Model-year record

2024 Tesla Cybertruck
See the complaints, recalls, crash rating, and fuel economy in the public record. Then check the mileage and history of the car you found.
This page shows records, not a buy or avoid call.
The same model year can include a well-kept car and a neglected one. Use these records to plan what to check. Use the specific-car check when you know the mileage.
Complaints filed
162
Reports to NHTSA, 2024
Safety recalls
11
NHTSA campaigns on record
NHTSA crash test
Overall NCAP rating
Combined MPG
No data
EPA estimate
Known issues
Electrical System issues lead owner complaints (22% of 162 reports), followed by structure (20%).
+ 11 more component categories with fewer reports.
Share of all 162 NHTSA complaints for this model year, grouped by the component owners named. Bars are scaled to the largest category. Examples: ODI 11695120, ODI 11646503, ODI 11751738, ODI 11749753, ODI 11746326.
Individual complaint reports(162)
Showing the 50 most recent reportsElectrical SystemJul 2026 · ODI 11751738Details +Close −
The car would stop charging at home and an error showed up about two months ago. After reporting to Tesla, they did a diagnostic over the air and concluded that the battery (HVB) needs to be replaced. The car is at the shop for over a month, and they are still waiting on parts.
- Reported
- Jul 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemJul 2026 · ODI 11749753Details +Close −
I am filing a safety defect complaint regarding my Tesla Cybertruck. Water entered the truck bed outlet area and caused corrosion to the mounting bolts and surrounding components, resulting in Tesla determining that the entire bed wall panel requires replacement. The bed outlet is designed for outdoor use and exposure to weather conditions. In my opinion, water intrusion into this area represents a design defect because moisture can enter the electrical outlet assembly and associated mounting hardware, leading to corrosion and component deterioration. My concern is that continued corrosion could potentially affect the integrity or functionality of the electrical outlet system and create an electrical safety hazard for owners using the bed power outlets in normal outdoor conditions, including rain or vehicle washing. Tesla inspected the vehicle and confirmed water ingress and corrosion were present and advised that replacement of the bed wall panel was necessary to correct the condition. I request that NHTSA review whether the design of the Cybertruck bed outlet and surrounding components adequately protects against water intrusion and corrosion during normal vehicle use.
- Reported
- Jul 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
StructureJul 2026 · ODI 11748520Details +Close −
The contact owns a 2024 Tesla Cybertruck. The contact stated that while driving at an undisclosed speed, the vehicle made an abnormal rattling sound, and the contact noticed that the metal quarter panel was loose. The contact was concerned that the quarter panel detachment could cause a crash. The vehicle was taken to the local dealer, where a replacement quote was provided. The vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was contacted and confirmed that there was no coverage. The failure mileage was approximately 3,000.
- Reported
- Jul 2026
- Incident date
- Oct 2024
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Forward Collision AvoidanceJul 2026 · ODI 11747861 · crashDetails +Close −
Approximately 10 minutes after my vehicle was serviced at a Tesla Service Center for a Full Self-Driving (FSD) concern, I entered the highway and engaged FSD. The service center had stated the system was operating correctly. While traveling approximately 75 mph through a highway curve, FSD suddenly changed to an "Unavailable" state. According to Tesla's own accident data, I did not disengage FSD. There was no audible warning, no effective visual warning, no takeover request, no controlled deceleration, and no safe handoff to the driver before the vehicle stopped controlling itself. Within about one second of FSD becoming unavailable, the vehicle left its intended path and struck a concrete highway divider. If the divider had not been present, the vehicle likely would have crossed into oncoming highway traffic, creating the risk of a catastrophic head-on collision with other vehicles, including a semi-truck. Tesla's accident report confirms I did not disengage FSD and shows no warning or takeover request before impact. I possess documentation supporting that FSD became unavailable without a safe transition to the driver. This failure occurred immediately after Tesla serviced the vehicle and represented that the FSD system was functioning properly. Despite the accident data, Tesla Customer Support and the Service Center have refused to acknowledge or investigate what appears to be a failure of the FSD system's fail-safe behavior. The failed component appears to be the FSD/Autopilot system and its driver handoff logic. The vehicle and electronic records are available for inspection. An automated driving system should not terminate operation at highway speed without providing adequate warning, a safe transfer of control, or controlled deceleration. I believe this presents a serious safety defect that could result in fatal crashes. The collision caused approximately $15,500 in vehicle damage.
- Reported
- Jul 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- Crash
Electrical SystemJun 2026 · ODI 11746326Details +Close −
PCS system has failed. This causes the vehicle to be unable to charge and can lead to loss of power if unable to get to a supercharger before the battery is depleted. It can now only be charged at full Tesla superchargers and not at other brands, hotel chargers, or home AC chargers. The vehicle did notify me of the PCS failure and recommended using a supercharger. Tesla proactively updated my account to allow for free supercharging, but this does not eliminate the risk when going to areas that do not have superchargers available. Parts are not currently available to repair the problem and my service requests are left in a "review" state. Vehicle is available for inspection if needed.
