A couple of weeks ago, we brought you the story of a Nissan dealer in Colorado that was offering $5 leases on 2025 Leaf models. Not to be outdone, Larry H. Miller Chrysler Dodge Ram Fiat in Denver, Colorado, is offering a $0/month lease on the 2024 Fiat 500e. Now, before you get too excited about having the opportunity to drive away in a chic EV for free, some taxes need to be paid.

The dealership’s Fiat 500e deal is a 27-month lease and does not require any downpayment. However, $1,297.68 in taxes needs to be paid at delivery, and at the end of the lease, there is a $395 disposition fee. Add those two figures together, and you get $1,692.68, which works out to be just the equivalent of $62.66 each month.

Read: Stellantis Extends Fiat 500e And Maserati Production Halt Again By Two More Weeks As Sales Struggle

It’s also worth noting that the lease is limited to 10,000 miles per year. Any excess mileage will be charged at 30 cents per mile. If, at the end of the lease, you want to keep the keys to the 500e, there’ll be a $17,388.45 payoff.

This deal is quite the bargain and has equivalent monthly payments of less than half the $127.91 available for the recent Nissan Leaf leasing deal. It’s unclear how many Fiat 500e the dealer has available, but it’s likely initiated this deal to help clear some inventory.

It’s no secret that the Fiat 500e has been a slow seller, and the brand appears to be having a particularly hard time selling it in the United States. While numerous ‘special edition’ models have been rolled out in the US, they are not selling either, and Fiat has repeatedly paused EV production in Italy. Just a few days ago, it extended a production halt yet again, meaning no new ones will be produced until at least January 20, 2025.

Despite all of this, the 500e could serve as a good city runabout for anyone living in Colorado, particularly given that it’s now so incredibly cheap to lease. All standard examples have a 42 kWh battery with 117 hp and 162 lb-ft (219 Nm) of torque, giving the car up to 149 miles (240 km) of range.

Tesla’s long-hyped, Mad Max-meets-LEGO Cybertruck has been on the streets for a year now, and, predictably, the drama has already arrived with it. One owner is out here claiming their electric pickup fell victim to a mere pothole on the road, racking up an eye-watering repair bill of over $34,000. Yes, thirty-four grand. Yet he still thinks the EV is tough and capable.

In a Facebook post picked up by Reddit, the unnamed Cybertruck lover reveals images of the damage and a screenshot of the total repair bill, which came to $34,013 including tax.

Related: Cybertruck Wheels Snap Off Like Twigs In Bizarre TikTok Video

“I finally got my truck back after nearly four months,” he wrote. “It got worked over pretty hard, and many more things needed to be replaced than originally expected.”

Certainly more than would be expected from a typical hard pothole strike in a full-size truck, the kind of vehicle that’s usually one of the most resilient on the road. Just how big was this pothole? I’m imagining something the size of the sinkhole that opened up at the Corvette museum back in 2014 maybe?

“The rear suspension mounts broke and then punched through the frame, requiring the full rear frame replacement,” he explains. “Front and rear rack and pinion steering, suspension all the way around, front and rear bumpers, air suspension systems, and bed components, to name a few.”

Some Reddit commenters have openly questioned whether a pothole really would cause that much damage to a truck, regardless of whether its a traditional body-on-frame pickup or built around aluminum castings, like the Tesla.

One commenter claims (without offering proof) that the owner posted in August that the damage occurred when he jumped the truck 22 ft (6.7 m), and the owner’s slightly cryptic comments in this latest post only serve to fan the flames.

More: Eagle Cap Camper Snaps Ram 3500 Dually In Half, Mopar Refuses $17,000 Repair Bill

“Since the insurance paid for it I won’t comment on how it was driven, just that a very large pothole in our washed-out road caused all the dominoes to fall,” he says.

But despite suffering such a huge amount of damage and needing an equally huge amount of work and money to get it back in working order, the owner doesn’t think any less of his Tesla.

“This is not a commentary on the durability of the truck,” he says. “You would be astounded at how tough and capable this truck is. This is still the most amazing truck I’ve ever had!”

A pothole and $32,000 of repairs later he still loves the truck!
byu/IcerC inCyberStuck

From an observer’s perspective, it’s clear that the Volkswagen ID.4 is far from perfect as it’s had several issues since its launch. At times, the problems are relatively trivial. However, some of them are more serious, such as when the doors open on their own because they can’t handle water on them. What we don’t often get is an inside look at life with such a car. Now, one man in Florida is telling his troubled story with an ID.4. 

Josh Cowan is a die-hard Volkswagen fan. He’s owned three Jettas, a Tiguan, and an Atlas. His wife’s very first car was a Volkswagen. It made sense to him to get an ID.4 when it came time to buy a new car for his family. What he didn’t know was that he’d end up right back in a loaner Tiguan for over seven months. 

More: VW Bringing Back True ‘Volkswagen’ Looks For Facelifted ID.3 And ID.4

Not long after taking delivery of his low-mileage but used ID.4 from Carmax, he noticed an airbag light on. He took it to the dealer and mentioned to them that he also heard a strange noise periodically. “There was a clunking sound that happened every time you kind of turned a corner and accelerated,” Cowan said to WFTV. 

First, the dealer thought the issue was a motor mount. When that didn’t work, they told him that the ID.4 needed a new transmission. Now, over seven months later, the ID.4 is still sitting at the shop. What’s taking so long? According to the dealer, Volkswagen itself hasn’t supplied it with the tools it needs to swap the gearbox out. 

“So, there it sits. Now it’s been seven and a half months. There are two additional recalls on that car that have happened in the meantime that they don’t have fixes for,” Cowan said. Interestingly, Volkswagen seems poised to wipe its hands of all liability as they offered the Cowans $3,000.

