https://www.iihs.org/ratings/top-safety-picks
https://www.nhtsa.gov/ratings-search
There was also that guy that tried to murder-suicide his whole family by driving off a cliff and everyone survived. Crazy considering the picture of the crumpled car..
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/luck-tesla-family-plung...
Is there any evidence Teslas are not at least average, if not above average in safety?
Edit: see post below for insurance loss comparisons, which would be the most accurate data in my opinion:
Tesla gets high test scores, but real world results seem to differ - https://www.forbes.com/sites/stevebanker/2025/02/11/tesla-ag...
The question is if driving the same way in the same conditions in the same places, would one experience more injury in a given model of Tesla versus a competing car?
Tesla is competing on price, but it’s providing acceleration that normally available in cars with much better handling characteristics.
If the statistics were seeing more collision risk, more injury risk attributable to the vehicle itself rather than the driver, then surely the actuaries would be able to suss that out.
https://www.iihs.org/research-areas/auto-insurance/insurance...
For 2021-2023, Luxury Cars, Large, Tesla Model S has lower than average personal injury, medical payment, and bodily injury losses.
For 2021-2023, Luxury Cars, Midsize, Tesla Model 3 is lower than average on personal injury and bodily payment, but slightly higher on the non 4WD model for bodily injury.
For 2021-2023, Luxury SUV, Midsize, Tesla Model Y has lower than average personal injury, medical payment, and bodily injury losses.
For 2021-2023, Luxury SUV, Large, Tesla Model X has lower than average personal injury, medical payment, and bodily injury losses
They all have lower than average property damage losses too.
That said 21-23, Tesla Model 3 electric 4dr was 9% higher personal injury, 26% higher medical payment, -3% lower medical injury.
Unless I read that wrong.
But besides self driving I don't agree with the softwareization of cars. Maybe if Tesla made cars in a more traditional way, but they were EVs I would consider them a real option. The single giant screen without any tactile buttons feels cheap and I'm sure is just about cost saving. The whole cybertruck teardown makes it look like the vehicle wasn't well thought out.
Basically everything about Tesla as a company from its actual cars to its CEO which is supposedly leading it does not inspire confidence. When there are so many other well established car companies that take it far more seriously I don't even take Tesla seriously enough as an option to care about their crash test results.
I can only say your take is yours to have, but the software is the biggest selling point to me, and the plastic widgets on other cars look tacky and spurious.
I thought it was similar FB where Zuck owns enough voting shares to be effectively untouchable as well.
It’s always interesting when the perception given by the media is so far removed from the actual facts.
> [1] Total revenue decreased 12% YoY to $22.5B. YoY, revenue was impacted by the following items:
> - decline in vehicle deliveries
[1]: Page 5 - https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/downloads/TSLA-Q2-...
https://electrek.co/2025/09/25/tesla-tsla-down-22-europe-whi...
Musk's antics and focus issues (i.e. too many resources focused on Cybertruck) aside: The thing with Tesla is, they operate completely antithetical to the classic car industry.
The classic car industry designs a model series and signs four-ish year contracts with all the suppliers for the expected amount of vehicles to sell, with a few extension clauses to cover for higher than expected demand. During these four years, the "rebrush" is designed, keeping most of the car the same but incorporating learnings during production, newly developed technologies (e.g. improved compute power) and maybe retooling to make production more efficient, and then it's another four-ish years that are used to make the next generation. That business model makes sense when operating with a shit ton of suppliers, so both the manufacturer and the suppliers can plan for the mid term.
Tesla however, just like SpaceX, takes pride in not following this business model. As much as possible is made in-house, which means less vendors to deal with, and that enables continuous improvements and iteration.
The downside is that it makes life so much harder for spare parts because any given part might just have been in production for a few weeks if not days, and for consumers and consumer protection agencies it's orders of magnitude harder to warn about construction defects because there is no such thing as a "generation" any more.
Even with our exorbitant energy prices, I pay about 1/3 for the cost of energy per mile (off-peak). I have to go in for service 3 times less often (and just that is worth a pot of gold to me). I no longer need to detour to gas stations once or twice a week as I can just plug in the car at night. And then EVs are also more enjoyable to drive imo.
I have some reservations about my EV, but on the whole it is better than an ICE vehicle in almost every way and I'll certainly never buy another car that isn't an EV.
I have a really hard time using cruise control in my Genesis EV. I usually use one of the regen breaking modes, and when you disable cruise control, the car will automatically start regen braking unless you have you have the throttle at the perfect position which is near impossible. And that's much more noticeable if you use one of the more heavy regen modes.