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Vehicle Speed ControlJun 2026 · ODI 11745182Details +Close −
This is reporting an issue with v14.3.3 and v14.3.4 of Tesla Full Self Driving (FSD) Supervised. This month I have driven over 4,000 miles with FSD enabled, approximately 2/3rd on 14.3.3 and 1/3 on 14.3.4. FSD has regularly failed to respect speed limit changes, even though it seems to recognize / observe the speed limit signs. I am certain it’s observing the signs because it renders them on the in-car display, but it doesn’t actually adjust its speed in response to those signs. The most egregious of cases have been when driving through Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona where the speed limit is often 75 mph on Interstate highways (e.g., [XXX]). On multiple occasions the vehicle has ignored construction speed limit changes to 55 mph, and instead has tried to maintain 75-80 mph through the construction zone. Not only could that get me a nasty speeding ticket, but it could also put construction workers lives at risk. It has also happened in non-construction zones, like when on a non-interstate highway that passes through towns and reduces speed when doing so. It doesn’t fail 100% of the time, but it has been an issue more than 50% of the time I enter a construction zone. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Exterior LightingJun 2026 · ODI 11743708 · crash · 2 injuriesDetails +Close −
I was driving my Tesla Cybertruck on the highway when I experienced unexpected steering movements from side to side. I attempted to maintain control of the vehicle and slow down. The vehicle ultimately left its intended path and collided with the median. I do not know the cause of the incident. At the time of the accident, I believe a Tesla driver-assistance feature may have been engaged, but I am requesting that Tesla review the vehicle data and logs to determine exactly what systems were active and whether any vehicle malfunction contributed to the event. The accident resulted in significant vehicle damage. I am submitting this report because I am concerned that a potential steering, vehicle control, or driver-assistance system issue may have contributed to the incident and I believe the event should be investigated.
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- Crash 2 injuries
StructureJun 2026 · ODI 11743041Details +Close −
The rear passenger side sail applique flew off the truck while I was driving on the freeway.
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Forward Collision AvoidanceJun 2026 · ODI 11743084Details +Close −
Tesla does a warning if it can not detect your eyes on the road when using FSD (Full Self Driving). After few warnings on a trip it becomes a strike. After 5 strikes, they remove FSD and AutoPilot for a week. It becomes dangerous now since I have been driving on FSD for several years to drive the big CyberTruck without FSD. The removing FSD for a week behavior needs to be stopped. Without FSD chances of accident are 10000% increased.
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemJun 2026 · ODI 11741901Details +Close −
PCS2 charging failure, PCS_a094 / a095 errors, loss of AC charging, reduced charging speeds, and PowerShare charging issue.
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Vehicle Speed ControlJun 2026 · ODI 11741313 · crashDetails +Close −
On 05/30/2026 at approximately 15H24, my Tesla Cybertruck was parked and stopped at approx. [XXX] of Target). No one was seated in the driver seat. A passenger entered the vehicle and sat in the front passenger seat to play music. Shortly after the passenger sat down, the vehicle suddenly and unexpectedly moved forward on its own and rear-ended the vehicle parked directly in front of it and causing damages. This occurred while the vehicle was supposed to be parked/stationary and while there was no driver in the driver seat. We do not understand what triggered the vehicle to move forward. This appears to be a serious safety issue because a parked, unattended vehicle should not move forward without driver input. The incident created a collision risk to nearby vehicles, pedestrians, and anyone standing in front of or around the vehicle. I am requesting that NHTSA review this as a potential unintended movement / unintended acceleration / park-to-drive activation / rollaway safety defect. Tesla should be required to investigate the vehicle logs and determine whether the movement was caused by a software issue, gear selection issue, Autopark/FSD/Summon/mobile app activation, brake hold/parking brake failure, sensor/occupancy issue, accelerator pedal issue, or any other defect. Video and photos in the link: [XXX] There was property damage to the vehicle parked in front. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- Reported
- Jun 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- Crash
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11741138Details +Close −
My Tesla Cybertruck has experienced a failure of the Power Conversion System (PCS), which prevents the vehicle from charging at home using the installed residential charging equipment. Tesla diagnosed the issue and advised that the required replacement part is unavailable, with no estimated date for repair. As a result, I have been forced to rely exclusively on public Superchargers for several months. While Tesla has provided free Supercharging, this does not restore the vehicle’s intended functionality and requires significant additional travel, waiting time, and disruption to my daily activities and business operations. The vehicle was purchased and represented as capable of convenient home charging, and the prolonged inability to repair a critical charging system due to parts unavailability substantially impairs its use, value, and practicality. I am submitting this complaint because Tesla has been unable to provide a repair timeline, and I am concerned that other owners may be experiencing similar failures and extended delays in obtaining repairs. The offered loaner vehicle is a Tesla Model Y, which is not comparable to a Cybertruck and does not meet the hauling and cargo needs associated with my business operations.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainMay 2026 · ODI 11740903Details +Close −
All vehicle cameras failed simultaneously on May 12, 2026 at approximately 4:41 PM. Tesla app displayed "Cameras Unavailable — Please try again later." All camera-dependent systems were completely inoperable: Autopilot, FSD, Sentry Mode, dashcam/TeslaCam. Component failed: Entire forward and perimeter camera system. Vehicle available for inspection at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center. Safety risk: Vehicle cannot safely operate driver assistance systems with all cameras dead. Total loss of rear/side visibility systems while driving. No warning prior to failure. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola general manager intentionally cancelled 8 consecutive service appointments — confirmed on recorded Tesla corporate call May 29, 2026. Owner drove 2.5 hours to one appointment and the GM rescheduled it without any notice. Tesla corporate agent confirmed on record: "You shouldn't have to travel to a service center that's over 100 miles away when you have one that's close to you." As of May 29, 2026 vehicle is at Tallahassee SC — Tesla refusing to provide a loaner or complete repairs. Owner has been without vehicle 24-48 hours despite being promised a loaner at time of tow. Prior warning: TeslaCam left-repeater camera failure events auto-saved December 15, 2025 — system was already failing 5 months prior to total failure. Was defect reproduced by dealer: No — Tesla refused to inspect despite 8 cancelled appointments.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Visibility/WiperMay 2026 · ODI 11740919Details +Close −
My vehicle's windshield wipers were completely inoperable for an extended period. I drove this vehicle across multiple states without functional windshield wipers — confirmed on a recorded Tesla corporate support call dated May 21, 2026. This is also covered under NHTSA Recall 24V456000 (Windshield Wiper Motor failure), which Tesla Pensacola failed to identify or perform. Tesla Council Bluffs, IA identified this recall as requiring urgent attention. Safety risk: Operating a vehicle at highway speed without functional windshield wipers in any precipitation is extremely dangerous. I drove cross-country in this condition. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola stated the vehicle had "nothing wrong." Tesla Council Bluffs identified the recall. Recall has still not been performed.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2024