Josh believes that if he accepts it, he’ll release VW from future claims. With that in mind, Josh says “It’s frustrating, and we feel really let down by Volkswagen.” The only thing he can do at this point is wait on the dealer and the automaker to make things right. 

Image Credit: WFTV

DS Automobiles has just unveiled their new flagship, the fully electric N°8 fastback crossover, and it’s clear they’re trying (perhaps a bit too hard) to grab attention. During the official presentation, the French automaker had the gall—er, the cheek—to throw a little jab at the competition, recreating a scene from the folk tale Cinderella to make their point. And what’s that point, you ask? Well, the DS N°8 wants to be the new luxury carriage for those who fancy a bit of magic in their drive; no pumpkins required.

More: DS No8 Breaks Cover As The New French Electric Flagship

The N°8 was revealed by none other than Olivier Francois, CEO of Fiat, Abarth, and DS Automobiles, who made a rather grandoise statement by calling the N°8 a “modern-day carriage.” This, of course, was meant to evoke the heritage of DS, a brand that’s barely old enough to legally drink in some countries. A bit of a stretch, sure, but it sets the stage for what was to follow.

In a rather Cinderella-esque moment at the end of the video, Francois parks the N°8 between an Audi Q4 Sportback e-tron and a BMW i4, both of which were conveniently de-badged, but we got the message loud and clear. To top it off, he delivered a final punchline:

“Well, I’m convinced that if Cinderella were written in 2025, she would undoubtedly ride in a N°8. And allow me to say, by next summer, when N°8 is launched, it might just be like the fairy tale: the 12 strokes of midnight may very well sound for the competition’s luxurious carriages.”

At this point, the Audi and BMW are transformed nto pumpkins, while the DS N°8 remains unscathed, because, of course, it’s the star of the show. For the uninitiated, Cinderella’s fairy godmother turned a pumpkin into a golden carriage to get her to the ball, only to have the magic wear off at midnight. You know, just in case you hadn’t picked up on the metaphor.

Now, setting aside the cheeky marketing, DS Automobiles has had a bit of a rough ride since its split from Citroen in 2014. Competing with more established brands in both sales and brand recognition has proven tricky.

Positioned as one of Stellantis’s premium brands alongside Lancia and Alfa Romeo but below Maserati, DS doesn’t have the decades of heritage that BMW or Mercedes-Benz can rely on. Instead, it shares its underpinnings with other Stellantis models, while attempting to carve out its own niche with quirky French styling, more upscale interiors, and a slightly more refined chassis setup. Think of DS like Genesis, but focused more on the lower segments—if that makes sense. And that’s the approach they’ve taken with the N°8, which is designed to challenge the sedans and coupe-SUVs in Europe’s premium midsize segment.

More: How Would You Save Stellantis?

Francois was quick to highlight that the 4.82-meter-long (189.8-inch) N°8 combines the elevated driving position of an SUV with the elegance and class of a grand sedan. It also boasts the longest range in its segment with up to 750 km (466 miles) on a single charge.

In the video, the CEO went on at length about the interior, claiming it offers “extreme comfort, beauty, silence, and refinement.” He also highlighted that the N°8’s seats provide a spa-like experience, complete with massaging, ventilating, and heating functions, plus, a neck warmer for good measure.

But, as with all things that sound too good to be true, it remains to be seen whether buyers will shell out for this French luxury crossover when they can just as easily reach for a more traditional choice from the likes of BMW, Audi, or Mercedes-Benz.

DS Automobiles

Tesla is currently facing a wide array of legal challenges. While the company works to expand the adoption of robotaxis and continues to be investigated over concerns about Autopilot, it is now dealing with a lawsuit brought by a California woman. She alleges that a flaw in Tesla’s locking system allowed an assailant to enter her vehicle and attack her.

The plaintiff, identified only as Jane Doe in court filings from the Golden State, claims that Tesla doors can still be opened from the outside, even when the car is locked via the Tesla app.

According to the filing, the incident occurred at the Galleria at Tyler mall while Jane Doe was charging her Tesla Model Y. After plugging in the vehicle, she moved to the passenger seat to take a nap while the EV charged. Upon getting in, she used her Tesla app to lock the car. Evidently, the wing mirrors folded in and she saw an icon indicating that the car was locked.

More: Judge Rules Tesla Phantom Braking Lawsuit Can Proceed

Before she woke up, a person identified in the lawsuit as Jabari Marquis shook the car from the outside and then entered through the driver’s side door. While the woman believed the vehicle was locked, the exterior door handle allegedly worked as normal.

She claims that Marquis proceeded to assault her and she called 911, attempting to alert them to her predicament by saying things like “I hate this Mall, it’s full of rapists,” and “The charging stations are so slow.” The call apparently lasted for approximately seven minutes and ultimately police arrived and intervened.

The lawsuit accuses Tesla of failing to secure the vehicle’s doors from the outside and for not alerting occupants about the situation either. Interestingly, the suit isn’t solely against Tesla as the woman also includes the site of the assault, Galleria At Tyler. Her council claims that the mall failed to provide adequate security. Finally, the defendant, Mr. Marquis, is also facing legal consequences here as the woman is suing for damages related to assault and battery.

Driving is an inherently dangerous task, but several modern tech features are supposed to increase safety. According to one family in California, one such tool, Tesla’s Autopilot, is actually to blame for the death of their loved one. He crashed into a parked fire truck around 4 a.m. on February 18, 2023, and didn’t survive. 

Carscoops covered the crash when it first happened. At the time, it was unclear whether or not the driver were using any semi-autonomous driving features. Now, we know that the driver, Genesis Giovanni Mendoza Martinez, 31, had engaged Autopilot when he crashed into the fire truck. 

