Tesla’s fourth-quarter sales results are in, and, as expected, they’re a bit of a mixed bag. On the upside, the company set a new record for quarterly sales. On the downside, it missed projections and sold fewer cars in 2024 than in 2023, marking its first-ever annual sales decline in over a decade amid growing competition in the global electric vehicle market. Unsurprisingly, this has contributed to a drop in the company’s stock price. Let’s break it all down.

See: Tesla Model Y Juniper Caught With Split Headlights And Rear Light Bar

First, Tesla delivered 495,570 vehicles in the fourth quarter of 2024. That’s an improvement over its previous record-breaking quarter (Q3 of 2024), which saw 462,890 deliveries. However, analysts had projected that Tesla would deliver closer to 500,000 vehicles. To match its 2023 total sales , Tesla would have needed to deliver more than 510,000 cars in Q4, meaning it fell short of what was necessary to avoid a year-over-year decline.

2024 vs. 2023: The Numbers Game

As a result, Tesla fell short of its goal of surpassing the 1.8 million deliveries achieved in 2023, ending 2024 with exactly 1,789,226 vehicles delivered. The breakdown of these numbers is particularly noteworthy: 1,704,093 of those deliveries came from the Model Y and Model 3. This means the Model S, Model X, and the newly launched Cybertruck collectively accounted for less than five percent of Tesla’s total sales.

In addition to its vehicle deliveries, Tesla reported strong performance in its energy business. The company says that it delivered a record 11.0 GWh of energy storage products in the fourth quarter of 2024. It hasn’t released financial results yet which could shed some additional light on how the brand is doing. Those will come out on January 29 after the market closes.

Tesla Stock Faces Continued Pressure

Tesla’s latest sales report hasn’t done much to stabilize the company’s ongoing stock slump. As of this writing, Tesla shares have dropped 6.8% for the day, capping off what’s been a rough week. Over the past five trading days, TSLA has fallen from a high of $465 per share to just $375.

It’s unclear what might stop the bleeding, or so-to-speak, at least in the short term. Perhaps the alliance between Elon Musk and Donald Trump will come into play but we’ll have to wait a little while longer to see how that shakes out.

Refreshed Model Y And New Sub-$30K EV

One factor working in Tesla’s favor is the imminent launch of the updated version of its bestselling Model Y, codenamed Project Juniper. Expected to hit most global markets in the coming months, this refreshed model should help boost sales and bolster confidence as the company moves into 2025.

Read: Tesla Exec Confirms Sub-$30K Model Q And 2025 Product Plans

Additionally, CEO Elon Musk has expressed optimism about the company’s future, predicting more than 20% growth in sales for 2025. Adding to this, a recent Deutsche Bank report revealed that Tesla’s Head of Investor Relations, Travis Axelrod, confirmed the planned launch of a lower-cost vehicle priced under $30,000 in the first half of 2025. With the introduction of this budget-friendly model alongside the updated Model Y, could reignite Tesla’s sales momentum and help the company regain its footing in the crowded EV market.

It turns out that getting your hands on a Tesla Cybertruck might be just as nerve-wracking as waiting for it in the first place. One hopeful owner is finding out the hard way that Tesla doesn’t play nice when it comes to deadlines or refunds. According to him, the company has given him a simple ultimatum this holiday season: take delivery now or kiss $2,500 and his spot in line goodbye. Happy holidays, right?

Despite his requests for a little breathing room, Tesla seems uninterested in bending its rules. And, based on the fine print, it’s hard to say he didn’t see this coming.

More: Brand New Cybertruck Leaks Oil After 3 Days, Tesla Needs A Month To Fix

Right now, ordering a Cybertruck requires a $250 non-refundable order fee. That’s different from the deposit that a Facebook user put down by a factor of ten. He dropped $2,500 to configure a truck and on December 28 received word from Tesla that he had to accept delivery now or lose that money. “You have exceeded your final hold on your Cybertruck and have been assigned a truck that is on island readily available,” reads a message reportedly from Tesla service.

According to his own post on the Tesla Cybertruck Owners group on Facebook, he needs more time, which is what he allegedly told the company rep. They simply responded “Your order will be cancelled with your deposit forfeited.” Butcher pleaded that this didn’t seem fair and that he would like the deposit to go to a future purchase of a Cybertruck.

Based on the details provided and Tesla’s response, it seems clear that he agreed to these terms when placing his order. While he doesn’t explicitly clarify, all signs point to this being a confirmed order rather than a simple reservation—likely involving specific options or configurations. If that’s the case, does it mean Tesla is entirely in the right here, and the customer is in the wrong? It’s a tricky situation, but the fine print seems to be working in Tesla’s favor.

Interestingly this isn’t the only non-refundable part of the Cybertuck buying experience. At some point in mid-2025, the automaker plans to launch the battery range extender for the truck. In October, it increased the non-refundable deposit for the accessory from $500 to $2,000. Perhaps this is just a lesson to be careful about counting your eggs before they hatch. 

Buying a new car is supposed to come with a little peace of mind. Warranties exist for those “just-in-case” moments, protecting buyers from hefty repair bills should something go wrong. But as one Tesla owner learned just before Christmas, warranties can be as fragile as a cracked windshield—literally. What followed was a near-miss with a $1,700 repair bill, a lot of confusion, and a lesson in persistence that every car owner should hear.

Imagine walking out to your six-day-old car to find a giant crack in the windshield that wasn’t there when you left it. That’s exactly what happened to Reddit user Heartvu on December 23. They say they’d only driven their new 2025 Tesla Model 3 some 200 miles (322 km) and didn’t think anything had hit the windshield during that time.