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainMay 2026 · ODI 11740924Details +Close −
Beginning approximately December 2025, my vehicle produces a severe grinding sound when attempting to accelerate. The sound has been consistent and ongoing for approximately 6 months. Confirmed verbatim on recorded Tesla corporate support call May 21, 2026: "If I try to accelerate it's making this horrible grinding sound. This has been going on since December." Component: Drivetrain / power unit (unknown — Tesla has never inspected). Safety risk: Grinding on acceleration indicates mechanical failure in the drivetrain that could result in sudden loss of power or vehicle control. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola GM intentionally cancelled 8 consecutive service appointments since December 2025 — confirmed on recorded Tesla corporate call May 29, 2026. Owner stated on Tesla's recorded line: "For the last two years it's been broken. I've literally had it in the shop more than I've driven it." Tesla has never examined the source of the grinding sound. As of May 29, 2026, vehicle is at Tallahassee Service Center. Tesla escalated to Regional Manager on May 29, 2026. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2024
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11740931Details +Close −
My vehicle achieves only 80-100 miles of real-world range per charge, requiring charging to 100% to reach even this reduced figure. On April 30, 2026 at 11:08 PM, I documented energy consumption of 460.8 Wh/mi — 37% worse than the specification required to achieve Tesla's advertised range of 318-340 miles. Component: High voltage battery / power distribution system. Safety risk: Severe undisclosed range reduction means the vehicle may reach 0% charge in locations and at times the driver does not anticipate based on advertised specifications, creating stranding and safety risks. Manufacturer response: Raised on May 21, 2026 recorded call with Tesla corporate. Tesla acknowledged the issue and said to discuss at service — but all service appointments have been cancelled since December 2025.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
StructureMay 2026 · ODI 11740934Details +Close −
The vehicle's tonneau cover was defective from the day of delivery and remained unusable for approximately the first 12 months of ownership. Factory over-application of adhesive forced the rear window against the tonneau rollers, preventing operation. I purchased this vehicle specifically for its cargo bed functionality for business use. The cover was finally repaired at Tesla Lincoln, NE when a senior technician was present — root cause identified as a manufacturing defect present from the factory. Component: Tonneau cover / rear bed cover system. Safety: Debris containment failure — unsecured cargo bed.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2024
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainMay 2026 · ODI 11740906Details +Close −
NHTSA Recall 24V832000 covers a drive inverter defect that can cause complete loss of drive power. This recall was identified as active on my vehicle when I drove cross-country to XXX. Tesla Pensacola [XXX] ) told me "nothing was wrong" and did not perform this recall despite having the vehicle in for service multiple times. Component: Drive inverter / power train. Safety risk: Complete loss of drive power at highway speed is an extreme safety hazard. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola stated the vehicle had no issues and performed no recall work. Tesla Council Bluffs, IA immediately identified this recall as requiring urgent attention on the same vehicle. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle currently at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Vehicle Speed ControlMay 2026 · ODI 11740907Details +Close −
NHTSA Recall 24V276000 covers an accelerator pedal pad that can dislodge and become trapped under the pedal, causing unintended acceleration. This recall was identified as active and unperformed on my vehicle by Tesla Council Bluffs, IA. Tesla Pensacola told me the vehicle had "nothing wrong" and performed no recall work despite multiple service visits. Safety risk: Unintended acceleration is an extreme safety hazard capable of causing fatal accidents. Manufacturer response: Tesla Pensacola failed to identify or perform this safety recall. Tesla Council Bluffs immediately identified it as requiring urgent attention. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Jun 2024
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
WheelsMay 2026 · ODI 11740910Details +Close −
NHTSA Recall 26V255000, issued April 22, 2026, covers brake rotor studs that may crack, potentially causing wheel separation at speed. This critical safety recall has not been performed on my vehicle. Tesla Pensacola cancelled all service appointments since December 2025 without performing any recall work. Safety risk: Wheel separation at highway speed is a life-threatening defect. I have been driving this vehicle since April 22, 2026 — over one month — with potentially cracked brake rotor studs because Tesla has refused to schedule and complete service. As of May 27, 2026, the vehicle was towed to Tesla Tallahassee without my knowledge or a loaner vehicle provided, and Tesla is now refusing to perform service without my in-person presence. Available for inspection: Yes — vehicle at Tesla Tallahassee Service Center.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11739642Details +Close −
Pcs2 failure
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Unknown Or OtherMay 2026 · ODI 11739137Details +Close −
I am submitting a safety complaint regarding the rear visibility system on my Tesla Cybertruck. The physical rear view mirror does not provide any usable visibility of the roadway behind the vehicle. The design of the rear window and cargo area blocks the view, which makes the mirror ineffective for its intended safety function. Because the physical mirror cannot be used, the driver must rely on the rear camera feed displayed on the center screen. This is the only way to see directly behind the vehicle during normal driving. However, the rear camera feed disappears every time the turn signal indicators are activated. When the indicators turn on, the screen automatically replaces the rear view with the side camera view. This removes all rear visibility at the exact moment when the driver needs full awareness for lane changes, merging, and turning. This behavior cannot be disabled or overridden. It is part of the default software design. As a result, the driver is left without any functional rear visibility method during critical maneuvers. This creates a clear safety risk and raises concerns regarding compliance with FMVSS 111, which requires reliable rear visibility. The loss of rear visibility during lane changes and turns increases the risk of collisions with vehicles approaching from behind. Since the physical mirror is unusable and the digital feed is removed by the software, the driver has no safe or compliant way to monitor rear traffic during these maneuvers. I request that NHTSA investigate this issue and require Tesla to provide a remedy. A potential remedy would include keeping the rear camera feed visible at all times unless the driver manually chooses to remove it, or adding a dedicated rear view camera feed that remains active during all driving conditions.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738551Details +Close −
PCS2 failed. Unable to AC charge. Afraid supercharging will go out next. Lots of errors on dash. Tesla says will take months for the part to come in, because thousands of others are failing, potentially stranding drivers.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738373Details +Close −
AC power system failure. Can no longer charge car from home AC power (free), must use commercial charging station (pay).