More: Rogue Tesla Smashes Into Multiple Cars Before Plunging Off Parking Deck

According to the Independent, the complaint against Tesla on behalf of the Mendoza family says that Giovanni was using Autopilot for 12 minutes prior to the crash. Data reportedly shows that he “generally maintained contact with the steering wheel until the time of the crash.” Why he didn’t see the flashing emergency lights of the truck and slow down or move over is unclear. 

In any case, the complaint says that Autopilot itself is flawed and that Tesla “undertook a widespread campaign to conceal thousands of consumer reports about problems with [its] ‘Autopilot’ feature, including crashes, unintended braking, and unintended acceleration.” For Tesla’s part, it’s responded the way it has with so many cases like this. It argues that the crash and its results “were caused by misuse or improper maintenance of the subject product in a manner not reasonably foreseeable to Tesla.”

Slow down and move over when approaching emergency vehicles. Truck 1 was struck by a Tesla while blocking I-680 lanes from a previous accident. Driver pronounced dead on-scene; passenger was extricated & transported to hospital. Four firefighters also transported for evaluation. pic.twitter.com/YCGn8We1bK

— Con Fire PIO (@ContraCostaFire) February 18, 2023

There’s no question that this entire situation is sad. We all make mistakes and sometimes that includes misunderstanding what a product is or isn’t capable of. Tesla, no doubt, could make it more clear that Autopilot and FSD don’t actually provide genuine Level 5 autonomy – perhaps starting with their names, which may mislead consumers into thinking the cars can actually drive themselves without any human interference.

This seems to be the case here, according to the lawsuit: “Not only was he aware that the technology itself was called ‘Autopilot,’ he saw, heard, and/or read many of Tesla or Musk’s deceptive claims on Twitter, Tesla’s official blog, or in the news media,” the complaint states. “Giovanni believed those claims were true, and thus believed the ‘Autopilot’ feature with the ‘full self driving’ upgrade was safer than a human driver, and could be trusted to safely navigate public highways autonomously.”

At the same time, it seems that previous legal victories for the automaker make one thing clear: ultimately, the driver is responsible for always maintaining control of the vehicle. 

As we pointed out in our original coverage, countless such accidents happen every year involving all kinds of vehicles, not just Teslas. It’s why the NHTSA has created campaigns like “Slow Down, Move Over” to remind drivers what they should do when they encounter an emergency vehicle.

Image Credit: Contra Costa FD

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has confirmed it’s looking into a recent fatal crash involving a Tesla Cybertruck that killed three teenagers in California late last month.

The accident occurred in the early hours of November 27 in Piedmont. Local police officers quickly responded to the scene and found the Cybertruck engulfed in flames. A witness pulled the sole survivor from the truck. All four occupants were 2023 graduates of the Piedmont High School who had returned home to celebrate Thanksgiving.

Watch: Tesla Cybertruck Crash Leaves Three Dead After Catching Fire

While recently speaking with Business Insider, a spokesperson from the NHTSA said the agency “is aware of the crash and is gathering information from the manufacturer and law enforcement.” The official noted that no formal investigation has been launched at this stage.

In the immediate aftermath of the crash, both the Piedmont Police Department and California Highway Patrol said they were looking into the cause of the crash. Piedmont police chief Jeremy Bowers suggested that speed likely played a role.

“It’s safe to say that speed was a factor. Now, are there other factors associated? That is certainly possible, but speed is likely a contributing factor to this collision,” he said. Police added there were no immediate signs that mechanical problems with the Cybertruck had contributed to the crash.

The Tesla caught fire soon after colliding with a cement wall and getting wedged between it and a large tree, but it’s currently unknown whether its high-voltage battery pack was the cause. While Piedmont fire chief Dave Brannigan said that it resembled a “typical car fire”, Bowers commented that it was “too intense” and the police officers, who tried to extinguish it, couldn’t. Eventually, fire crews put out the blaze.

This was the second fatal accident involving a Tesla Cybertruck in the US. The first occurred in early August when a man driving his electric pickup crashed near Beach City in Chambers County, Texas, slamming into a concrete culvert and triggering a fire.

Lead screenshot ABC7/YouTube

When an automaker willingly puts its own vehicle to the test in front of an audience, you know it means business. Chinese automaker Chery demonstrated its confidence in the safety of its EVs by performing a very demanding crash test on camera. The triple-car collision showcased the strength of the 2025 Exeed Sterra ES chassis and the integrity of its battery pack, all in front of an audience of media representatives.

The crash test took place in Tianjin, China, with support from the China Automotive Technology and Research Centre (CATARC). Unlike the typical crash trolleys used in standard tests, Chery opted for three actual Exeed Sterra ES vehicles, aiming for a more realistic simulation.

The Crash Test Setup

The scenario aimed to replicate a real-world situation, but there are two key caveats. First, it involves a static car attempting a U-turn, only to be struck from both sides by two other vehicles. The main difference here is that, in an actual U-turn accident, the turning vehicle would likely be moving when struck. Additionally, it’s unrealistic to assume both other cars would be traveling at exactly the same speed. More on that later, but it’s important to keep these factors in mind when evaluating the test.

More: Chery Hunting Wild Concept Previews New Wagon With Solid-State Batteries

Two white Sterra ES EVs, each traveling at 60 km/h (37 mph), struck the red vehicle from opposite angles. One car impacted the front-right corner at a 30-degree angle, while the other slammed directly into the passenger compartment from 180 degrees. While a challenging crash for any car, the footage and photos suggest that the Exeed Sterra ES maintained a strong level of protection for its occupants.

Despite enduring forces approaching 35 tons (70,000 pounds), the Exeed Sterra ES appears to have maintained its structural integrity, keeping the test dummies protected inside.

