The carpet floor mat on the driver's side accordions up under the accelerator and brake pedals creating a driving hazard. The driver side floor mat is supposed to be secured in place by an approximately 1 inch wide strip of velcro running the length of the floor mat under the edge closest to the seat. The Velcro is secured to the mat on three exterior edges. The Velcro is not secured on the interior edge allowing the Velcro to fold upwards and lose grip with the underlying carpet. Once the Velcro detaches and folds from the mat, it loses all grip and begins to slide. I informed two different Tesla dealers about the incident and they simply suggested I buy an identical replacement mat. They did not consider it a warranty issue and didn't admit that the mats were inherently defective even though this identical problem has been clearly documented and discussed on numerous internet forums.
The worst 2025 Tesla Model 3 problems
Ranked by number of owner complaints. Mileage and cost come from what owners wrote.
Problems by type
Tap a problem to see which part fails, at what mileage and in which other years.
- Driver assistance42
- Steering27
- Electrical24
- Acceleration14
- Brakes13
- Lights7
- Body6
- Suspension5
- Engine4
- Wheels4
- Fuel system3
- Visibility3
- Airbags2
- Seat belts2
- Seats2
- Transmission2
- Tires1
Recalls 3
Electrical system: propulsion system: fuses, relays, contacts, and shunts
- What is wrong
- Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2025 Model 3 and 2026 Model Y vehicles. The battery pack contactors may fail, causing a loss of drive power.
- Risk
- A loss of drive power can increase the risk of a crash.
- Remedy
- Tesla Service will replace the battery pack contactors, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed December 9, 2025. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1‑877‑798‑3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-25-16-005.
Recall number 25V690000 · Recall details
Back over prevention: software
- What is wrong
- Tesla, Inc. (Tesla) is recalling certain 2024-2025 Model 3, Model S, 2023-2025 Model X, and Model Y vehicles. The computer circuit board may short, resulting in the loss of the rearview camera image. As such, these vehicles fail to comply with the requirements of Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) number 111, "Rear Visibility."
- Risk
- A rearview camera that does not display an image reduces the driver's rear view, increasing the risk of a crash.
- Remedy
- Tesla released an over-the-air (OTA) software update, free of charge. Tesla will also identify any vehicles that experienced a circuit board failure, or stress that may lead to a circuit board failure, and replace the affected computers, free of charge. Owner notification letters were mailed March 7, 2025. Owners may contact Tesla customer service at 1‑877‑798‑3752. Tesla's number for this recall is SB-25-00-001.
Recall number 25V002000 · Recall details
Tires: pressure monitoring and regulating systems
- What is wrong
- 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.
Recall number 24V935000 · Recall details
See all 3 recalls for the 2025 Tesla Model 3
Defect investigations
FSD Collisions in Reduced Roadway Visibility Conditions
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 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 under the following SGO report identification numbers: 13781-8004, 13781-7181, 13781-7381, 13781-7767, 13781-7964, 13781-8977, 13781-9267.
EA26002
Traffic safety violations while Full Self Driving ("FSD") is engaged
The Office of Defects Investigation (âODIâ) is opening this Preliminary Evaluation (PE) to assess the scope, frequency, and potential safety consequences of FSD executing driving maneuvers that constitute traï¬c 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 traï¬c laws. ODIâs investigation will therefore focus, in particular, on whether certain driving inputs within the control authority of FSD forestall the driverâs supervision when they are unexpectedly performed. ODI has identiï¬ed a number of incidents in which the inputs to the dynamic driving task commanded by FSD induced vehicle behavior that violated traï¬c safety laws. Although reports of this nature span a variety of behaviors, the reports appear to most commonly involve two types of scenarios. The ï¬rst type of scenario involves a vehicle operating with FSD proceeding into an intersection in violation of a red traï¬c signal. The second type of scenario involves FSD commanding a lane change into an opposing lane of traï¬c. With respect to the ï¬rst type of scenario, ODI has identiï¬ed 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 traï¬c signal, failed to stop fully, or failed to accurately detect and display the correct traï¬c 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 traï¬c signal. ODI has identiï¬ed six Standing General Order ("SGO") reports in which a Tesla vehicle, operating with FSD engaged, approached an intersection with a red traï¬c 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. the federal safety agency understands that Tesla has since taken action to address the issue at this intersection. With respect to the second type of scenario, ODI has identiï¬ed 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 identiï¬ed 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. ODIâs 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. the federal safety agency'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, the federal safety agencyâs 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 The SGO reports cited in this Resume are listed below by report ID and are available for download at 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.