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738398Details +Close −
In July of 2025, I drive my vehicle on a 130 mile trip. About 25 miles into the drive, I started receiving errors about AC charging not available. I stopped at a Tesla supercharger Hannibal [XXX] but I couldn’t charge it there either. Drive it the rest of the way to my destination where I had an ac charger available. Tried there but I couldn’t charge there either. Tried resetting the car…still couldn’t charge. Opened service ticket. Tesla had to send a tow vehicle 110 miles to me and then tire the truck back to the service center in [XXX] . they had to keep the car 3 days and replaced the pcs system. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Jul 2025
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738258Details +Close −
Can’t charge at home and must drive across town to charge. Part is unavailable for over two months they said.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainMay 2026 · ODI 11738261Details +Close −
The PCS unit failed and the truck would not charge at all. Tesla repaired under warranty.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Nov 2025
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738262Details +Close −
PCS2_a094 error PCS2_a095 error PCS2_a137 error Known issue. PCS system failing. Vehicle slows down charging and then stops charging completely. Service scheduled for 2 months away.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738264Details +Close −
The PCS module failed in the vehicle, not allowing me to charge the vehicle at home. I can still use it at Superchargers, but the AC charging at my house no longer works and the power share function of the truck also no longer works. There seems to be a widespread issue as in all the forms in groups. I’m in thousands of people have had this problem recently with no rhyme or reason to year make model or miles
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainMay 2026 · ODI 11738267Details +Close −
PCS2 failure preventing the truck from charging, and use of PowerShare.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Mar 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738306Details +Close −
Pcs2 board replaced. Charging was limited to 24amp. Replaced under warranty but a lot of trucks are experiencing this so I am reporting
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738308Details +Close −
I have had a PCS2 charging failure for months now and Tesla has not fixed it. The truck is currently only charging at 24a instead of 48a. If this continues to fail the truck will not be able to charge at all.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738328Details +Close −
PCS component in my car has degraded, I could charge at 36A earlier but now the charger only charges at 24A. This is line with large number of PCS failures reported by other users and their failed components being replaced by Tesla. However they returned mine saying they could not replicate it!
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11738019Details +Close −
The main FSD computer has given me a fault which probably necessitates replacement of the main computer at a cost of $3250. Car is 2024 and is just out of warranty with 52,000 miles within the last month. Tesla states they will not cover. Safety features are "not available", per the warning on my dash.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11737729Details +Close −
I have fell victim to the now infamous PCS failure. My truck stopped being able to charge from home, and Tesla requires me to use their Supercharging system in order to drive it. I was actually around the truck when it failed and could smell a potent odor of electrical smoke coming from outside the vehicle. I have observed the same odor every time I’ve charged it since. Tesla will not accept the vehicle at their service center because they are back ordered on the part by over eight weeks.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainMay 2026 · ODI 11736516Details +Close −
Unexpected PCS2 failure and loss of AC charging. This unable to charge battery where supercharger is not available. Risks of being stranded. Limits current use. Repair unavailable and no estimated time per service center!
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemMay 2026 · ODI 11736225Details +Close −
Will not charge at 48 volts has been reduced to 24 volts. PCS failure. This is a widespread issue and apparently known by Tesla which currently has a parts shortage
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Lane DepartureMay 2026 · ODI 11736349 · crashDetails +Close −
The failed components include the Tesla Vision system (cameras), sensors, Active Safety Control Module (AEB), and Gear Selection UI. Symptoms first appeared on April 30, 2026, including black screens and "Autopilot Unavailable" alerts. Internal vehicle logs from Apr 30 to May 02 confirm persistent "SNA" (Signal Not Available) and "UNAVAILABLE" states for these critical safety modules well before the collision. On the day of the accident (May 02), the logs recorded 25 instances of Gear UI signal loss, which completely disabled the rearview camera and proximity alerts while reversing. This total "blind" state put my safety at extreme risk as I had zero visibility of blind spots and received no audible warnings. The Automatic Emergency Braking (AEB) was also recorded as "UNAVAILABLE," failing to prevent the collision. The problem is scientifically confirmed by the vehicle's internal diagnostic logs, which I have retrieved and am ready to provide for inspection. The accident has been reported to the local police and Progressive Insurance. I am currently coordinating with Tesla Service for a formal inspection of these software and hardware defects.
