Skip to main content

Techfullpost

Cars

Tesla gives up on selling cars

Tesla gives up on selling cars

For much of the past decade, Tesla has defined the modern electric vehicle revolution. But in recent months, an uncomfortable question has become harder to ignore: does Tesla still see itself as a car company at all?

That question loomed large during Tesla’s latest quarterly earnings call, where Elon Musk and senior executives appeared to all but confirm what critics have long suspected. Tesla’s future, they suggested, lies less in building and selling cars—and far more in artificial intelligence, autonomous systems, and humanoid robots.

In one of the most striking moves yet, Tesla quietly ended production of its original flagship vehicles, the Model S and Model X, vehicles that once symbolized the company’s technological edge and luxury ambitions. Their exit makes room, executives say, for an entirely different priority: scaling up production of Tesla’s Optimus humanoid robot, a project that still struggles to perform basic tasks without human assistance.

At the same time, a top Tesla executive urged investors to stop thinking of the company as an automaker altogether, framing Tesla instead as a “transportation as a service” provider. Musk reinforced the message with a familiar refrain: in the long run, people won’t be driving cars at all.

“The vast majority of miles traveled will be autonomous in the future,” Musk said. “Probably less than 5 percent of miles driven will be where somebody’s actually driving the car themselves—maybe as low as 1 percent.”

Moments later, he went further. “Long-term,” Musk said, “the only vehicles we’ll make will be autonomous vehicles.”

A Car Company in Name Only?

On paper, Tesla is still very much in the car business. In 2025, the company reported $94.8 billion in revenue, with $69.5 billion—about 73 percent—coming from vehicle sales. But the trend lines tell a different story. Automotive revenue fell 10 percent year over year, while Tesla’s non-car businesses—energy generation, battery storage, and services—continued to grow.

Tesla has also lost its crown as the world’s largest EV seller, overtaken by China’s BYD. Meanwhile, its two remaining mass-market vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, are seeing declining demand despite refreshed designs and attempts to introduce cheaper variants.

The broader market isn’t helping. EV subsidies and tax incentives that once fueled demand are being rolled back in multiple countries. Musk himself played a role in that shift through political donations and vocal support for Donald Trump, moves that have alienated parts of Tesla’s historically progressive customer base. Combined with Musk’s increasingly polarizing public persona, the Tesla brand has lost some of its former shine.

Betting on Subscriptions and Software

Like many technology companies before it, Tesla is increasingly turning toward subscription-based revenue. For the first time, the company disclosed that it has 1.1 million active Full Self-Driving (Supervised) subscriptions, a 38 percent increase from late 2024.

Musk recently announced plans to stop selling Full Self-Driving (FSD) as a one-time purchase and move to a subscription-only model. While FSD enables hands-free driving in many scenarios, drivers must still monitor the road and remain ready to intervene. Tesla’s autonomy claims have repeatedly drawn scrutiny from regulators, lawsuits from consumers, and investigations over safety and marketing practices.

Still, Musk remains convinced that autonomy—and robotaxis in particular—will define Tesla’s future. He claimed Tesla’s autonomous taxi service will launch in “dozens” of U.S. cities this year, a scaled-back promise compared with earlier projections. He also teased a third-generation Optimus robot, which he says could be ready for mass production by late 2027.

The Trillion-Dollar Incentive

Autonomy is not just a technological obsession for Musk—it’s central to his compensation. Under a controversial pay package, Musk stands to earn up to $1 trillion if Tesla meets a series of aggressive milestones, including deploying more than a million robotaxis, producing a million humanoid robots, and generating $7.5 trillion in shareholder value.

Notably, the plan does not require Tesla to dramatically expand car sales. If Tesla averages 1.2 million vehicles sold annually over the next decade, Musk would still qualify for massive stock awards—fewer cars per year than Tesla sold in 2024. In effect, declining vehicle sales are already baked into the deal.

Board Approval and Growing Doubts

Tesla’s board and major shareholders have consistently backed Musk’s vision, despite mounting evidence that the company is lagging behind competitors in key areas. Waymo’s robotaxis operate with fewer incidents, while federal crash data reported by Electrek suggests Tesla’s autonomous vehicles crash at higher rates than human-driven cars—even with safety drivers present.

Optimus robots, meanwhile, remain largely dependent on remote human operators. Musk himself admitted during the earnings call that Optimus is not yet meaningfully deployed inside Tesla’s own factories.