PE25012
Compliance with Standing General Order 2021-01 Reporting Requirements
The Office of Defects Investigation (“ODI”) has identified numerous incident reports submitted by Tesla, Inc. (“Tesla”) in response to Standing General Order 2021-01 (the “SGO”), in which the reported crashes occurred several months or more before the dates of the reports. The majority of these reports involved crashes in which the Standing General Order in place at the time required a report to be submitted within one or five days of Tesla receiving notice of the crash. When the reports were submitted, Tesla submitted them in one of two ways. Many of the reports were submitted as part of a single batch, while others were submitted on a rolling basis. Preliminary engagement between ODI and Tesla on the issue indicates that the timing of the reports was due to an issue with Tesla’s data collection, which, according to Tesla, has now been fixed. the federal safety agency is opening this Audit Query, a standard process for reviewing compliance with legal requirements, to evaluate the cause of the potential delays in reporting, the scope of any such delays, and the mitigations that Tesla has developed to address them. As part of this review, the federal safety agency will assess whether any reports of prior incidents remain outstanding and whether the reports that were submitted include all of the required and available data. The SGO reports cited in the Opening Resume, can be found at under the following SGO 2021-01 report IDs: 13781-11020-1 13781-10844-1 13781-10843-1 13781-10530-1 13781-10160-1 13781-10159-1 13781-10157-1 13781-10146-1 13781-10122-1 13781-10098-1 13781-10097-1 13781-10096-1 13781-10095-1 13781-10094-1 13781-10093-1 13781-10023-1 13781-10022-1 13781-10021-1 13781-10020-1 13781-10017-1 13781-10016-1 13781-10015-1 13781-10014-1 13781-10013-1 13781-10012-1 13781-6047-1 13781-9930-1 13781-9917-1 13781-9928-1 13781-9925-1 13781-9924-1 13781-9923-1 13781-9922-1 13781-9835-1 13781-9834-1 13781-9833-1 13781-9832-1 13781-9831-1 13781-9830-1 13781-9829-1 13781-9827-1 13781-9818-1 13781-9780-1 13781-9779-1 13781-9778-1 13781-9777-1 13781-9775-1 13781-9774-1 13781-9773-1 13781-9772-1 13781-9771-1 13781-9770-1 13781-9728-1 13781-9688-1 13781-9715-1 13781-9714-1 13781-9713-1 13781-9712-1 13781-9711-1 13781-9710-1 13781-9709-1 13781-9696-1 13781-9695-1 13781-9694-1 13781-9693-1 13781-9692-1 13781-9691-1 13781-9690-1 13781-9687-1 13781-9686-1 13781-9342-1 13781-9319-1 13781-9019-1 13781-8910-1 13781-8732-1 13781-8712-1 13781-8310-1 13781-7897-1 13781-7895-1 13781-7835-1 13781-7798-1 13781-7797-1 13781-7758-1 13781-7757-1 13781-7756-1 13781-7755-1 13781-7667-1 13781-7399-1 13781-7398-1 13781-7397-1 13781-7396-1 13781-7395-1 13781-7394-1 13781-7393-1 13781-7389-1 13781-7388-1 13781-7387-1 13781-7386-1 13781-7385-1 13781-7383-1 13781-7187-1 13781-7186-1 13781-7185-1 13781-7184-1 13781-7181-1 13781-7023-1 13781-6399-1 13781-6389-1 13781-6388-1 13781-6387-1 13781-6386-1 13781-6379-1 13781-6378-1 13781-6377-1 13781-6375-1 13781-6214-1 13781-6172-1 13781-6155-1 13781-6154-1 13781-6122-1 13781-6120-1 13781-6118-1 13781-5800-1
AQ25002
Actually Smart Summon sessions resulting in low-speed impacts.