- Reported
- May 2026
- Incident date
- May 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- Crash
Electrical SystemApr 2026 · ODI 11734727Details +Close −
A widespread defect in the Cybertruck's Power Conversion System (PCS) completely disables home/AC charging. Replacement parts are on national backorder. The Power Conversion System (PCS) manages all alternating-current (AC) power flowing into the battery. I began receiving an error code, PCS2_a095, which indicates a failure in the Power Conversion System (PCS) of a Tesla Cybertruck, causing "AC Charging inability to charge at home, effectively bricking the vehicle for daily convenient use.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemApr 2026 · ODI 11734541Details +Close −
This error code (PCS2_a103_IsoTempSensorIrrational) is from a Tesla Cybertruck. It relates to the Power Conversion System (PCS2), which handles AC charging, PowerShare (vehicle-to-load/home), and other power conversion functions. My Cybertruck will likely be affected in the future by charging issues related to PCS. I understand this is a common issue with Cybertruck within my VIN range. I request this issue be investigated and a recall done prior to being affected.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainApr 2026 · ODI 11734576Details +Close −
Faulty PCS system can cause car to stop charging, potentially causing vehicle to shut down on the highway, leaving it stranded and a hazard on the road.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Vehicle Speed ControlApr 2026 · ODI 11734677Details +Close −
The new tesla update forces me to interact with the touch screen in order to operate my vehicle after self driving is disabled. There is no way to dismiss or disable this screen in the new update and no way for me to roll my vehicle back to the old software. After disengaging self driving a forced selector box forces you to make one of 4 choices in order to see your screen/navigation and perform other features in the car such as adjusting the windshield wipers. There is no way to disable this screen, it pops up every single time Full Self Driving is disengaged and there is no way to disable it. I believe this actively violates california law by requiring me to interact with the touch screen while actively controlling the vehicle on manual mode. I tried clicking elsewhere on the screen but yuo are forced to select one of the four options presented
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemApr 2026 · ODI 11733265Details +Close −
The contact owns a 2024 Tesla Cybertruck. The contact stated that while driving at undisclosed speeds, the sideview mirrors struck a pedestrian. Additionally, the sideview mirrors struck barriers and other objects while driving. The contact stated that the vehicle failed to detect or recognize when an object was struck and continued operating. The dealer was notified of the failure, but the vehicle was not repaired. The manufacturer was notified of the failure. The approximate failure mileage was 28,000.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Exterior LightingApr 2026 · ODI 11732892Details +Close −
The OEM off-road light bar was mounted on the top of windshield fell off. Tesla refused to fix and replace
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Electrical SystemApr 2026 · ODI 11732042Details +Close −
PCS FAILURE. WILL NOT CHARGE
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainApr 2026 · ODI 11731264Details +Close −
Vehicle stopped AC and DC charging. This could get anybody stranded. Seems to be a wide spread issues online. PCS2
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
SteeringApr 2026 · ODI 11730720 · crashDetails +Close −
I was driving my 2024 Tesla Cybertruck on the Freeway 57 southbound between 9:06 AM to 9:10 AM at about 60 mph when the vehicle suddenly steered sharply to the left without any input from me. It completed a full 360-degree spin, hit the concrete median, and then came to a stop. No other cars were involved. The truck is heavily damaged and not drivable. This appears to be a sudden mechanical or software failure. I have reported it to 911 and the police car moved the vehicle to a safe place. I have reported it to Tesla and requested a full diagnostic review of the vehicle logs.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- Crash
Unknown Or OtherApr 2026 · ODI 11730745Details +Close −
The PCs on earlier cybertrucks has been recalled. The same issue seems to persist. The issue will not allow you to charge T home and drastically cuts vehicle performance. In addition the only way you can charge is via a supercharger which makes one wonder if this whole thing was a cash grab for Tesla to force these trucks onto their costly charging network.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Feb 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
SteeringApr 2026 · ODI 11730347Details +Close −
This incident happens when driving home from work, it happened half a mile away from where I live on a local road. All of a sudden car lost all power, steering wheel and brake completely failed, drive train completely failed while the car was still moving. there was no way the car could be controlled to move to the side of the road or to break to completely stop it.. thankfully it coasted to a complete stop. As it was the middle of the day, there were no cars around the local road I was on. Once the car stopped everything shut off completely. There was no way to turn on the hazard lights or get out of the car either I had to use emergency exit.. car wash towed to Tesla service center where it stayed with them for a few weeks and I was told that it was PCS an ancillary auxiliary part that needed to be replaced. While searching the forums, I found out that this is becoming a problem where multiple cyber trucks have this issue going on which I feel is a safety issue as it can cause a major accident or fatalities if somebody was driving on the highway on highway speeds and this happened. I am opening this ticket to help others so hopefully a recall is done on this.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Dec 2025
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
Power TrainApr 2026 · ODI 11729334Details +Close −
My Cybertruck’s Power Conversion System failed at 65,000 miles. I received a PCS alert, AC charging became unavailable, and the vehicle displayed charging faults. The repair required major disassembly of the tonneau, bed, and air suspension and cost 7000 because it occurred after warranty. Why This Is a Safety Defect: The PCS is a critical component that handles onboard AC charging, DC-DC conversion to the 48V system, and power delivery. Failure can strand drivers, prevent charging, and (as seen in related drive-inverter recalls) contribute to sudden loss of propulsion while driving. This Is a Widespread Issue: PCS failures are occurring frequently (“left and right”) in Cybertrucks, especially early production models. Owner forums and polls show dozens of identical failures, with some samples reporting 18–40% affected. Many owners face 2,000–7,000 repairs out of warranty. Tesla issued a limited recall for related drive inverters (NHTSA Campaign 24V-832) that can cause sudden power loss, but no recall covers the broader PCS defect despite the clear pattern. I strongly urge NHTSA to investigate this common defect immediately and require Tesla to issue a full recall for affected Cybertrucks, including free replacement of the Power Conversion System for all owners. Thank you for protecting public safety.
- Reported
- Apr 2026
- Incident date
- Apr 2026
- Mileage
- Not provided
- Outcome flags
- None reported
This page shows the latest 50 reports to keep it usable. The count above includes every complaint NHTSA has returned for this model year.
Recalls(11)
Open a recall to read what NHTSA says is wrong, what can happen, and how it gets fixed. Check the VIN and remedy eligibility with a dealer; federal no-charge requirements have an age limit, though a manufacturer may offer more coverage.
Electrical SystemMay 2024 · 24V832000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. A fault in the drive inverter may cause a loss of drive power to the wheels.
Risk: A loss of drive power can increase the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla service will replace the drive inverter, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed January 4, 2025. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-40-009.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Electrical System · 24V051000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2012-2023 Model S, 2016-2024 Model X, 2017-2023 Model 3, 2019-2024 Model Y, and 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. An incorrect font size is displayed on the instrument panel for the Brake, Park, and Antilock Brake System (ABS) warning lights. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 105, "Hydraulic and Electric Brake Systems" and 135, "Light Vehicle Brake Systems."