Chery reports that the pillars withstood the impact, all seven airbags deployed as expected, and the doors automatically unlocked. The emergency call function was also activated, adding an extra layer of safety. Crucially, the battery pack showed no signs of leaks, smoke, or fire, while the high-voltage system shut down automatically, as it should in the event of a crash.

The Need for Independent Validation

While Chery’s self-conducted crash test is certainly impressive, there’s always the question of how the Exeed Sterra ES would perform under the more stringent scrutiny of third-party evaluations from agencies like EuroNCAP or IIHS. After all, it’s one thing to conduct your own tests, but the true measure of safety comes when those tests are held to the rigorous standards set by industry authorities.

Also keep in mind that having one car stationary in the crash test affects realism by concentrating impact forces on the moving vehicles, which doesn’t replicate how energy is distributed in a real-world collision. In an actual U-turn accident, all vehicles would be in motion, dissipating force across the crash. By keeping one car static, the test isolates the impacts, potentially exaggerating their severity and not fully capturing how the vehicles would behave in a dynamic, unpredictable real-world scenario.

Tell Me More About The Exeed Sterra ES

The Exeed Sterra ES, first launched in 2023, shares its platform with the Huawei-backed Luxeed S7. It’s part of a growing list of contenders in the electric sedan market, all aiming to dethrone the Tesla Model 3. It comes with both RWD and AWD configurations, promising an impressive driving range of up to 905 km (562 miles) of range on a full charge, thanks to its large 97.7 kWh battery pack. For the 2025 model year, Chery has introduced several updates, including reinforced body and chassis elements, further improving its safety credentials.

Chinese cars have come a long way in terms of safety, as demonstrated by their performance in independent crash tests. Many EVs from Chinese automakers have earned five-star ratings in EuroNCAP, even as the organization has introduced stricter testing protocols in recent years. The growing safety standards among Chinese manufacturers signal a broader shift, with more models becoming increasingly competitive in global markets.

In a world where cars are often either all business or all spectacle, Toyota has gone for something a bit different. The automaker has unveiled a one-off electric vehicle designed for the popular Australian children’s music group The Wiggles. Dubbed the Big Red Ute, it combines playful design with Toyota’s off-road heritage, and while it may look like a bit of a gimmick, there’s some genuine engineering at work beneath the colorful exterior.

Designed and developed locally by Toyota’s Product, Planning, and Development division, the Big Red Ute isn’t just a show pony. While this one-off clearly serves a specific purpose, some of its styling elements could hint at the upcoming ‘baby’ Toyota FJ Cruiser.

More: Toyota’s Electric Hilux Goes Beyond The PR Stunt With Real-World Mine Testing

The front end draws from the tough, utilitarian design of Toyota’s classic Cruiser J70, with a playful twist. The headlights, for instance, are LED screens that can display everything from pupils to hearts. Muscular fenders, exposed wheels, and underbody protection reinforce the pickup’s off-road character, while the 3,120 mm (122.8 inches) length keeps it compact enough for the stage without losing presence. The same applies to the chunky tires wrapped around the rainbow-themed 12-inch Turbofan wheels.

The exposed cabin accommodates four passengers, each with their own seatbelt attached to the oversized bull bar. Adding to the fun, there’s an integrated bubble machine at the rear, capable of producing 6,000 bubbles per minute, a feature guaranteed to captivate toddlers.

Toyota Australia

The name Big Red Ute is inspired by the latest song release from The Wiggles, while the colorful livery mirrors the Toyota Hilux featured in the music video.

Despite its toy-like appearance, this one-off is a fully functional vehicle, powered by a 48V electric powertrain, independent coil spring suspension, and drum brakes. Naturally, the top speed is limited to 20 km/h (12 mph), because, really, no “ute” needs to go faster than that on a music stage.

The Big Red Ute made its debut on December 7, when The Wiggles performed in Melbourne. The EV will accompany the band on the remainder of their Australian tour, before joining them for their global tour dates. The Wiggles have been around for three decades, earning the title of “the world’s most popular children’s entertainment group.”

Dashcam footage from a multi-story parking lot in New South Wales, Australia, has captured the shocking moment a Tesla Model S went rogue, careening into multiple vehicles before launching through a barrier and plummeting to the level below. If you’re expecting the usual “driver error” explanation, you might want to think again. This one’s still a mystery.

The crash occurred last Saturday at a DFO mall in New South Wales, Australia. A video shows the Model S initially slamming into the front of Toyota LandCruiser Prado, briefly lifting it into the air and spinning it around. The Tesla then continues to speed across the parking lot, hitting the car with the dashcam. Just two seconds later, it can be heard smashing into the barrier and falling to the pavement.

Read: Tesla Cybertruck Crash Leaves Three Dead After Catching Fire

Despite the severity of the multiple impacts, the 59-year-old driver and 68-year-old passenger were not seriously injured, although they were transported to hospital for treatment.

The damage to the Model S was extensive. The front end was nearly unrecognizable, the tailgate and rear window were shattered, and one of the wheels was ripped off entirely. It’s not every day you see a car come apart like that without some sort of catastrophic failure at play.

No official cause for the crash has been given at this stage, but officers from the New South Wales police force are investigating. The wrecked Model S has also been taken to a garage to have its electronics checked to determine the cause of the crash. It’s unclear if the 59-year-old male driver was in complete control of the car at the time or if it suffered some kind of mechanical and software-related failure.

Numerous crashes involving Teslas in the United States have been blamed on the carmaker’s Autopilot driver assistance systems, but it would be highly unusual if the driver had tried to enable the system in the parking lot. Nevertheless, the cause of this particular incident is still under investigation, and it’s important to determine whether it was related to the vehicle or driver to prevent similar occurrences in the future.

