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.
Investor's Corner
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
New drone footage shows Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory steel frame nearing completion at Giga Texas.
Tesla’s dedicated Optimus factory at Gigafactory Texas is closing in on a finished steel frame, according to drone footage posted Thursday afternoon by longtime site observer Joe Tegtmeyer. In the video, Tegtmeyer said structural steel assembly is now about five column grids away from reaching the building’s north perimeter beam, putting the primary skeleton in its final stretch roughly six months after Tesla broke ground on the North Campus site in late March.
The Giga Texas Optimus Factory latest update … construction keeps moving fast!
Steel assembly is now only about 5 column grids from the north perimeter beam. Concrete is going in on the three upper floors, rebar is still being laid for more pours, and footing / grade-beam work… pic.twitter.com/qvFPvwnYzW
— Joe Tegtmeyer 🚀 🤠🛸😎 (@JoeTegtmeyer) September 17, 2026
Tegtmeyer’s footage shows concrete already going in on three upper floors while crews continue laying rebar and pouring grade beam footings at ground level. That kind of parallel work, steel rising at one end of the site while concrete sets at the other, is a scheduling approach Tesla used at the original Giga Texas building and appears to be repeating here to save time before the plant’s targeted 2027 production start.
Teslarati has tracked the building’s progress since Tesla confirmed construction was officially underway in May, when the first steel structure went up on what was then bare, reclaimed land. The facility is part of a more than 5.2 million square foot expansion of Giga Texas’s North Campus that Tesla has said will eventually run nearly the length of the existing vehicle factory, over 4,000 feet, while sitting somewhat narrower. Musk has pegged the long term output target at 10 million Optimus units a year once the line is running at full capacity, a volume that would dwarf the one million unit pilot line Tesla is standing up separately at its Fremont, California factory.
Tesla Giga Texas to feature massive Optimus V4 production line
The Texas facility sits alongside another major buildout on the same campus. Terafab, the joint Tesla and SpaceX chip fabrication plant that will eventually supply the silicon running Optimus units in the field. Housing robot assembly and chip production on the same grounds is a deliberate supply chain decision, cutting down on the shipping and lead time that would otherwise sit between the two.
Tesla has not given an updated timeline beyond its previously stated goal of bringing high volume Optimus production online at the site in the summer of 2027. Fremont’s smaller pilot line began mass producing the current Gen 3 robot in January, with that plant expected to build tens of thousands of units this year primarily to generate the real world data Tesla needs to refine the robot’s software before Giga Texas ramps up. Six months of visible construction progress, tracked almost entirely through Tegtmeyer’s recurring drone flights, gives the clearest outside look yet at how seriously Tesla is treating that 2027 deadline.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
New drone video shows Tesla’s Optimus Factory reaching a turning point
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