Risk: Warning lights with a smaller font size can make critical safety information on the instrument panel difficult to read, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla began releasing an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-00-003.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Vehicle Speed Control · 24V276000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. The accelerator pedal pad may dislodge and cause the pedal to become trapped by the interior trim.
Risk: A trapped accelerator pedal can cause the vehicle to accelerate unintentionally, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla service will replace or repair the accelerator pedal assembly, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed June 18, 2024. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-33-003.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Visibility · 24V456000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. Excessive electrical current can cause the front windshield wiper motor controller to fail.
Risk: Windshield wiper failure can reduce visibility, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla service will replace the wiper motor, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed October 1, 2024. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-17-006.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Structure · 24V457000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. The trunk bed trim sail applique could have been improperly adhered and can loosen.
Risk: A loose applique can detach from the vehicle, creating a road hazard for following motorists and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla service will apply adhesion promoter and pressure sensitive tape or replace missing applique as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed August 18, 2024. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-12-006.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Back Over Prevention · 24V718000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles. The rearview camera image may be delayed after shifting into reverse. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 111, "Rear Visibility."
Risk: A delayed rearview image reduces the driver's view of what is behind the vehicle, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla released an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed November 25, 2024. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-00-016.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Tires · 24V935000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck, 2017-2025 Model 3, and 2020-2025 Model Y vehicles. The tire pressure monitoring system (TPMS) warning light may not remain illuminated between drive cycles, failing to warn the driver of low tire pressure. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard number 138, "Tire Pressure Monitoring Systems."
Risk: Driving with improperly inflated tires increases the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla released an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed February 15, 2025. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-24-00-018.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Structure · 25V170000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024-2025 Cybertruck vehicles. The light bar can delaminate and detach from the vehicle.
Risk: A detached light bar can become a road hazard, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla service will replace the cant rail assembly, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed September 19, 2025. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-25-10-001.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Exterior Lighting · 25V699000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024-2026 Cybertruck vehicles operating software prior to 2025.38.3. The vehicle controller software may cause the front parking lights to be too bright and exceed the maximum light output, adversely affecting the vision of other drivers. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 108, "Lamps, Reflective Devices, and Associated Equipment."
Risk: Parking lights that are too bright can reduce visibility of oncoming drivers, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla released an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed December 12, 2025. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-25-00-008.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Exterior Lighting · 25V735000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024 Cybertruck vehicles equipped with a service-installed off-road light bar accessory. An incorrect surface primer may have been used to attach the lightbar to the windshield, causing the light bar to loosen and detach.
Risk: A detached light bar may fall, creating a road hazard for other vehicles and increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla Service will inspect the light bar and install an additional mechanical attachment or replace the light bar using tape to adhere the light bar to the windshield as well as an additional mechanical attachment as necessary, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed April 9, 2026. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-25-90-001.
Open full NHTSA recall record →Wheels · 26V255000Details +Close −
Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024-2026 Cybertruck vehicles equipped with 18-inch steel wheels. The brake rotor stud holes may crack and allow the stud to separate from the wheel hub.
Risk: Wheel stud separation can cause a loss of vehicle control, increasing the risk of a crash.
Remedy: Tesla Service will replace the front and rear brake rotors, hubs, and lug nuts, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed June 20, 2026. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1-877-798-3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-26-33-003.
Open full NHTSA recall record →A campaign can apply to this model year without being incomplete on a specific vehicle. Check the VIN with NHTSA or a dealer to confirm whether a particular car needs repair.
Investigations
4 NHTSA investigations on record
Investigations are agency reviews, not findings that a vehicle is defective.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) is opening this Engineering Analysis to evaluate Tesla’s Full Self Driving Beta and Full Self Driving (Supervised) (collectively, FSD) degradation detection system. The focus of this investigation will be to assess the system’s ability, when encountering reduced roadway visibility conditions, to detect degradation and alert the driver with sufficient time to respond. ODI will evaluate the performance of FSD in degraded roadway conditions and the updates or modifications by Tesla to the degradation detection system, including the timing, purpose, and capabilities of the updates, and Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact. Tesla’s FSD is an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) that relies exclusively on vision-based cameras and the related FSD software to detect and respond to the roadway ahead, projecting a path forward based on traffic control devices, vehicles, pedestrians, and the roadway itself. When Tesla began transitioning away from using both cameras and radars to an exclusively camera-based approach, known as Tesla Vision, in mid-2021, it developed and implemented a degradation detection system that it deployed by a software update to existing and new Tesla vehicles. On June 28, 2024, the day after Tesla submitted the SGO report of the November 28, 2023 fatal crash listed in this document, Tesla began developing an update to the degradation detection system. At this time, ODI does not have information on when the update was deployed and which vehicles have the updated system. ODI discussed individual incidents and its initial findings during the PE phase of its investigation with Tesla. As part of those discussions, Tesla’s post-incident analysis indicated that the update to the degradation detection system, had it been installed on the vehicles at the time, may have affected 3 of the 9 incidents identified by ODI. Tesla also described internal data and labeling limitations that prevented a uniform identification and analysis of crash events with the subject system engaged. ODI believes this limitation could have led to under-reporting of subject crashes over portions of the defined time-period. Available incident data raise concerns that Tesla’s degradation detection system, both as originally deployed and later updated, fails to detect and/or warn the driver appropriately under degraded visibility conditions such as glare and airborne obscurants. In the crashes that ODI has reviewed, the system did not detect common roadway conditions that impaired camera visibility and/or provide alerts when camera performance had deteriorated until immediately before the crash occurred. Review of Tesla’s responses revealed additional crashes that occurred in similar environments and where the system either did not detect a degraded state, and/or it did not present the driver with an alert with adequate time for the driver to react. In each of these crashes, FSD also lost track of or never detected a lead vehicle in its path. In upgrading PE24031 to an Engineering Analysis (EA), ODI will gather further information on the updated degradation detection system, including the status of updating vehicles and scope of compatible vehicles, the system’s visibility degradation detection capability, and alerts or warnings to the driver. Lastly, ODI will conduct analysis on six recent potentially related incidents. These incidents can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-11937, 13781-13211, 13781-13569, 13781-13633, 13781-13693, 13781-13788. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-8004, 13781-7181, 13781-7381, 13781-7767, 13781-7964, 13781-8977, 13781-9267.