Still, Tesla’s pivot away from traditional car manufacturing reflects a broader industry trend. Automakers increasingly talk about “software-defined vehicles,” promising continuous improvements through over-the-air updates—and recurring revenue through paid features. Compared with the capital-intensive, low-margin business of building cars, subscription software looks irresistible.

A Risky Transformation

The problem is scale. FSD subscriptions, even if they grow, are unlikely to replace Tesla’s primary revenue engine anytime soon. And with the Model S and Model X gone, Tesla has fewer vehicles to sell at a time when it needs cash the most.

Pursuing robots and robotaxis isn’t cheap. Tesla expects to spend $20 billion in capital expenditures in 2026, more than double last year’s spending. The money will go toward Cybercab production lines, the long-delayed Semi truck, Optimus robots, and new battery and lithium facilities, according to CFO Vaibhav Taneja.

Toward the end of the earnings call, Musk conceded that much of this spending is being driven by necessity rather than strategy.

“Why do we have to build these things?” Musk said, referring to lithium and cathode refineries. “Can someone else build these things? It’s very hard to build these things.”

The Identity Crisis Deepens

Tesla’s transformation is far from complete—and far from guaranteed to succeed. For now, the company still depends on selling cars to survive. But its leadership increasingly behaves as though that era is already over.

Whether Tesla can successfully reinvent itself as an AI and robotics powerhouse remains an open question. What is clear is that the company is drifting further away from the business that made it famous—and profitable—in the first place.

ADVERTISEMENT
RECOMMENDED
Cars

British Digger Maker JCB Sets 406 MPH Hydrogen Speed Record

By George Mensah 3 min read

JCB’s Hydrogen-Powered Hydromax Sets New World Land Speed Record at 406 MPH

British engineering giant JCB has set a new world land speed record for a hydrogen-powered vehicle, with its Hydromax streamliner reaching an average speed of 406.320 mph (653.6 km/h) across Utah’s famous Bonneville Salt Flats.

The record was certified under FIA regulations, which require two timed runs over a one-mile course—one in each direction—with both runs completed within an hour. Hydromax recorded 400.623 mph on its first run and 412.135 mph on its second on August 11. The two speeds produced an average of 406.320 mph, establishing a new FIA hydrogen land speed record.

The achievement more than doubles the previous FIA benchmark for hydrogen-powered vehicles. That record stood at 185.5 mph, set by BMW’s H2R in 2004.

A Construction Engine Pushing Past 400 MPH

Hydromax’s achievement is even more notable because it also surpassed JCB’s own diesel land speed record. The company’s previous Dieselmax streamliner reached 350.092 mph in 2006. Unlike its diesel predecessor, however, Hydromax’s hydrogen combustion engines produce no carbon dioxide at the exhaust.

The 32-foot-long streamliner is powered by two production-based hydrogen combustion engines. Each is a 4.8-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine, derived from technology JCB already uses in its construction equipment and generators.

Rather than developing a completely bespoke racing engine, JCB adapted technology that is closely related to the engines already supplied to its customers. The Hydromax project was completed in just over 15 months, with engineering support from Ricardo and Prodrive.

Before making its FIA record attempt, Hydromax had already demonstrated its potential at Bonneville. During Speed Week, the vehicle achieved a Southern California Timing Association-certified speed of 368.347 mph, placing it in the Blown Gas Streamliner class.

That performance paved the way for the FIA record attempt just days later—and ultimately saw JCB push hydrogen combustion beyond the 400-mph barrier.

Andy Green Behind the Wheel Again

Wing Commander Andy Green, a former Royal Air Force fighter pilot, drove Hydromax to the new record. Green already holds the outright world land speed record, having driven the Thrust SSC to 763.035 mph in Nevada’s Black Rock Desert in 1997, the only car ever to break the sound barrier on land. He also drove JCB’s Dieselmax to its 2006 diesel record.

“Bonneville is the spiritual home of the world land speed record, and JCB Hydromax has just written itself into that history,” Green said. “The car was terrific: stable, strong and fast. Setting a world land speed record with hydrogen power, twenty years after Dieselmax, is a huge privilege.”

Marketing With a Purpose

For JCB, the record serves a purpose beyond bragging rights. The company has poured roughly $130 million into developing hydrogen combustion technology as an alternative to both diesel and battery power for heavy machinery, and the engines in Hydromax are meant to demonstrate what that investment can do.

“This record was set by production-based engines, the same engines powering JCB diggers right now,” said JCB chairman Anthony Bamford. “That is the point of JCB Hydromax: it shows hydrogen works, and it works today at the highest level with zero emissions.”