Few cars have ever divided opinions quite like the Tesla Cybertruck. Its polarizing design isn’t even up for debate—some love its sci-fi aesthetic, while others can’t stand its unpolished looks comparing it with a child’s drawing brought to life. Regardless of which side you’re on, there’s no denying that it has helped pave the way for other electric pickups. However, it’s also proven to be riddled with problems and videos recently shared to TikTok appear to suggest the wheels might be more fragile than expected.

Earlier in the year, Tesla had to fix the standard aero covers on the Cybertruck’s wheels after it was revealed they were chewing into the tire sidewall. However, this latest potential problem isn’t related to the wheel covers, but instead the alloy rims themselves. More specifically, the wheels of this Cybertruck have shattered in a rather bizarre way, leading to speculation that they may not be as durable as they should be.

Read: Sixth Time The Charm? Tesla Cybertruck Recalled Over Loss Of Drive Power

It’s unclear what exactly caused the wheels to snap off like that. Some believe it could have been caused by a pothole, though this type of damage seems unlikely to result from something so minor. Other viewers speculate that the impact may have been with the concrete wall visible in the videos, but one would have expected more damage to the side of the car if this was the case.

@jordan8tatum

Even in a crash the Cybertruck Rims shouldn’t crumble 🤷🏾‍♂️🤔 #cybertruck #JordanNTatum #fail

♬ original sound – Jordan & Tatum

What’s clear is the extent of the damage. Many of the spokes on the front wheel have broken off and cracks are visible around the central part that connects to the hub. The damage done to the rear wheel is even more extensive, as the entire rim has broken off from the hub, except for some material around the lug nuts.

It could be that the wheels of the Cybertruck are made from cast aluminum. Most cars on the market leave the factory with cast aluminum wheels as they are relatively inexpensive, but inconsistencies in the materials used during the manufacturing process can make them weak. More premium rims are forged and, in addition to being much stronger, are also significantly lighter.

Perhaps one of the reasons why the rims of this Cybertruck failed so spectacularly is because the electric pickup weighs over 6,600 lbs in its lightest configuration, or more than 3,000 kg, which puts extra stress on some components, such as the wheels and tires.

The person who posted the two videos on TikTok writes that the Tesla has a problem and should be recalled. However, without any more info, it’s impossible to determine whether this is a widespread issue impacting other Cybertrucks too or not.

@jordan8tatum

I seriously think the Cybertruck Rims need a recall! Have yall ever seen a rim snap off in a perfect circle? #cybertruck #fail #explore

♬ original sound – Jordan & Tatum

Image Credit: jordan8tatum / TikTok

For well over a decade, some production cars have shown up to owners with electric door poppers. The technology isn’t exclusive to electric vehicles or exactly novel, either. The C5 Chevrolet Corvette has electronic door releases, as does the Dodge Viper.

In the USA, any car with this type of door release has to have a manual backup, and that’s where we find our problem today. Every automaker gets to decide where and how they’ll employ that manual backup. Let’s have a quick look at exactly where Dodge decided to put them on the new Charger Daytona.

More: Clueless Thief Trapped Inside Corvette C8 Begs Owner For Help

Carscoops was on hand at the Los Angeles Auto Show to see the new Charger Daytona. One thing we noticed right away was the door popper button in the cabin. It’s located on the side of the door card and passengers will likely use their thumb to smack it when they want to get out.

It also had us immediately wondering where the manual backup was. Here are a few photos of the door card. Take a moment and see if you can spot it. If you can’t find it, move on to the next as we get closer and closer to the handle.

Notice that the manual release is somewhat deep and far forward on the door card. From the driver’s seat, it is completely out of view. The new Jeep Wagoneer S has a similar design with a slightly easier-to-find and access manual release. It’s easy to see why some condemn handles like this. Will drivers unfamiliar with the car be able to get out in the case of a crash or power failure in the car?

That’s a real issue that many Tesla drivers have ended up complaining about. While, no doubt, it’s the responsibility of an adult driving a car to understand how to escape in case of emergency, it’s easy to understand why people end up confused by handles like this.

To Tesla’s credit, the front door manual release is typically right on top of the armrest, far more visible and easy to use than the one in the Dodge Charger Daytona. At the same time, the rear door release is sometimes under the carpet in the middle of the rear bench seat. That’s not simple or easy to find in an emergency.

This isn’t even a problem that needs to exist because some automakers like Lexus and Audi seem to have a very simple and elegant solution. Rather than present a button to pop the doors, they still use a physical handle. Pulling on it gently engages the electric door release. In case of emergency, a full hard pull on the exact same handle will actuate the physical backup and the door will open.

In some cases, the button that engages the electric release also is a handle that occupants can pull out to engage the manual release. Should door handles like those in Lexus and Audi products be required or should automakers have the freedom to add manual releases as they see fit? Tell us your thoughts below!

Image Credits: Stephen/Casey Rivers for Carscoops

One of the benefits of owning an EV is that they consist of fewer moving parts so should be less expensive to service and maintain. But as one Tesla owner discovered, EV hardware isn’t invincible, and it’s still expensive when it breaks.

This reminder comes from Cybertruck owner Joey Arrowood, who is staring down the barrel of an $8k bill after finding an oil leak on his electric pickup. That’s right, an oil leak – EVs use oil, too. As he shared in a post on the Facebook Cybertruck group, as he returned to his truck one day, he noticed a pool of oil under the rear motor, closer inspection revealing that a small, sharp rock had ground a hole in the motor housing.