The Office of Defects Investigation (“ODI”) is opening this Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to assess the scope, frequency, and potential safety consequences of FSD executing driving maneuvers that constitute traffic safety violations. This investigation concerns versions of FSD that Tesla has labeled as "FSD (Supervised)" and "FSD (Beta)." Tesla characterizes FSD as an SAE Level 2 partial automation system requiring a fully attentive driver who is engaged in the driving task at all times. Level 2 partial automation systems are designed to support and assist the driver in performing certain aspects of the driving task, requiring a driver to supervise and intervene as necessary. The driver remains fully responsible at all times for driving the vehicle, including complying with applicable traffic laws. ODI’s investigation will therefore focus, in particular, on whether certain driving inputs within the control authority of FSD forestall the driver’s supervision when they are unexpectedly performed. ODI has identified a number of incidents in which the inputs to the dynamic driving task commanded by FSD induced vehicle behavior that violated traffic safety laws. Although reports of this nature span a variety of behaviors, the reports appear to most commonly involve two types of scenarios. The first type of scenario involves a vehicle operating with FSD proceeding into an intersection in violation of a red traffic signal. The second type of scenario involves FSD commanding a lane change into an opposing lane of traffic. With respect to the first type of scenario, ODI has identified 18 complaints and 1 media report alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating at an intersection with FSD engaged, failed to remain stopped for the duration of a red traffic signal, failed to stop fully, or failed to accurately detect and display the correct traffic signal state in the vehicle interface. Some complainants also alleged that FSD did not provide warnings of the system's intended behavior as the vehicle was approaching a red traffic signal. ODI has identified six Standing General Order ("SGO") reports in which a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, approached an intersection with a red traffic signal, continued to travel into the intersection against the red light and was subsequently involved in a crash with other motor vehicles in the intersection. Of these incidents, four crashes resulted in one or more reported injuries. At least some of the incidents appeared to involve FSD proceeding into the intersection after coming to a complete stop. ODI's pre-investigative work, including coordination with the Maryland Transportation Authority and State Police, indicated that the problem may be repeatable, given that multiple subject incidents occurred at the same intersection in Joppa, Maryland. NHTSA understands that Tesla has since taken action to address the issue at this intersection. With respect to the second type of scenario, ODI has identified 2 SGO reports, 18 complaints, and 2 media reports alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, entered opposing lanes of travel during or following a turn, crossed double-yellow lane markings while proceeding straight, or attempted to turn onto a road in the wrong direction despite the presence of wrong-way road signs. Likewise, ODI has identified 4 SGO reports, 6 complaints, and 1 media report alleging that a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, proceeded straight through an intersection in a turn-only lane or executed a turn at an intersection in a through lane despite the presence of lane markings or signals. Complaints also alleged that FSD did not provide warnings of the system's intended behavior. Some complaints alleged that more than one of these failures occurred and, as such, the numbers are not cumulative. Some of the reported incidents appeared to involve FSD executing a lane change into an opposing lane of travel with little notice to a driver or opportunity to intervene. ODI’s review will assess whether there was prior warning or adequate time for the driver to respond to the unexpected behavior or to safely supervise the automated driving task. This review will assess any warnings to the driver about the system's impending behavior; the time given to drivers to respond; the capability of FSD to detect, display to the driver, and respond appropriately to traffic signals; and the capability of FSD to detect and respond to lane markings and wrong-way signage. NHTSA's review will also consider any updates or modifications to the system(s) that may affect the performance of FSD with respect to obeying traffic safety laws and signals. This assessment will focus, in particular, on the types of traffic safety violations described above, as most reports identified thus far have centered around those behaviors. While the behaviors under investigation appear to occur most frequently at intersections, NHTSA’s investigation will encompass any other types of situations in which this behavior may arise, such as when traveling adjacent to a lane of opposing traffic or when approaching railroad crossings. If other evidence received during this investigation involve other types of traffic safety violations, those may be considered as part of this assessment as well. To review the ODI reports cited in the Opening Resume ODI Report Identification Number document, go to NHTSA.gov. The SGO reports cited in this Resume are listed below by report ID and are available for download at NHTSA.gov/laws-regulations/standing-general-order-crash-reporting. 13781-8739-1, 13781-8995-1, 13781-9623-1, 13781-10333-1, 13781-10872-1, 13781-10930-1, 13781-10939-1, 13781-10941-1, 13781-11069-1, 13781-11305-1, 13781-11579-1 Media reported allegations included as a separate attachment.