On January 6, 2025, the Office of Defects Investigations (ODI) opened Preliminary Evaluation 24003 (PE24033) to investigate Actually Smart Summon (Summon) sessions resulting in crashes during active sessions. According to Tesla, Summon is a short-distance SAE Level 2 system, controlled by the user from a cell phone within a certain distance and intended for use in parking lots and on private property. ODI analyzed complaint data provided by Tesla as well as complaints submitted to ODI from consumers to identify Summon incidents resulting in crashes. ODI's analysis indicates that almost all Summon reported crashes involved minor property damage claims with no reported incidents involving a vulnerable road user, injury, fatality, or major property damage as indicated by an air bag deployment or vehicle tow away. Out of millions of Summon sessions, a fraction of 1% resulted in an incident. Almost all those incidents took place where, typically early in a Summon session, the system or person using the app failed to fully detect or respond appropriately to vehicle surroundings resulting in minor impacts. Incidents took place when app users did not have a complete 360-degree view of the surroundings in the app to assess situational awareness. This limited the app user’s ability to determine whether an impact was imminent during initial vehicle maneuvers such as reversing in close proximity to an obstacle or a curb. ODI found that the impacts most often occurred with parking gates, adjacently parked vehicles, and short parking bollards. During this investigation, ODI identified two Summon crashes related to camera blockages. In both crashes, Summon attempted to navigate a snowy parking lot with snow partially or fully obstructing the forward-facing cameras. Summon did not detect the camera blockage and the vehicles collided with unoccupied parked vehicles while navigating the parking lot. App users in both instances did not command a vehicle stop or pause despite the obstructed camera visible in the camera stream in the app. On January 15, 2025, Tesla released Over-the-Air (OTA) Software (SW) Update Action numbers 578998 and 579185 for vehicles in service to implement a camera blockage detection condition. Both OTAs improve camera blockage detection mechanisms. Additionally, on January 20, 2025, and January 30, 2025, Tesla identified additional system requirements associated with camera visibility checks and released OTA SW-578752 and SW-580322, respectively. These firmware updates reduce false negative camera blockage detections due to snow or condensation. In its investigation, ODI identified one Summon incident where the vehicle did not yield for a gate arm blocking a garage exit lane and the app user did not command a vehicle stop or pause, resulting in an impact. On February 6, 2025, Tesla deployed OTA SW-578839 to improve vehicle reaction to dynamic gates. This OTA update upgraded vehicle perception systems through a high-fidelity occupancy determination network, which uses data from vehicle sensory systems to improve reconstruction of field objects with high accuracy. On November 20, 2025, Tesla further improved vehicle performance by adding object detections from a separate neural network through OTA SW-580514. Owners of the affected vehicles received all six OTA SW updates. Tesla also released these SW updates to production vehicles. See online public file for detailed descriptions of all six OTA SW updates. Due to low incident occurrence and low incident severity, this preliminary evaluation is closed. The closing of this investigation does not constitute a finding that a safety-related defect does not exist. The agency reserves the right to take additional action if warranted by future circumstances. For additional information regarding this investigation, see the complete online public file.
PE24033
Technical service bulletins for the 2025 Tesla Model 3 4
Bulletins tell dealers how to fix known problems. A warranty extension means the manufacturer pays for that repair for longer.
- On some vehicles, degraded or excessive glue under the front seat cushion(s) may cause creaking noises...
- On some vehicles, insufficient lubricant at the front seat recliner tube ends may cause creaking noises...
- On certain Model 3 and Model Y vehicles, the tire pressure monitoring system (TPMS) sensor battery may...
- A firmware diagnosis feature is being introduced on Model 3 and Model Y vehicles that monitors wheel...
2025 Tesla Model 3 fuel economy
Official EPA estimates in miles per gallon (MPGe for electric). Ranges cover trims that share the same engine.
| Engine | Drive | City | Highway | Combined |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Electric motor Electric 363 mi range | RWD | 140-145 | 123-128 | 131-137 MPGe |
| Electric motor Electric 346 mi range | AWD | 113-133 | 104-122 | 109-128 MPGe |
What 2025 Tesla Model 3 owners say
Most recent owner complaints, unedited.