More: Brand New Cybertruck Leaks Oil After 3 Days, Tesla Needs A Month To Fix

Just to be sure, they checked the on-board cameras to look for potential vandalism too. They also submitted a ticket to Tesla for service and because they live near a service center, they scheduled an appointment for the next day. When they arrived, the center made it clear that windshields aren’t covered under warranty, which is sort of a half-truth.

A Cautionary Tale for Tesla Owners

In reality, they are if the windshield cracked due to a stress fracture. Heartvu didn’t know that initially and was preparing to drop $1,700 on a new windshield before one very important act. They specifically asked the Tesla service center if the crack was due to impact or stress. “After checking the car again, they said it was stress, and only at this point did the person on the phone say that the windshield can be repaired under the warranty,” they say.

On top of that, the owner had the service center repeat that confirmation in the Tesla service center app chat room. We’re only learning about this because Heartvu wanted to make sure other owners know about the propensity for stress fractures to crack windshields.

“I’m making this post because this sub has been really helpful to me in understanding Tesla and their shitty customer service”, they wrote. “If I hadn’t read from another redditor that there was a difference between impact and stress fractures, I would have been stuck paying the deductible or full fee to replace the windshield on my brand new 2025 Model 3. Also, Tesla insurance in my state does not specifically cover glass or windshields.”

Other Owners, Similar Issues

Notably, another owner reported a nearly opposite situation where they had a broken windshield. They thought the crack was the product of an impact and planned to pay for the replacement. When the Tesla technician removed the broken pane they spotted a problem in the bodywork. They explained to the customer that the bracket the windshield rests on was missing a weld and thus was not flat, putting stress on the glass and eventually causing the crack. So they received a free fix for the bodywork and the windshield.

The takeaway here is simple: if you find yourself staring at a cracked windshield, don’t assume the damage is your fault or blindly accept the first repair bill thrown your way, whether it’s from Tesla or any other automaker. Always dig deeper. Ask questions, demand clarity, and insist on determining whether the crack is due to impact or a stress fracture. And whatever you do, get that confirmation in writing. Tesla’s customer service isn’t exactly known for being user-friendly, so you might need to channel your inner detective to get what you’re owed.

Screenshot Credit: Heartvu/Reddit

Chinese automaker BYD has been aggressively expanding its global footprint, with Brazil being a key part of its growth strategy. However, that momentum screeched to a standstill on Monday when Brazilian authorities halted construction on a new manufacturing plant, throwing the company’s plans into uncertainty.

According to government officials, the construction company responsible for the project, called Jinjiang Construction, treated its 163 workers like modern-day slaves. These workers, reportedly hired in China by a separate firm, were allegedly brought to Brazil through irregular—and highly questionable—means. To make matters worse, over 100 of them had their passports withheld, effectively trapping them in exploitative conditions.

The conditions we’re talking about here are truly brutal. The workers lived on the construction site. The accommodations offered by the company included beds without mattresses and, in one case, one bathroom for 31 workers. As such, an official report from the government says workers would often all wake up around 4 a.m. so that everyone could have access to the restroom before beginning work at 5:30 a.m.

More: BYD To Finalize Location For Mexican Factory This Year

“In one of the rooms, occupied by a cook, pots with prepared food were found left open on the floor, exposed to dirt and without refrigeration, to be served the following day,” says the Public Labor prosecutor’s office.As if that weren’t bad enough, the construction company, Jinjiang Construction Brazil LTD., based in Sichuan, China, evidently made life harder when it came to pay and job freedom.

“The workers were required to pay a deposit, had 60% of their wages withheld (receiving only 40% in Chinese currency), faced excessive costs for terminating their contracts, and had their passports withheld by the company,” authorities added.

These conditions were bad enough that Jinjiang Brazil LTD is now prohibited from continuing its operations. While the workers will remain in the same accommodations for the time being, they are no longer allowed to work for Jinjiang. Authorities are scheduled to meet with BYD and Jinjiang on the 26th to determine the next steps.

Alexandre Baldy, Senior Vice President of BYD Brasil, stated, “BYD Auto do Brasil reiterates its commitment to full compliance with Brazilian legislation, especially with regard to the protection of workers’ rights and human dignity.”

BYD, short for Build Your Dreams, is already the top-selling EV car brand in the country and the new facility was supposed to come online next year. However, it’s now unclear how this controversy will impact the company’s plans moving forward.

Credit: MPT Brazil / HT: SCMP.com

Canoo seems to be up a creek without a paddle. On December 18, the company sent its employees home on a “mandatory unpaid break,” which is set to last through the end of 2024. As of now, the outlook for the EV startup in 2025 remains uncertain. o put it simply, nothing appears rosy for the once-promising electric vehicle manufacturer.

All of this caps off an incredibly challenging year for Canoo. In April, reports revealed that the company spent twice as much on the CEO’s private jet as it earned in all of 2023. By August, it was facing lawsuits for missing payments to a debtor. Then, in November, the company furloughed 23 percent of its staff.

Read: Canoo Furloughs 23% Of Factory Staff After Selling Only 22 Vehicles Last Year

TechCrunch reports that the brand locked employees out of their access to Canoo systems beginning on December 20. Benefits are said to last throughout the rest of the month. On top of this, a new report from KFOR says that Canoo lied about building cars in Oklahoma.

In November 2023, the brand announced it was delivering its first “made in Oklahoma” EVs to the state government. The governor even celebrated the occasion, stating, “For the first time in 17 years, vehicle manufacturing is back in Oklahoma.” However, it turns out that might not be entirely true.