On October 17, 2024, NHTSA’s Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) opened a Preliminary Evaluation (PE24031) of Tesla’s Full Self Driving Beta and Full Self Driving (Supervised) (collectively, FSD) to assess: the ability of the FSD system to detect and respond appropriately to reduced roadway visibility conditions; whether any other FSD crashes had occurred under degraded roadway visibility conditions that are similar in nature to the four SGO-reported crashes identified in the opening document, and if so, the contributing circumstances for each of those crashes; and any updates or modifications by Tesla to the FSD system that may affect the performance of FSD in degraded roadway visibility conditions, including the timing, purpose, and capabilities of any such updates, and Tesla’s assessment of their safety impact. Tesla’s FSD is an advanced driver assistance system (ADAS) that relies exclusively on vision-based cameras and the related FSD software to detect and respond to the roadway ahead, projecting a path forward based on traffic control devices, vehicles, pedestrians, and the roadway itself. During this phase of the investigation, ODI reviewed the materials provided by Tesla detailing any actions taken, or changes, modifications, and updates made that may relate to the alleged defect. ODI reviewed information related to Tesla’s transition to a vision-only perception system, and its deployment of the strategy in vehicles. ODI’s findings include information on limitations of the vision-only perception system and updates made in response to known subject crashes. When Tesla began transitioning away from using both cameras and radars to an exclusively camera-based approach, known as Tesla Vision, in mid-2021, it developed and implemented a degradation detection system that it deployed by a software update to existing and new Tesla vehicles. On June 28, 2024, the day after Tesla submitted the SGO report of the November 28, 2023 fatal crash listed in this document, Tesla began developing an update to the degradation detection system. ODI reviewed certain public statements, including those made during an April 2025 earnings call, in which Tesla stated that it had developed a breakthrough “direct photon-counting” capability that eliminates the degradation that the camera-based system experiences when glare is encountered. At this time, ODI does not have information on when the update was deployed and which vehicles have the updated system. ODI has discussed individual incidents and its initial findings with Tesla. Based on Tesla’s post-incident analysis, the update to the degradation detection system, had it been installed on the vehicles at the time, may have affected 3 of the 9 incidents identified by ODI. Review of Tesla’s responses revealed additional crashes that occurred in similar environments and where the system either did not detect a degraded state, and/or it did not present the driver with an alert with adequate time for the driver to react. In each of these crashes, FSD also lost track of or never detected a lead vehicle in its path. Tesla also described internal data and labeling limitations that prevented a uniform identification and analysis of crash events with the subject system engaged. ODI believes this limitation could have led to under-reporting of subject crashes over portions of the defined time-period. Available incident data raise concerns that Tesla’s FSD system fails to detect and/or warn the driver appropriately under degraded visibility conditions such as glare and airborne obscurants where the camera-based system performance degrades significantly. In the crashes that ODI has reviewed, the FSD system did not detect common roadway conditions that impaired its visibility and/or provide alerts when camera performance had deteriorated until immediately before the crash occurred. ODI is upgrading this investigation (PE24031) to Engineering Analysis (EA) 26002 to further evaluate this matter. The crashes included in the failure report summary can be found at NHTSA.gov under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-8004, 13781-7181, 13781-7381, 13781-7767, 13781-7964, 13781-8977, 13781-9267.
The Office of Defects Investigation (ODI) is opening a Recall Query to assess the remedy adequacy of Recall 23V838. On December 12, 2023, Tesla filed a Defect Information Report (Recall 23V838) applicable to all Tesla models produced and equipped with any version of its Autopilot system, which Tesla described as an SAE Level 2 (L2) Advanced Driver Assistance System (ADAS). Autopilot is the simultaneous engagement of Tesla’s Traffic-Aware Cruise Control (TACC) and Autosteer. In describing the safety defect, Tesla’s Defect Information Report (DIR) explained that “the prominence and scope of the system’s controls may be insufficient to prevent driver misuse,” and Tesla committed to the deployment of a multipart remedy aimed at improving system and engagement controls and reducing mode confusion. EA22002 (upgraded from PE21020) was opened to investigate whether Tesla’s Autopilot contained a defect that created an unreasonable risk to motor vehicle safety and involved extensive crash analysis, human factors analysis, vehicle evaluations, and assessment of vehicle control authority and driver engagement technologies. The work conducted in these investigations aligns with Tesla’s conclusion in its 23V838 recall filing. During EA22002, ODI identified at least 13 crashes involving one or more fatalities and many more involving serious injuries in which foreseeable driver misuse of the system played an apparent role. Tesla filed Recall 23V838 to address concerns regarding the Autopilot system investigated in EA22002. Following deployment of the remedy in Recall 23V838, ODI identified concerns due to post-remedy crash events and results from preliminary NHTSA tests of remedied vehicles. Also, Tesla has stated that a portion of the remedy both requires the owner to opt in and allows a driver to readily reverse it. Tesla has also deployed non-remedy updates to address issues that appear related to ODI’s concerns under EA22002. This investigation will consider why these updates were not a part of the recall or otherwise determined to remedy a defect that poses an unreasonable safety risk. ODI is therefore opening this Recall Query investigation to further evaluate the adequacy of the remedy for recall 23V838.
Crash-test ratings
2024 Tesla Cybertruck PU/CC AWD NHTSA source
- Overall
- Frontal
- Side
- Rollover
Fuel economy by trim
No EPA fuel-economy record is available for this model year. Some trims and older vehicles were not tested or are not in the current EPA feed.
Before you buy
Useful next checks
Federal records tell you about patterns. These checks can tell you more about the specific car in front of you.
These are affiliate links. TireKick may earn a fee if you use one.
Compare the year-by-year record
Open another year for its own evidence-gated decision. TireKick does not crown a best year from raw complaint totals.
2024 Tesla Cybertruck: frequently asked
What does the complaint record show for the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck?
Owners filed 162 NHTSA complaints about the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck. This is raw owner-reported complaint volume with no production or exposure normalization, so it is not a reliability score or a best/worst-year ranking.
What are the most common problems on the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck?
The most-reported problem areas are Electrical System (22% of complaints) and structure (20%).
How many recalls does the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck have?
11 recalls have been issued that affect the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck, covering components such as electrical system. Check the VIN with NHTSA and ask a dealer to confirm remedy eligibility; federal no-charge requirements have an age limit, though manufacturers may offer more coverage.
What gas mileage does the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck get?
EPA fuel-economy figures for the 2024 Tesla Cybertruck aren't available yet.