So I have to follow this pattern: Disable regen, engage cruise, use cruise, disable cruise, enable regen just to use it for a few minutes. And with the Genesis, every time you change between regen modes the car kind of jerks a bit. I've heard this is not really a problem in Teslas. Of course I could simply not use regenerative braking (a major feature of the car) or I can attempt to change my driving habits and not use cruise control as often. For long drives I much prefer my ICE vehicle specifically because of this.
The other thing may be related more to my driving position. The car is heavy and rides harshly over bumps which causes my foot to accidentally push harder on the throttle for < 1 sec. And because it's an EV which has quick acceleration the car occasionally will accelerate fast after I hit a bump. I've driven a ton of ICE sports cars with hard suspensions and never had this problem. Perhaps I'm just getting old and now have bad reflexes!
Tesla has their regen dialed in quite well. I've read Ford's is good as well, but I haven't had a chance to drive one yet.
I have a Tesla as well as a Lightning, and in my experience the Ford's regen behavior is indeed very similar to Tesla. I don't have much experience with other brands.
The Lightning would allow me to do it old school, it has a non-one-pedal-drive mode that has similar regen to normal engine braking on an ICE truck. But I prefer OPD so I just do the 'accelerate slightly and deactivate cruise' to get around the sudden slow down if I just turn it off abruptly.
> Perhaps I'm just getting old and now have bad reflexes!
Sounds like just a very aggressive throttle mapping. Not something I personally run into, but as with my earlier comment, this is very much going to be specific to the car. I also tend to drive with my toe at the bottom of the accelerator pedal which steadies my foot quite a bit and makes it less prone to bouncing on a bump.
That was also what I tried doing to try and remedy the problem. The problem is normally when you want to deactivate cruise, it's because there's a slower car in front. And it's a bit unnerving to accelerate towards the slower vehicle (even if ever so subtle) when the goal is to deactivate cruise. I've attempted this about 3 times on the highway and it just didn't feel comfortable so I stopped doing that. I wish there was simply some setting so that after deactivating cruise there was some smoother ramp up to the current regen setting. For example, after deactivating cruise it's max-regen should be similar to ICE vehicle deceleration, then after N milliseconds ramp up to last used regen. That would solve the problem for me.
What’s the problem you’ve been having with yours?
“Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading.”
But "more vehicles than ever" is factually false, according to Tesla itself. They delivered ~397,000 vehicles in Q2-2025. They delivered ~437,000 in Q4 of 2024.
So I'm not sure what you meant by that statement.
YTD Sales
- Lucid: 23.4%
- Tesla: -4.3%
- Rivian: -13.2%
Lucid is the big surprise there to me (though only ~8K sold).
EV tax credits were only available through Q3. There was a rush to buy EVs before credits expired.
If you’re only looking at that one quarter, that’s the most biased signal you could get.
I don't think tsla shareholders are complaining.
It did double. Check the april lows.
> is that their CEOs public behavior drove the value down over 100 points in the months prior.
And yet, he is still CEO. Not only that, didn't the board just award him a new pay package?
> I think the meme stock comment above actually has some merit though.
A $1.5 trillion meme stock? Don't think so. A S&P500 company that is a meme stock. Don't think so. It is highly volatile, but it isn't gamestop.
All I'm saying is that Musk is still the CEO because enough shareholders back him. Why? Who knows. Maybe it's because he's increased the value of tsla from a few billion to $1.5 trillion in the past 15 years. Who knows.
I get more worried about all the CEOs that say effectively nothing. That seem to have PR team coaching them on everything they say. It's the quiet, plotting ones we should be exceptionally concerned about.
Because we have no idea what they're really thinking.
They haven't improved the car for at least five years. Yes, autopilot is better, but that's it. And no, autopilot is not going to be doing autonomous driving globally anytime soon.
There is absolutely no justification for such a valuation. Humanoid robots? That's as short sighted as vision only self driving. There are any number of vastly more promising robotics companies.
As a previous Tesla stock holder and still car owner, I want Tesla to be a good car company first. It is not. And the CEO has gone out of his way to alienate and be hostile to his own customer base.
It's a meme stock because musk hurt your feelings? If you think the stock of company valued at $1.5 trillion is a "meme stock", it's because of your political agenda. Not reality.
> There is absolutely no justification for such a valuation.
There must be some justification. Otherwise it wouldn't be trading at $1.5 trillion.
> I want Tesla to be a good car company first.
Musk has been open about what tesla is. It surely isn't a "car company".
> And the CEO has gone out of his way to alienate and be hostile to his own customer base.
You are not his "customer base". The narcissism and sense of self-importance is off the charts.
I don't think that he really runs the company, and kicking him out will most likely not change anything technical, but it will affect the company image among shareholders, most likely negatively.