In an interview with KFOR, a former employee of Canoo claims that not a single car was made in the factory there. They also shed some light on the financial trouble the brand is facing. “They hired too many, too quick, and paid too much,” the former employee said. “Everybody was a boss, and everybody wanted to be everybody’s boss… everybody had a director title, so nobody’s doing anything. They have tons of equipment… It looks great. They have literally everything to run an entire assembly line for cars.”

Despite that equipment, they made no bones about where the production cars came from. “I can tell you, those did not come off our assembly line… If you talk to any Canoo employee, they’ll tell you those do not come off the assembly line.”

Read: Canoo Made $886,000 In 2023, Spent $1.7 Million On CEO’s Private Jet

“All those were handmade in Justin, Texas, by a totally separate company called AFV,” the unnamed employee said. “They made them, they handmade them, and then they just brought them here. And most of them, they ended up just getting – like 90 percent of all the vehicles just got decals swapped out on them.”

Notably, the CEO of Canoo, Tony Aquila also owns AFV. Carscoops reached out to the company to get its take on the situation and has not receive a reply as of this writing. 

The Hemi is barely alive over at Stellantis and reports say that Carlos Tavares killed it. Whether or not that’s true, it’s clear that Dodge understands that buyers want a gas-only option. That is why the production of the gas-powered Charger is ahead of schedule. A new report says that even with all the various factors at work, the new Charger isn’t going to end up with a Hemi V8 anytime soon.

As a reminder, those who claim to be familiar with the matter say that now-former CEO Tavares axed the Hemi so that Dodge and Ram could be “greener.” However, he left the company earlier this month. Now, despite some less-than-spectacular reviews of the new Charger Daytona, at least one report indicates that it won’t get a V8.

More: Dodge Dealers Already Discounting New Charger Daytona EV Under MSRP

According to Jalopnik’s Andy Kalmowitz, engineers at Dodge say there are two main problems. First, the Hemi V8 won’t even fit under the hood of the new Charger. While I’m personally all for Dodge selling a Charger with a V8 literally sticking up out of the hood itself, that probably doesn’t meet safety standards.

Evidently, the engineers claim that shoehorning a V8 into the Charger would require moving the cradle and the firewall. That’s unlikely to happen simply based on the cost of re-engineering such pivotal parts. Dodge would have to run new crash tests too on top of everything.

In addition, the engineers claim that going back to the V8 would “fly in the face of what they were trying to accomplish with the car.” To be very clear, the goal was to build the next generation of muscle cars for the modern world. Did Dodge pull that off? The reviews are mixed and there’s still no indication of exactly how customers will adopt the car. In any case, a Stellantis spokesperson responded to the report with the following statement:

“Dodge is focused on launching the all-new, all-new electric Dodge Charger Daytona models, as well as the Dodge Charger SIXPACK ICE-option models coming next year. We have nothing additional to share in regard to potential future products.”

Granted, this neither confirms nor refutes the original report, although, given the engineering hurdles, it’s unlikely that the new Charger will be available with a V8 in the future. At least, for now, the Hemi lives on in cars like the Jeep Wrangler 392 and the Durango that we drove recently, as well as in heavy-duty Ram trucks. Nevertheless, if you insist on having it in a muscle car, there are still plenty V8 Chargers and Challengers sitting at dealers’ lots.

Klaus Pflugbeil thought he had it all figured out. Swipe some trade secrets, make $1.3 million, and quietly build a tech business overseas. Instead, the former employee of a company bought by Tesla is now facing two years in federal prison. Why? Because, unsurprisingly, the FBI has little patience for blatant industrial espionage. His partner is allegedly still at large.

Authorities nabbed Pflugbeil back in March after he allegedly attempted to sell sensitive tech to someone he thought was a buyer. It wasn’t. It was an undercover FBI agent ready to ruin his day. According to the Department of Justice, Pflugbeil “built a business in China to sell the sensitive technology that belongs to a U.S. company.” That’s a sanitized way of saying he and his partner cooked up a scheme to peddle trade secrets while hoping nobody in America would notice. They noticed.

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

As we noted in our original coverage, the DOJ doesn’t specifically say that Pflugbeil stole these secrets from Tesla. However, several factors, including its acquisition of a Canadian tech manufacturer (Hibar Systems) in 2019, for whom Pflugbeil used to work for, point to Tesla as the “leading U.S.-based electric vehicle company” the official records refer to.

“His actions were bold – he even advertised that he was selling the victim’s products – because he thought, incorrectly, that he was outside the reach of U.S. prosecutors,” stated United States Attorney Peace. “Today’s sentencing sends a clear message to would-be offenders: My office will do everything it can to protect American innovation and national security no matter where you try to hide.”

In that same vein, it’s worth noting that Pflugbeil’s co-defendant, Yilong Shao, remains at large according to the DOJ. Evidently, the pair were quite blatant in their work. The DOJ says that Pflugbeil sent several documents including trade secrets to Shao and even said things like “[it’s] in a different format, so it looks very original and not like a copy.” The pair then advertised their products, precision dispensing pumps, and battery assembly lines, across the globe.

They showed up at trade shows, sent emails, and even claimed directly that their products didn’t infringe on any patents, copyrights, or other intellectual property. Somewhat ironically, Pflugbeil’s LinkedIn profile features a quote from Benjamin Jowett as his banner: “The way to get things done is not to mind who gets the credit for doing them,” it says. Perhaps he should’ve made sure that Tesla got full credit for the tech he professed to create.