Related: Sixth Time The Charm? Tesla Cybertruck Recalled Over Loss Of Drive Power

“At some point a small rock bounced over the belly pans and covers and wedged itself between the rear subframe and gearbox wearing a small hole into the aluminum case,” Arrowood wrote on Facebook. “I find it absurd to comprehend that such a small rock can cause this kind of damage.”

The Tesla is coming up to 9,000 miles (14,500 km) and the owner says the little action its seen away from paved surfaces was restricted to some driving on local dirt roads. But Arrowood’s local service center in Clarkston, MI, claims the proper fix is a new drive unit at a cost of $7,660.55, and says it won’t cover the cost, and will only repair it if Arrowood pays up himself or files an insurance claim.

“I love the truck and driving it, but come on Tesla… a little help here is needed please,” the owner wrote.

Commenters on the thread don’t all agree on the correct course of action: some suggest fixing the hole with JB Weld; others claim a genuine aluminum welding job would be better. But none of them thinks Arrowood should shell out for a brand new motor and most believe this isn’t a warranty situation, just an unfortunate freak accident, possibly made worse by poor design and thin castings on Tesla’s part.

Who do you think should pay, and what kind of fix would you recommend? Leave a comment and let us know.

A crash involving a Tesla Cybertruck has left three people dead and one seriously injured in the northern Californian city of Piedmont

The incident occurred in the early hours of Wednesday morning. Police were first alerted to the accident when the iPhone of one of the occupants automatically sent out an SOS at 3:08 a.m., pinpointing the crash’s coordinates. Just two minutes later, officers arrived on the scene to find the electric truck completely engulfed in flames. Local fire crews were quick to respond, arriving at 3:16 a.m., but the damage was already catastrophic.

Read: Elon Musk Boasts About Tesla Cybertruck’s Strength After Devastating Crash

While speaking with the media, Piedmont fire chief Dave Brannigan said that a witness managed to pull the sole survivor from the wrecked Cybertruck before flames consumed the vehicle. The survivor was transported to the hospital, where they remain in critical condition after undergoing surgery. While the extent of their injuries has not been disclosed, their survival is nothing short of remarkable given the destruction at the scene.

The exact cause of the crash is still under investigation, but Piedmont police chief Jeremy Bowers hinted that speed likely played a central role.

“It’s safe to say that speed was a factor. Now, are there other factors associated? That is certainly possible, but speed is likely a contributing factor to this collision,” he said, adding there were currently no signs mechanical problems caused the crash.

“We’re very new into this investigation – the California Highway Patrol, us, the Piedmont Fire Department – so there’s no indication that there were mechanical effects that were the primary cause for the collision,” Bowers added. “All that is still very much under investigation at this point.”

The Cybertruck veered off the road, jumped a curb, and smashed into a cement wall before becoming wedged between the wall and a large tree. The impact was so severe that the vehicle caught fire shortly after. Despite initial speculation about Tesla’s lithium-ion battery packs being the cause, Brannigan noted that the blaze resembled a “typical car fire” and was extinguished quickly by local firefighters.

Police have not yet released the names of the victims, but local news outlets, including CBS News Bay Area, have reported that all four occupants were 2023 graduates of Piedmont High School. The group was home for Thanksgiving, visiting family and friends during the holiday break.

Lead screenshot ABC7/YouTube

A man in Portland is seeking $745,000 after his car was T-boned by a Tesla that was allegedly on self-driving mode and ran a stop sign on November 25, 2023. The incident is now spotlighting the contentious debate around the reliability of autonomous vehicle technology and the role of driver responsibility when using it.

According to the lawsuit seen by Oregon Live, while driving through the intersection of Oregon 212 and Southeast Sunnyside Road, Michael Ward’s 2021 Hyundai was hit by the Tesla, even though Ward was moving with the flow of traffic and had the right-of-way. The crash caused significant injuries, leaving Ward with facial and spinal fractures, along with extensive dental damage.

He has filed a lawsuit against the driver of the Tesla, Kgoc Phuong Anh Dinh, accusing her of negligence by “unreasonably relying upon autonomous vehicle technology.”

More: US Govt Investigating Tesla’s Full-Self Driving After Four Crashes, One Fatal

Ward’s Hyundai was totaled in the crash, and he was transported to OHSU Hospital for treatment of his injuries. In the lawsuit, he is seeking $100,000 to cover past and future medical expenses, $40,000 in lost income, $5,000 for personal property damaged in the crash, and a substantial $600,000 for pain and suffering.

Despite the Tesla allegedly being in self-driving mode, the carmaker is not named as a defendant in the case. Tesla explicitly states in its guidelines that drivers must remain alert and ready to take control when using Autopilot or Full Self-Driving (FSD) features, a point that complicates cases like this one.

Other Tesla Self-Driving Lawsuits in Oregon

Oregon Live notes that other self-driving-related lawsuits have been filed across the state. Earlier this year, a separate lawsuit was filed by another Oregon man after his Tesla Model 3, allegedly operating in Full Self-Driving mode, steered itself into a curb and damaged one of its wheels.

He sued Tesla for the cost of a replacement wheel, $713, and sought reimbursement for the $6,000 he had paid to purchase the FSD system. While the court ruled that Tesla must pay for the damaged wheel, it declined to order the company to refund the cost of the software.

In 2021, a man sued a Tesla driver and the car manufacturer after the car apparently switched into self-driving mode and slammed into him. The man had sought $342,000. The case was ultimately settled for an undisclosed amount, soon after it was revealed the insurance company for the Tesla had disposed of or lost the wrecked vehicle before it could be analyzed.

Related: Tesla Allegedly In “Self-Drive” Mode Slams Into Parked Police Car

In the same year, another Tesla owner filed a $250,000 lawsuit against Tesla alleging that his Model S, which was in Autopilot mode, misread road conditions and made a 180-degree turn, slamming into a barrier after it hydroplaned on standing water. The man, Ranjan Lamichhane, said that he stopped pursuing damages after Tesla managed to boot his lawsuit out of federal court and sent him into arbitration, where he felt out-powered.

