaning service
A Texas permit just confirmed Tesla’s cleaning robot is coming to service its Cybercab and Robotaxi fleet.
A routine Texas building permit may have quietly confirmed that Tesla’s robot vacuum and autonomous cleaning bot for the Robotaxi and Cybercab is coming. A state filing with the Texas Department of Licensing and Regulation, as first discovered by Tesla enthusiast Spencer and posted to X, that project number TABS2025022006, lists the scope of work at Tesla’s Austin Robotaxi hub at 5900 E Ben White Blvd to include a “Cleaning Robot” alongside Supercharger cabinets and an Equipment Inspection System.
Tesla first showed the cleaning robot publicly on January 31, 2025, posting a short video on X with the caption “This robot sucks,” showing a large robotic arm inside a Cybercab cabin switching between attachments to vacuum debris, pick up trash, and wipe down surfaces.
The operational case for this hardware comes down to mathematics. A robotaxi running rides across Austin needs to cycle passengers continuously to generate revenue. Every minute a vehicle sits waiting for a human cleaning crew is a minute it is not earning. A robotic arm that can fully clean a Cybercab cabin between rides in under two minutes removes one of the key bottlenecks in fleet utilization that no autonomous vehicle company has yet solved at scale.
This robot sucks pic.twitter.com/VUmGfCM5B3
— Tesla (@Tesla) January 31, 2025
The 5900 E Ben White Blvd address sits roughly 12 miles southwest of Gigafactory Texas, where Tesla has been mass producing its Cybercab. The Ben White facility is expected to functions as Tesla’s Austin Robotaxi Hub, the physical base of operations where fleet vehicles return between rides to charge, get cleaned, and undergo inspection before being dispatched again – and all autonomously. One can imagine a Cybercab dropping off a passenger, routes itself back to Ben White, pulls into the cleaning station, charges on one of the Supercharger cabinets listed in the same permit, passes the equipment inspection system, and returns to service, all without a human making a single decision.
The sighting activity around both locations has accelerated in parallel with production. By mid-March 2026, Cybercabs were spotted regularly on public roads across Austin and Silicon Valley. Tesla’s Robotaxi operations in Texas has expanded to cover the entire Austin metro area and has spread to Dallas, while autonomous Cybercab employee shuttle runs at Gigafactory Texas are also set to begin soon. What it represents is the physical infrastructure behind a fleet that Tesla intends to run without anyone cleaning, driving, or dispatching it by hand.
SpaceX comes with a slew of changes for Starship Flight 13
Tesla gets price target upgrade on heels of crazy successful auto quarter