Imagine getting to work a few days or weeks after buying a brand new Tesla only to realize there are major issues. The cameras aren’t functioning, the GPS still thinks you’re sitting at home, and features like emergency braking don’t work. That’s exactly the type of situation that a number of Tesla owners are dealing with right now.

Several of these drivers claim to have taken delivery within the last month or two. This detail is important not just for the inconvenience it causes, but also because it might point to the root of the problem. These owners report that they all have Tesla’s AP4 or hardware version 4 chipset, which is responsible for the features mentioned above. If it has a problem, those features won’t work, so it could very well be the crux of this whole situation.

Glitches, Delays, and Angry Owners

Over on Reddit, several owners report very similar symptoms. On top of that, they claim that Tesla service centers are routinely scheduling to swap out AP4 hardware and delaying appointment times.

“Happened to me: 2024 Model Y. Navigation shows me at home. All the time. Cameras out. Even the display does not adjust. Auto lights don’t adjust. Appointment on January 13 wayyy delayed,” said one commenter.

More: Trump Might Kill Autonomous Crash Reporting Rules, Handing Tesla Exactly What It Wants

“I was contacted by Tesla today and the tech from my local service center told me that Tesla has told them to stop replacing the computers until they get to the root cause. He said they’re going to try and fix it with a software update and to expect 30 days. I find this mind-blowing because my symptoms started happening on Dec 2 and now my service date has been pushed back to Jan 23, nearly 2 months later,” said another.

There are many more complains on forums, including this one: “After a software update pushed by Tesla, the AP4 computer in my 2024 Tesla Model Y shorted out, causing a complete failure of all systems controlled by this computer.”

So, What’s Actually Wrong?

Electrek reports that sources from inside Tesla say that it’s related to a short circuit: “The cause is still being investigated, but one source told Electrek that one of the possible causes is the low-voltage battery short-circuiting the computer during the camera calibration process.” According to the outlet, one source claimed that Tesla Service has a mandate to “to play down any safety concerns related to this problem to avoid people believing their brand-new cars are not drivable.”

That seems like a tough job for Tesla Service employees considering how much emphasis the brand itself places on touting its safety record and technology. Notably, the NHTSA currently requires cars to have a functional backup camera, so it’s strange no recall related to this issue has been announced. That could change any day, but it’s also possible that Tesla will send an update that will fix the problem remotely, if it’s software related.

We’d ask Tesla, but, well, they don’t have a press department, though it appears that they might’ve recently hired one, as you can see from this Linkedin posting. We’ll keep an eye out to see if they decide to actually say something.

Are you a Tesla owner dealing with this headache? Share your saga in the comments. You can also report the issue to the NHTSA here, or if you’re in Canada, go ahead and do that here

The Tesla Cybertruck has a big battery. At 123 kWh, it’s bigger than anything else on offer from Tesla to normal customers. Of course, with a big battery comes a lengthy charging time. Early adopters ended up having to wait well over an hour to go from 0-100%. Now, an update will literally speed things up at the charging station.

Tesla says that select V4 Superchargers can now push up to 325 kW to the Cybertruck. Notably, they won’t maintain that speed during the entire charge, although the boost is big enough to significantly decrease overall charging time. The Cybertruck is technically capable of accepting at least up to a 400 kW charge rate, but Superchargers don’t offer that. In addition, speeds often peak early in the session and then drop off.

More: Tesla’s New Cheaper Wraps Sound Good Until You Find Out They’re Just Vinyl

Nevertheless, we’ve got some insight into what Cybertruck owners can expect when rolling up to a 350 kW supercharger. According to one owner charging in Blaine, Washington, they went from 8-40 percent charge in just 10 minutes.

In 35 minutes, they were up to 80 percent state of charge. Notably, the max speed for their session was 321 kW and they hit that speed when the battery was just 14 percent charged. From there, speeds diminished down to just 95 kW by the 80 percent mark. The same owner reported very similar figures from another charger in Tacoma, Washington as well.

@cybertruck can now charge up to 325kW on select V4 Supercharger posts. Rollout in progress.

— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) December 14, 2024

It’s worth noting that for now, only about 19 Supercharger locations throughout the nation offer this type of speed. Tesla says more are coming online soon. In addition, the EV automaker claims that in 2025, some V4 stations will support charging at up to 500 kW speeds.

That would be remarkable and cut charging time down even further. While the speeds won’t be consistent throughout the charging session, a higher maximum speed will enable a higher overall average speed throughout the session. As is the case with many Tesla promises though, let’s wait til it happens to celebrate it. 

I got 10-80% in 35min & 8-80% in 35 min last night testing it out

Over 30% gained in 10 min though pic.twitter.com/z8bf7NDYBM

— David Moss (@DavidMoss253) December 14, 2024

My test results:

Blaine, WA Boblett Street 44°
88.0980 kWh
8%-40% 10min
8%-80% 35min
10% 315kW
14% 321kW Peak
20% 290kW
25% 268kW
30% 236kW
35% 201kW
40% 179kW
50% 143KW
60% 113kW
70% 91kW
80% 95kW

Tacoma, WA S 40th Street
10%-43% 10min
10%-62% 20min
10%-80% 35min
16% 321kW…

— David Moss (@DavidMoss253) December 14, 2024

Lamborghini’s plans for its first electric car have just hit a brief pause, but don’t worry, it’s not time to start doubting the brand just yet. The Lanzador, an EV concept unveiled in mid-2023, was originally slated to hit production in 2028. Now, the Italian automaker has pushed that timeline to 2029, according to the latest reports.