Over the years, many Tesla owners have reported complaints about “phantom braking”—a phenomenon where the car suddenly and inexplicably applies the brakes, often with no apparent hazard in sight. Now, a lawsuit against Tesla over these alleged “phantom braking” issues has been allowed to move forward by a US District Judge in Chicago.

The suit accuses Tesla of concealing a defect in its forward collision monitoring system, which is said to trigger abrupt and unnecessary braking without any real danger present. While some parts of the lawsuit have been dismissed, the central claim regarding the phantom braking issue remains very much alive.

The lawsuit was originally filed by Tesla Model 3 owner Joshua Santiago in 2023. He claimed that the forward collision monitoring system used by Tesla is defective and can suddenly activate when there’s no actual danger or collision risk, described as ‘phantom braking.’ The lawsuit also alleged that Tesla was charging excessive car insurance premiums because of the reportedly defective collision monitoring system.

Read: Tesla Settles Lawsuit Against Rivian Over Claims It Stole Trade Secrets

Late last week, US District Judge Georgia Alexakis ruled to narrow the lawsuit’s scope but upheld the central claim about phantom braking. Tesla had moved to have the entire case dismissed, but the judge’s decision ensures the defect allegations will be heard in court.

The lawsuit alleges that Tesla had known about the alleged defect as early as 2015, but failed to inform customers about it. A whistleblower’s report asserts Tesla had recorded “139 cases of unintentional emergency braking,” and “383 reported phantom stops resulting from false collision warnings.” Hundreds of complaints regarding the faulty system have also been made to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

Tesla regularly deploys over-the-air software updates, but the plaintiff argues these efforts have failed to resolve the problem. Santiago claims he “would not have purchased his vehicle…had he been aware” of the defect”, positioning the case as a matter of consumer transparency.

Insurance Premium Claims on Hold

While the phantom braking allegations proceed, Judge Alexakis dismissed claims regarding Tesla’s inflated insurance premiums because of the allegedly faulty collision monitoring system. However, plaintiffs have been granted permission to file an amended complaint to revive those claims should they gather additional evidence.

Tesla, for its part, has previously denied claims that it was aware of phantom braking issues in its popular electric vehicles.

The Tesla Cybertruck has been no stranger to controversy, but a crashed example that gained viral fame is now taking on a new role—as an auction lot. The battered EV will need some repairs, but it could return to the roads, provided someone is willing to foot the bill for the undoubtedly costly and lengthy repairs.

This particular Cybertruck first made headlines a few months ago when it was spotted abandoned on the side of a road in Seattle, sporting significant damage to its driver’s side rear wheel. What followed was a mix of digital and real-world antics: Reddit threads, a short-lived stint as a tourist attraction on Google Maps, and even local residents leaving flowers at its forlorn resting place.

Read: Sixth Time The Charm? Tesla Cybertruck Recalled Over Loss Of Drive Power

The viral moment ended in September when the vehicle was towed away, and now, as Jalopnik first uncovered, it’s landed at Copart’s North Seattle location, awaiting its next chapter.

What’s the Damage?

Details about the crash that sidelined this Cybertruck remain elusive, but the aftermath tells its own story. Evidently, one of the rear wheels has taken quite a hefty hit, and it’s been bent out of position, indicating there’s some serious suspension issues hidden from view. The accompanying fender has also been ripped from the car, leaving the charging port exposed.

Anyone interested in placing a bid on this Cybertruck would be wise to check it out in person beforehand. It’s possible that the vulnerable cast aluminum frame of the Tesla may have sustained structural compromise from the collision, and if that’s the case, it may be extremely costly to repair or replace.

Image Credit: Copart

A Growing Graveyard of Cybertrucks

Interestingly, this isn’t the only mangled Cybertruck up for grabs. Copart currently lists 11 other examples scattered across the U.S., many of which appear to have fared even worse than this Seattle star. Some of them appear to have more extensive damage than this one and yet are already attracting bids. One particular rough example (below) with severe structural compromise to the front, rear, and sides after a punishing crash had attracted a bid of over $20,000 at the time of writing.

Image Credit: Copart

The Xiaomi SU7 Max is a proper EV sports sedan on paper. It makes  663 hp (673 PS / 495 kW). It can allegedly go from 0-62 mph (100 km/h) in just 2.8 seconds and drive up to 497 miles on a single charge. That’s a lot of speed but, evidently, the SU7 doesn’t have the brakes to reel it in on track.

In April, a Chinese influencer lapping the Shanghai Tianma circuit had a crash in the car. Video from the incident shows the driver start approaching a left-hand turn when things quickly go bad. 

Read: Xiaomi SU7 Ultra On Sale From $114K, Watch Prototype Lap The ‘Ring In 6:46

Despite several attempts to get the car to turn it, it barely changes its direction and then barrels through the end of the track. At that point, it smashes into the barrier and the airbags go off. The video by Tang Zhu Liao Che (堂主撩車) has already racked up millions of views. Tang Zhu showed the brakes of the car, which had done five hot laps prior to the crash, and the relatively small pads were severely worn.

Then, in June, another influencer in an SU7 experienced a similar brake failure while driving at a track. In this situation, the driver seesawed at the wheel before the crash. When the car struck the wall it had turned almost all the way around. The airbags didn’t go off and the driver’s seat broke apart like it was made of cardboard.