The pitch matters for JCB’s core business. Battery power struggles to match the run times construction and agricultural equipment need, since diggers and generators often run six to eight hour shifts without stopping to recharge. Hydrogen combustion, unlike battery-electric systems, refuels in minutes and can plug into the same fueling infrastructure being built out for other transport uses.

The FIA has confirmed the record, working alongside ACCUS, the U.S. national sporting authority, to oversee the sporting, technical, and timing procedures at Bonneville. The organization called the achievement a milestone in the development of hydrogen technology in motorsport.

Hydromax’s run also puts a number on the table for an industry still weighing which zero-emission technology, batteries, hydrogen fuel cells, or hydrogen combustion, makes the most sense for heavy vehicles. At 406 mph, JCB has given hydrogen combustion a data point that didn’t exist a month ago.

 

Cars

Mercedes-Benz Brings Back Physical Buttons After Rethinking Touchscreen-Heavy Cabins

By George Mensah 4 min read

Mercedes-Benz is stepping back from its all-digital dashboard strategy, with CEO Ola Källenius telling Autocar in July 2026 that the automaker plans to bring more physical buttons into its vehicles. The shift marks a departure from years of expanding touchscreen real estate across the brand’s interiors.

Källenius acknowledged that the industry’s push toward touchscreen-heavy cabins may have overlooked what some drivers actually need behind the wheel. Mercedes has not issued a formal announcement detailing the new approach through its official channels, and the company does not appear to be abandoning touchscreens altogether. Future models will likely combine digital displays with physical controls rather than favoring one over the other.

Consumer research backs up the reasoning behind the change. JD Power’s 2025 U.S. Multimedia Quality and Satisfaction Study found that digital-display problems increased across the industry last year. The same study found that drivers want technology that works intuitively and doesn’t pull their attention away from the road. JD Power’s conclusion pointed to a specific fix: pairing touchscreens with physical buttons improves how usable a vehicle’s controls actually are. For automakers like Mercedes, that finding suggests the years-long race toward bigger screens may have come at the expense of drivers who just want to adjust the temperature without digging through a menu.

How Mercedes got here

Mercedes’ recent interiors show how far the touchscreen trend went. The electric GLA SUV includes the MBUX Superscreen, a three-display setup that spans the width of the dashboard behind a single piece of glass. The design looks closer to a command console than a traditional car interior, and Mercedes has described it as part of a minimalist, technology-driven cabin concept. Other automakers have built similarly expansive infotainment systems in recent years, several of which drew criticism for making basic functions harder to reach while driving.

Other automakers are making the same move

Mercedes isn’t alone in walking back its screen-first approach. Volkswagen reintroduced physical steering wheel buttons in the Golf GTI, Tiguan, and ID.4 after years of relying on touch-sensitive controls that drivers and reviewers criticized for being difficult to use without looking down. Hyundai added physical buttons and knobs to the Santa Cruz and Palisade. Porsche has kept a mix of touchscreens and physical controls throughout its recent lineup rather than following the all-digital trend some competitors adopted.

The pattern points to an industry-wide correction. Automakers spent much of the past decade competing on screen size and digital features, treating touchscreens as a shorthand for modernity. That approach is now colliding with data showing it may have made cars harder, not easier, to operate.

The safety research behind the shift

Research from the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety adds weight to the argument for physical controls. The organization found that infotainment systems built around touchscreens increase the amount of time drivers spend looking away from the road. Tasks that would take a fraction of a second with a physical button, such as adjusting the volume or changing the fan speed, can require multiple glances at a screen to complete when routed through a touch interface. Even simple, routine actions behind the wheel become a source of distraction when a driver has to visually locate and tap the right spot on a screen rather than reach for a button they can find by feel.

That distinction matters for automakers now facing pressure from both regulators and consumers to prioritize safety alongside design. A touchscreen might look sleek in a showroom, but the AAA Foundation’s findings suggest that appeal can come with a real cost once a vehicle is in motion.

What comes next for Mercedes

Mercedes has not specified which upcoming models will feature the revised control layout or offered a timeline for rolling out the change across its lineup. Källenius’s comments to Autocar suggest the shift will apply broadly rather than to a single vehicle, positioning Mercedes among a growing group of automakers recalibrating how much of the driving experience should live on a screen.

For now, drivers waiting on the change will need to watch for Mercedes’ next generation of interior designs to see how the automaker balances its touchscreen ambitions against the practical case for a physical button.

ADVERTISEMENT
Receive the latest news

Subscribe To Our Weekly Newsletter

Get notified about new articles