The Lanzador is sort of a 21st-century Espada. It offers four seats, two doors, and has zero intent on being a hardcore track weapon. Of course, given current consumer trends, having it sit upright in the form of a semi-crossover will likely help it in terms of sales. That said, with signs suggesting the EV market could cool off in regions like the U.S. and Europe even as it grows elsewhere, including China, Lamborghini is now predicting production “before the end of the decade” instead of the originally planned 2028.

More: Aston Martin Valhalla Battles Italians With 1,064 HP PHEV V8

In November, CEO Stephan Winkelmann made it clear that Lamborghini is playing the long game. “We have enough time to decide if we need to accelerate or delay the introduction of the electric cars,” he stated. “So far, we are not thinking about delaying anything: we said we want to have our first electric car by the end of this decade, and this is something which we will continue to foster, because we said it has to be an additional car – a fourth model.”

A Deliberate Approach

While arch-rival Ferrari plans to launch its first EV as soon as 2025—four years ahead of Lamborghini—Winkelmann is unconcerned. According to Reuters, he stated, “We do not think 2029 is late to have an electric car. We do not think that, in our segment, the market will be ready in 2025 or 2026.”

So technically, the brand can still meet Winklemann’s predictions of “in this decade” even if the car comes out a year later than originally planned. In any case, it’s understandable that the brand would want to be very careful about how (and when) it launches such an important product.

Several performance-oriented EVs on the market today can out-sprint the all-new Temerario hybrid, which is no slouch itself. However, Lamborghini will need to do more than just build a fast-in-a-straight-line electric crossover to live up to its customers’ expectations. On top of that, it’s wrangling with regulations that could speed up or slow down the need for an EV in its lineup.

“We think this is the right way to face the future,” Winkelmann said. “There are discussions around synthetic fuels and this is an opportunity for our kind of cars”. Here’s hoping that the house of the raging bull gets it right, regardless of whenever its first EV arrives. 

Electric vehicle adoption rates fluctuate wildly sometimes. What doesn’t move around so much is loyalty after a person owns an EV. According to a new study, 92 percent of respondents said they would never go back to an ICE car. In fact, of all the available options, only one percent of the study population said they’d definitely go back to an ICE-only platform. As for the remaining 7 percent, 4 percent indicated they’d opt for a plug-in hybrid (PHEV), and the rest weren’t sure.

More: EV Batteries May Last Up To 40% Longer Than Expected

Notably, the survey comes from the Global EV Alliance (via Bloomberg) which, as its name might suggest, probably isn’t the most unbiased group when it comes to electric vehicles. It says online that “We believe that zero emission mobility is necessary to combat climate change,” and that “Our goal is a planet where all transportation is sustainable, clean, and electric!”

A Global Perspective on EV Trends

On the other hand, the study itself appears rather transparent. It includes responses from over 23,000 electric vehicle drivers in 18 countries including the USA, Canada, Austria, Brazil, France and India. On top of that, it weighs results based on each country’s share of the total EV fleet across the globe. This means that the results from the USA get weighted higher than those of, say, Sweden. That’s key because, in some smaller nations like Sweden, EV adoption rates are incredibly high.

By weighing the results, we get a more accurate picture of the reality EV owners are living in. According to almost all of them, electric cars are all they’ll buy from this point forward and that’s not all because of climate concerns either. Instead, nearly half of respondents (45 percent) championed the low operating cost of an EV when compared to a gas or diesel-powered car.

Climate friendliness was the second-biggest draw (40 percent), followed by helping the local environment (32 percent), solid driveability (21 percent), and lower maintenance costs (18 percent). In short: they’re cheaper to own, better to drive, and won’t leave your wallet crying every time you pull into a charging station (assuming it works, but we’ll get to that circus later).

Charging Woes Cast a Shadow

Here’s the part where the love affair stumbles: charging infrastructure. Or, more specifically, the lack of it. The study revealed that the biggest downside of driving an EV is the availability – or frequent unavailability – of fast chargers. This explains why Tesla, with its expansive Supercharger network, continues to dominate among buyers.

Read: Global EV Sales Shatter Records In November Thanks To China’s Unstoppable Growth

“When being asked about the disadvantages of driving an EV, the results indicate that the most significant drawbacks are the limited availability of fast chargers, the time-consuming nature of charging, and the frequent downtime of fast charging stations,” the study says. Certainly, that’s a major issue in the USA and clearly, Americans aren’t alone. 

Your Turn: Tell Us What You Think

Are you on the EV bandwagon yet? Or are you holding out for a fast-charging network that’s as reliable as your toaster and as conveniently located as your corner gas station? Whether you’re an EV diehard or still clutching your ICE keys like a security blanket, we want to hear from you. What’s your favorite thing about EVs, and what grinds your gears (figuratively, of course)? Drop your hot takes in the comments below. We’ll be here, pretending we’re not refreshing every five minutes for responses.

Image Credit: GEVA

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

If there’s one thing America loves, it’s a good tug-of-war between corporate power and government oversight, especially when it involves cutting-edge tech, fiery CEOs, and a whole lot of car crashes. Today, any accident involving an automated driving system must be reported to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), thanks to a Standing General Order issued in June 2021. This rule keeps automakers honest—well, sort of—but now, a newly surfaced document suggests that the Trump administration wants to kill it.

And surprise, surprise: the potential repeal would be a massive win for Elon Musk and Tesla, while also leaving regulators with fewer tools to keep autonomous driving tech in check.