Xiaomi issued the following statement, explaining that the SU7 Max is not meant for track use:

“We strongly remind you that Xiaomi SU7 Max is a high-performance luxury car for road use. Please do not try extreme driving such as on professional racing circuits. The braking system of Xiaomi SU7 Max uses NAO friction pads, which are suitable for daily driving. They are mainstream products that balance braking noise and braking performance and meet the needs of public road driving.

“Due to the high speed, large kinetic energy accumulation, sharp braking, and rapid wear of components under continuous high load and high temperature under track conditions, all core components of the vehicle are required to meet requirements far beyond those of daily conditions.”

NAO stands for non-asbestos organic. That material can work fine in daily driving. On a race track though, it’s proving problematic. Xiaomi itself has fitted the much more powerful SU7 Ultra, which broke the EV record at the Nurburgring last month with a 6:46.847 lap time, with carbon ceramic discs measuring 430 mm at the front and 410 mm at the rear. According to the company, they can withstand temperatures up to 2,372 F (1,300 degrees Celsius) and are much more resistant to fade during track use.

No doubt, having to slow down a car with this kind of power and one that weighs 4,365–4,861 lb (1,980–2,205 kg) isn’t easy. The Autopian points out that the Brembo brakes on the SU7 Max actually have pads that are smaller than those found on a Honda CR-V – a family SUV with roughly one-third of the power of the Chinese performance sedan.

Notably, during everyday driving, the regenerative braking power supplements the mechanical brakes. They’ll help out on track too, but they have limits as well. It’s why cars like the Hyundai Ioniq 5 N and the Porsche Taycan Turbo GT both have gigantic brakes when compared to the regular versions of those cars. Perhaps it’s time for Xiaomi to follow the lead of far more experienced automakers. 

Image Credit: China Observer

Plenty of Tesla Cybertrucks descended upon Las Vegas last week for SEMA, but the most dramatic of them all was brought to life by a Florida-based shop you’ve likely never heard of: Reds Miami. It has built what appears to be the world’s first Cybertruck dually, and it’s bound to divide opinions.

More often than not, dually setups are limited to hefty Heavy Duty pickups, but given all the buzz around the Cybertruck, it was only a matter of time before someone decided to bolt on two extra wheels at the rear. Tesla’s polarizing pickup truck was converted into a dually just a few days before SEMA.

Read: You Can Lease A Tesla Cybertruck For $1,249 A Month, But Would You?

The new wheels chosen for the Tesla were produced by Diesel Wheels and measure a huge 26-inch at the rear while wrapped in 35-inch tires. A set of bespoke fender flares then had to be crafted for the EV and much to our surprise, they actually suit the design of the Tesla quite well.

This project wasn’t simply a matter of bolting on the extra wheels and the new arches, however. As standard, the Cybertruck’s charging port is located on the driver’s side rear wheel arch, so new cabling had to be run to accommodate the flared fenders. The Tesla is also equipped with rear-wheel steering. Apparently, this functionality has been retained, although we suspect the extra weight of the two additional 26-inch wheels may put a little bit of extra strain on the system.

Then there’s the range. Fitting huge wheels on an EV can have a noticeable impact on the driving range, as can all-terrain tires. There’s no word on how much this Cybertruck’s range has been cut by, but for some, any reduction in range will be more than worth it for the wild looks.

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Pj (@pjtruckin)

View this post on Instagram

A post shared by Pj (@pjtruckin)

Pickup truck owners may have cornered the market on trolling EV drivers by occupying charging spaces, but they’re far from the only offenders when it comes to “ICEing”—the maddeningly inconsiderate practice of internal combustion vehicles hogging charging stations.

A prime example of this came recently in Athens, Greece, where a Ferrari F430 was spotted shamelessly parked next to an EV charger, despite plenty of empty regular parking spaces just a short stroll away. But this Ferrari owner wasn’t content with merely blocking access to the charger. No, they decided to up the ante by taking the plug and wedging it onto the alloy wheel of their mid-2000s Italian supercar.

More: Lamborghini And McLaren Supercars Caught ICEing Tesla Supercharger Station

This level of petty provocation is reminiscent of a Ford Ranger Raptor incident in New Zealand, where a similarly non-electrified vehicle owner tucked a charging plug onto the truck’s rear bed for laughs. Perhaps the Ferrari owner thought the wheel was the next best location. Another comedic option could’ve been to stick the plug into one of the quad exhaust pipes, though – radical idea incoming – simply leaving the charger for people who need it might’ve been the smartest move of all.

The photos were shared by an EV owner in a Facebook group called “E-Mobility in Greece“. The spotter came across the offending Ferrari late at night and had to do a double-take to process the audacity of the scene. The EV owner ended up using one of the several unoccupied regular parking spots, as his battery didn’t need charging at the time.

Photos Kainourgios Anthropos / Facebook

Ferrari itself is inching toward the electric revolution. The Italian company plans to unveil its first fully electric model next year and already offers plug-in hybrid supercars like the 296 GTB/GTS and the SF90 Stradale/Spider. These vehicles can legitimately use public chargers.

On the other hand, the pictured F430 runs exclusively on gasoline. Maranello’s entry-level supercar was introduced in 2004 as the successor of the 360 Modena, and was replaced by the all-new 458 Italia in 2009. Power for the F430 comes from a mid-mounted 4.3-liter V8 engine generating 483 hp (360 kW / 490 PS) and 465 Nm (343 lb-ft) of torque.

The broader issue of ICEing isn’t unique to Athens. It’s a global nuisance, but Greece appears to have cultivated its own vibrant subculture of offenders. The same Facebook group that shared the Ferrari incident even maintains a photo album dedicated to documenting ICEing violations. The album features over 100 examples of non-electrified vehicles of all shapes and sizes brazenly occupying parking spaces clearly marked for EVs and PHEVs.

Photos Dimitris Anastassiou / Facebook