News
How will Tesla Version 8 compare to current Autopilot in the real world?
Tesla’s upcoming Version 8 software will be the company’s most significant Autopilot upgrade since its October 2014 initial release, but how will these updates compare to current Autopilot behavior in the real world?
This will be the first time the company will switch from using the vehicle’s front-facing camera as the core hardware responsible for visual image recognition, to radar technology which will now become the primary sensor used in creating a virtual picture of the vehicle’s surroundings.
With these improvements, to be rolled out via an over-the-air software update in the coming weeks, Model S equipped with the Autopilot hardware suite and Model X should theoretically be able to handle emergency braking situations with more precision, provide a smoother Traffic Aware Cruise Control (TACC) experience, take highway exits on its own, and provide drivers and passengers with an overall safer experience.
Let’s take a look at each of these features and see how Autopilot in Version 8 will differ from current Version 7 capabilities.
Automatic Emergency Braking
Following the much publicized death of Joshua Brown after his Model S crashed into the side of a tractor trailer while driving on Autopilot, reliability of Autopilot’s Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) feature was immediately put to question. Tesla released a statement stating that the high, white side of the tractor trailer, combined with a radar signature that would have looked very similar to an overhead sign, caused automatic braking not to fire. “Since January 2016, Autopilot activates automatic emergency braking in response to any interruption of the ground plane in the path of the vehicle that cross-checks against a consistent radar signature,” said Tesla.
Spy shots taken from the Naval Air Station reveal Tesla was testing and calibrating its AEB system this past summer. But despite the tests which seemingly show a Model S automatically braking in a staged collision event, Tesla has been overly cautious when it comes to activation of its AEB feature. AEB is reliant on imagery received from its front-facing camera, and supplemented by radar input, to decide on the degree of confidence that would trigger a braking event.
Some Tesla owners have even taken it upon themselves to stage scenarios that would seemingly trigger the AEB response of the vehicle, but to no avail leaving further mystery as to how AEB works.
The current Autopilot system under Version 7 is limited in its ability to reliably detect people or pinpoint false positives such as reflective objects that may appear larger than they are. Tesla uses the concave bottom of a soda can as an example. When the radar signal is reflected back from the can’s bottom dish-shaped surface, the reflected signal is amplified to many times its actual size leading the radar to believe there’s a large object before it. Because of that, programming the AEB system to suddenly engage could lead to a dangerous situation so Tesla decided to limit the scenarios that could actually trigger an automatic emergency braking response.
However, Version 8 will combine the power of fleet learning with “radar snapshots” to improve the vehicle’s ability to more accurately depict the circumstances of an event. In other words, we can expect Autopilot under Version 8 to have a much higher degree of confidence when it comes to engaging automatic emergency braking. Tesla CEO Elon Musk believes this set up will provide safety improvements by a factor of three over existing Autopilot.
Traffic Aware Cruise Control
Beyond being able to track a vehicle that’s directly in front of the car, Version 8 of Autopilot will also be able to see the vehicle ahead of that. Tesla describes this update as follows: Tesla will also be able to bounce the radar signal under a vehicle in front – using the radar pulse signature and photon time of flight to distinguish the signal – and still brake even when trailing a car that is opaque to both vision and radar. The car in front might hit the UFO in dense fog, but the Tesla will not.
The improvement will lead to smoother braking events when TACC is engaged since Autopilot will no longer solely rely on the actions from the vehicle before it. If a hard braking event happened in front of the vehicle that Autopilot is immediately tracking, Version 8 will be able to identify it and slow the Model S (or Model X) even before the vehicle directly ahead may have applied the brakes.
The following video captures an incident whereby the vehicle being tracked by Version 7 of Autopilot could not see the hard braking event that took place two cars ahead. TACC seemingly did not have enough time to stop the Model S.
Being able to see two cars ahead in Version 8 will provide a smoother TACC experience and increased safety.
Improved Auto Lane Change and Freeway Exiting
What we’re particularly excited about is the new feature in Version 8.1 that will allow an Autopilot-equipped Model S and Model X to take highway exits using the onboard navigation system.
Currently, Version 7 of Autopilot is capable of handling lane changes when the driver explicitly uses the turn signal stalk. Signaling left and the vehicle will make a left lane change, and vice versa. However with the ability to punch in a destination through Tesla Nav and have the vehicle assist with freeway exiting, assuming that’s part of the route, in our minds, Tesla is taking a critical step towards the ultimate goal of building fully autonomous self-driving vehicles. It’s a small step, but nonetheless it’s a notable step.
Photo credit: Rob M.
Full details of Tesla Version 8 can be found here.
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