More: See What Happens When Two Cars Hit A Chinese EV At 60KM/H In Triple Crash Test

Reuters reports that it has seen a document that “recommends repealing requirement that companies report automated vehicle crash data.” That’s notable for several reasons, not least of which is one of the requirement’s biggest opponents: Elon Musk. The high-profile CEO, who not only campaigned openly for Donald Trump before the election but also became his largest donor, spending at least $277 million to support him, now stands to benefit in a significant way.

A Rule Tesla Really Hates

Under the current rules, Tesla, like many other companies, must report crashes to the NHTSA under the General Order if they meet two specific criteria. First, the vehicle’s Level 2 autonomous driving system must have been in use within 30 seconds of the accident. Second, the crash must either involve a vulnerable road user (like a pedestrian or cyclist) or result in “a fatality, a vehicle tow-away, an airbag deployment, or any individual being transported to a hospital for medical treatment.”

Musk takes exception to this order for several reasons. To be fair, the NHTSA itself even outlines some of the potential issues with the order on its website. For instance, car companies can only report the accidents that they’re aware of—which isn’t always as straightforward as it sounds.

More: Tesla’s Sub-$30K Model Q And 2025 Product Plans

“For example, some entities may have access to detailed vehicle and crash data immediately after a crash, because the vehicles supply instantaneous telematics, while others may only learn of crashes from consumer complaints submitted days or weeks afterwards and which may include limited crash information,” says NHTSA.

Reuters points out that its analysis of the NHTSA crash data shows Tesla accounted for 40 out of 45 fatal crashes reported to the agency through Oct. 15. It’s plausible that Tesla not only reports more incidents but also that the statistics look tilted against the brand because so many of its cars have Level 2 driving technology and owners use it more.

More: Tesla Shares Soar By 69%, As Musk Becomes First Person To Top $400 Billion Net Worth

Moreover, Bryant Walker Smith, a law professor in the University of South Carolina who focuses on autonomous driving, said Tesla collects real-time crash data that other automakers don’t and, as a result, probably reports a “far greater proportion of their incidents” than its rivals.

Did Tesla Wait This Out? Probably.

To that end, Reuters says a source claims that Tesla executives have wanted to squash the crash reporting for years. The team evidently decided that the only solution was to wait until President Biden, whose administration was supportive of the program, was out of office.

In the meantime, stay tuned—because if this unfolds the way it seems, you’ll probably be hearing about it next time someone’s Tesla decides to “assist” them into a ditch.

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.

The Lightship AE.1, formerly known as the L1, is now officially on sale and in production. Starting at $250,000, it’s among the most expensive trailers available today. Its standout feature is its ability to propel itself, significantly reducing the range drop typically experienced by EVs when towing.

Lightship, founded in 2020 by former Tesla employees,  Ben Parker and Toby Kraus, officially began operations in 2022, and since then, it’s been working to get to this day. The company developed a concept trailer, the L1, packed with innovative features. Not only did it possess its own battery pack and motors, but it had a telescoping upper section and an aerodynamic design to reduce drag.

More: $175,000 CyberTrailer Generates Its Own Power And Water For Off-Grid Living

The AE.1 Cosmos Edition is the production version of the L1 and it’s available right now for $250,000. Interested parties will need to plop down $7,500 to get on the list and Lightship says it’ll only build 50 of the Cosmos Edition trailers. After that, it’ll begin making other variants.

Notably, the first version of the trailer that can sleep up to four and includes a bathroom, does come fully loaded. That includes a 77 kWh battery pack, integrated solar panels on the roof, an induction cooktop, a refrigerator and freezer, a microwave and convection oven, a dishwasher, auto leveling, highway range assist, and a rear hitch on the trailer itself. The AE.1 comes with a NACS charging cable and is Starlink-ready.

More Trims and Pricing

Next year, Lightship will begin the expansion of the product lineup with a new trim. Dubbed the Atmos, it has a range of around 300 miles and a starting price of $184,000. In 2026, it wants to start production of two more trim levels beginning with the Panos.

Starting at $151,000, it’ll provide around 140 miles of range. Finally, the Terros should begin production in late 2026 with an asking price of $125,000. It won’t add any range but will still feature the telescoping pop-up design of the other three Lightship trailers. For now, interested parties can order any trim level but don’t expect anything but the $250,000 trim level to actually come out til late next year. 

Credit: Lightship

The future of autonomous driving is edging closer, but Tesla’s latest plans reveal it may not be as driverless as we’ve been led to believe—at least for now. On December 5, Deutsche Bank hosted an Autonomous Driving Day in New York City, featuring Tesla executive Travis Axelrod.

A private report from the event reveals several details about Tesla’s robotaxi plans for 2025. Perhaps most notably, Tesla envisions using a remote teleoperator as an initial safety measure. That’s right—these “robotaxis” will have a human on standby as a safety backup to take control if needed.

More: Tesla’s Sub-$30K Model Q And 2025 Product Plans: Key Insights From The Deutsche Bank Report

Elon Musk said earlier this year that Tesla would begin testing of Level 5 autonomous robotaxis in 2025. Now, we know more about that plan based on documents from the Deutsche Bank meeting reviewed by Carscoops. According to that report, “Tesla believes it would be reasonable to assume some type of teleoperator would be needed at least initially for safety/redundancy purposes.”

A Practical Reality Check

No doubt, the launch of any robotaxi inevitably demands significant safety considerations. Despite extensive efforts, even geo-fenced Level 5 robotaxis have been involved in dangerous accidents. Having a human remote operator could increase safety but Tesla is coy on the details. For instance, we don’t know how much work the teleoperator will do in the car. We don’t know how much control they’ll have, and we don’t know how long Tesla plans to use them after the launch of robotaxi rides. 

In addition, Tesla reiterated that these robotaxis will be based on existing Model 3 and Model Y vehicles. Whether that means brand-new models or cars returned from leases is unclear (because, let’s be honest, who’s going to pay the absurdly high buyouts Tesla is proposing?). That means in theory, one could be giving up control of their very own vehicle to a Tesla employee during robotaxi rides. Notably, the meeting notes do provide a little more insight into the rollout. 

First, it tells us that these will be paid rides, so don’t expect to go from A to B without throwing some cash at Tesla. Second, it says that the initial roll-out will consist of company-owned vehicles. The automaker will then “eventually dynamically adjust supply based on customer demand/traffic patterns.”

Users will hail a ride via an internally developed ride-share application which, as the report brings out, will enable Tesla to control the “value chain.” Essentially, Tesla gets about as much control (and data) here, from the start of the hailing process to drop off, as it could want. 

Regulatory Hurdles Ahead

Finally, the report also clarifies something else that seems obvious. “Tesla views regulation as the biggest headwind to broad deployment of robotaxi, which the company hopes will be adjusted at the federal level through updating of rules at NHTSA.”

It’s no secret that the NHTSA currently has very strict regulations when it comes to robotaxis in the USA. If those rules don’t change it won’t matter how fast Tesla develops true self-driving because the law doesn’t allow for Tesla to launch a giant fleet. It could, at most, deploy 2,500 cars per year under current rules. 

Whether or not all this comes to pass is about as clear as mud right now though. We’ll know by the start of 2026 if Tesla can hit these targets. Of course, that’s the year it plans on beginning production of its Cybercab, another big maybe in the brand’s future. 

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

Say what you will about the age of influencers or the divisive Tesla Cybertruck, but this story has both—plus a generous dose of feel-good energy. Meet the golden Cybertruck, a 2024 Tesla Cybertruck Foundation Series plated in real 24-karat gold and owned by Zack Nelson, the YouTuber behind JerryRigEverything. Now, this viral truck is up for auction, with all proceeds heading to charity.

This is a 2024 Tesla Cybertruck Foundation Series and it’s very famous. Yes, the model has in general made a name for itself but this truck in particular is more well-known than most. Marques Brownlee (MKBHD), TheStradman, Doug DeMuro, and JerryRigEverything (Zack Nelson) have all reviewed this example.

More: Seattle’s Viral Tesla Cybertruck Heads To Auction After Months Of Internet Fame

IIn fact, it was JerryRigEverything that handled the real gold plating on the truck, applying some $60,000 worth of gold to its bodywork. Once finished, Ridge Wallet, who owns the truck, intended to give it to a contest winner. That winner instead opted for a cash prize. Now, the truck is officially on sale with all the proceeds, including the buyer’s fee, going to the Not A Wheelchair Foundation. That means that whoever buys this truck will not only have a unique item but they’ll do some good in the process.

Nelson posted a video about the no-reserve auction and his wheelchair business. He calls it the least expensive manual wheelchair made in the USA. “Making inexpensive wheelchairs is actually pretty expensive,” he says in the video.

The truck bears signatures from several high-profile people who have reviewed it. Nelson estimates its value at around $200,000, primarily due to the 24K gold plating. However, as any car enthusiast knows, mods rarely pay off when it comes time to sell. Without the flashy plating, it’s just another Cybertruck—and one with a few flaws.

In any case, this is a dual-motor version of the truck with 600 horsepower. It also features 20-inch wheels, an 18.5-inch infotainment system, and a four-wheel steering system.

Whoever buys it will have to settle for a few imperfections. There are a few scratches and dings on the passenger bedside. In addition, the A-pillar panel on the passenger side is loose. Nelson says he’ll gold plate the replacement for the new owner when the part arrives.

As of this writing, bidding on Cars&Bids has already past $86,000, with several days left on the clock. Of all the Cybertrucks out there, this one might turn the most heads. Love it or hate it, this truck is a symbol of internet fame and philanthropy wrapped into one glittering, angular package.

Image Credit: Cars&Bids

Tesla’s billionaire CEO Elon Musk and former Republican presidential candidate Vivek Ramaswamy have been tapped by President-elect Donald Trump to head the so-called “Department of Government Efficiency,” or DOGE for short. If it rings a bell, that’s because DOGE is a backronym referencing the Doge meme and Dogecoin cryptocurrency, both famously associated with Musk.

While it won’t function as an executive department, DOGE will be an advisory body expected to have significant influence on federal spending and operations. That’ll supposedly happen sometime after Trump takes office in January. When it does, it seems that Ramaswamy plans to investigate a big government loan to Rivian for a factory in Georgia. That’s only one of several programs now coming under scrutiny.

Rivian’s Georgia Factory Loan Under the Microscope

Rivian announced plans to build the factory back in 2021. Since then, it’s faced several roadblocks including opposition from some neighbors. In May of this year, it delayed plans for the plant after initially saying it would begin construction in 2024. Then, in October it said it was seeking a loan to start the work. In November, the Biden administration approved a $6.6 billion dollar loan to the automaker.

Notably, the loan comes from the Department of Energy, which provides financing to all sorts of private businesses. One of its mandates is to promote technological innovation and no doubt, this is the type of loan that could do that. Certainly, it also spurs on the creation of jobs and cleaner energy. That doesn’t mean that the deal doesn’t warrant scrutiny though.

More: Rivian And VW Are Teaming Up To Reinvent The New Electric Golf Mk9

“Biden is forking over $6.6B to EV-maker Rivian to build a Georgia plant they’ve already halted. One ‘justification’ is the 7,500 jobs it creates, but that implies a cost of $880k/job which is insane. This smells more like a political shot across the bow at @elonmusk & @Tesla,” Ramaswamy said in a post on X.

Biden is forking over $6.6B to EV-maker Rivian to build a Georgia plant they’ve already halted. One “justification” is the 7,500 jobs it creates, but that implies a cost of $880k/job which is insane. This smells more like a political shot across the bow at @elonmusk & @Tesla. https://t.co/YYLW3fk1jX

— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) November 26, 2024

The politician went on to say, in a separate post, that “We are acutely aware of the reality that the outgoing Biden administration is pushing out $$ and proposing new regulations at a fast pace to get ahead of Jan 20. All midnight-hour expenditures & new regulations will get special scrutiny and should be rescinded where appropriate.”

Tesla’s Past Loan and Musk’s Potential Role

How much power and influence Musk will hold over any investigation of other EV brands is unknown at this time. It’s worth noting that Tesla also accepted a federal loan in 2010. The amount of that loan was $465 million and the brand paid it back almost ten years ahead of schedule. 

Typically, government loans for large production facilities like this can result in positive outcomes. As Fortune points out in its coverage, plants like this tend to bring other economic boosts to an area as tier I and II suppliers move in to fill the need of the automaker. If Rivian can post a profit in the fourth quarter, it could make this new loan look more lucrative to everyone involved. 

We are acutely aware of the reality that the outgoing Biden administration is pushing out $$ and proposing new regulations at a fast pace to get ahead of Jan 20. All midnight-hour expenditures & new regulations will get special scrutiny and should be rescinded where appropriate.

— Vivek Ramaswamy (@VivekGRamaswamy) November 27, 2024

Love them or hate them, electric vehicles can deliver mind-bending performance. We’re talking supercar levels of acceleration here, at least for 0-60 mph (96 km/h) and quarter-mile sprints. Take the Tesla Model 3 Performance, for instance.

Priced from $54,990 or $47,490 if you choose the no-cost Stealth Grey option and meet the requirements for the $7,500 federal tax credit (the only color that qualifies without adding the $8,000 FSD package, which unlocks eligibility for all colors and also nets you the tax credit), it might just be the best value in the EV sports sedan segment. That is, as long as you can stomach the depreciation that comes with it, especially compared to something like a BMW M3, which holds its value far better.

More: New Tesla Model 3 Long Range Gets Acceleration Boost Option In Some Markets

Not only does the Model 3 Performance outrun a BMW M3, but it also costs tens of thousands less than the German contender. For context, the base rear-wheel-drive M3 starts at $76,000, offering 473hp and a 0-60 time of 4.1 seconds. Step up to the M3 Competition xDrive, with its 523hp and a quicker 3.4-second sprint to 60 mph, and you’re looking at $85,300. And that’s without touching BMW’s extensive options list.

Meanwhile, the Model 3 Performance hits 60 mph in a blistering 2.8 seconds (albeit with a roll-out, so think around 3 seconds flat without) and rockets through the quarter-mile in about 11 seconds , all while offering just over 300 miles (488 km / EPA estimate) of range. Oh, and did we mention buyers are snapping up these Teslas for bargains on the second-hand market?

Second-Hand Steals

Photos Cars&Bids

For example, a Model 3 Performance in Ultra Red recently sold on Cars & Bids for just $46,250. It had only 2,200 miles on the odometer having been purchased new in June of 2024. To put that into perspective, that’s Lexus ES money for a car that delivers supercar acceleration. Apparently, 2,200 miles is all it takes for some buyers to lose interest in owning such a car.

As with all Model Performance variants, the car in question featured a panoramic glass roof, a premium interior, heated and ventilated front sport seats, and 20-inch wheels. The sale also included the Tesla Mobile Connector kit, compatible with both 120V outlets and NEMA 14-50 240V outlets for Level 2 charging.

The seller had the windows tinted and much of the body covered in SunTek paint protection film (PPF), which was applied to the front bumper, headlamps, hood, fenders, and mirror caps. Keep in mind that all of this came from Tesla with an MSRP of $58,380. Even at that price, it’s nothing short of a performance bargain.

A Windshield Or Another Tesla?

Interestingly, we’re about to see if this trend continues as another Model 3 Performance is up for sale again over on Cars & Bids. It has even fewer miles, just 800 so far, and with one day left into the auction, the highest bid stands at $38,250 at the time of writing with a day left (the auction ends on December 2). That’s for a car that, according to the listing, cost $56,380 new.

But why is the seller parting ways with it after so little time? As it turns out, replacing a windshield was enough to drive them into another Tesla. After all, who needs a windshield when you can just buy an entirely new car? Now that’s forward thinking.

“When I had to replace the windshield, Tesla had difficulties getting a replacement. They kept arriving damaged. Then, there was a lack of availability. It was dragging on. I was impatient. I just bought another Tesla while waiting for this one to be repaired,” the seller explained.

And he’s not alone either. A little digging reveals that windshield replacement for Teslas can be a frustrating and costly ordeal. When parts do finally arrive, the cost can hit nearly $1,500. Despite these headaches, the Model 3 Performance remains a killer deal in the sports sedan market. Whether new or lightly used, it’s hard to argue with this level of speed and value.

Photos Cars&Bids