After an informal, photo-based preliminary repair estimate for minor cosmetic damage at Tesla Collision Center Fort Lauderdale in late XXX (estimate never finalized, no repair performed), Tesla's internal system flagged my 2025 Tesla Model 3 (VIN [XXX]) as salvage/total loss, revoked Supercharger access, and voided the manufacturer warranty. Tesla confirmed the salvage designation in writing on XXX. Neither the DMV nor any insurer declared this vehicle salvage or a total loss: DMV records show a clean title, Tesla Insurance canceled the claim (accident not my fault) with no total-loss declaration, and the at-fault driver's insurer, [XXX], confirms it never issued a salvage title. As a result, the vehicle cannot use the Supercharger network and cannot receive warranty service or maintenance. My household has no home charging, so the vehicle cannot be charged sufficiently for longer trips, creating a risk of being stranded with a depleted battery. Tesla has not corrected the flag despite my XXX email to Customer Service and multiple in-app Service chats that were closed without resolution. I am concerned that an erroneous internal designation is disabling charging access and blocking safety-related maintenance on an otherwise roadworthy vehicle. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
Statement Regarding My 2025 Tesla Model 3 Accident I was driving my 2025 Tesla Model 3 when the accelerator pedal appeared to become stuck, causing the vehicle to continue accelerating. The vehicle reached approximately 70 mph, and I was unable to regain control. I attempted to stop the vehicle by applying the brakes, but the brakes felt hard or would not respond, and the vehicle would not stop as expected. I was driving the vehicle myself and was not using Autopilot or Full Self-Driving. Because I could not bring the vehicle to a stop, I collided with three other cars. I believe the suspected accelerator and braking malfunction contributed to the accident. The police responded to the accident and prepared a report. My Tesla was towed from the scene to a tow yard. I reported the accident to my insurance company, which provides full coverage on my vehicle. At this time, my insurance company has not yet declared the Tesla a total loss, and I still have an outstanding car loan. I sustained bruising to my hand and ribs and went to the emergency room for medical evaluation. I am requesting that the vehicle be preserved for an independent inspection so the cause of the accident can be investigated, including the reported accelerator and braking problems and any relevant electronic vehicle data. This statement reflects my recollection of what happened and is provided so the accident and suspected vehicle malfunction can be properly investigated.
This vehicle doesn't come with a turn signal stalk. To engage the turn signal, I have to use push-buttons on the steering wheel. Nearly every time I use them, I get the wrong direction, even after a year of ownership. It's functionally impossible to use them legally to exit a roundabout, and I really want you to reflect, it is impossible to use them to legally exit a roundabout -- I can not obey the law using them. It's functionally impossible. Additionally, they're too close to the edge of the steering wheel, causing light brushes to trigger a false turn signal, confusing nearby drivers. About 8 to 9 out of 10 turn signals I make are false or in the incorrect direction. This feature is dangerous and embarrassing. One last thing I want to note, this car disables the turn signal automatically after I exit a lane, or if it simply thinks I have. The car should never disengage the turn signal for any reason.
Rodents are attracted to the wiring and eat it. The new soy product controls turn signals.... Tesla employees see this everyday. in 2 weeks my car has gone into the shop twice. I have never had this issue until now and owned many teslas
The contact owns a 2025 Tesla Model 3. The contact stated that on several occasions while driving with Full Self-Driving (FSD) mode engaged and approaching a closing gate, the vehicle failed to come to a complete stop. The failure required manual driver intervention to prevent a crash. The manufacturer was contacted but was not notified of the failure. The failure mileage was 15,000.
I am reporting concerns involving the high-voltage battery and battery management system (BMS) of my 2025 Tesla Model 3 Long Range AWD. The vehicle's displayed range at 100% charge has progressively declined from approximately 320 miles to 304, then 298, and most recently approximately 295 miles. A previous Tesla Battery Health Test reported approximately 89% battery health. However, the vehicle currently will not allow me to perform another Battery Health Test, leaving its present battery condition unknown. I am concerned that additional degradation or an underlying battery or BMS issue may be going undetected. Tesla instructed me to perform a BMS calibration by discharging the battery below 10%, allowing the vehicle to rest, charging to 100%, and allowing it to rest again. I followed these instructions, but the displayed-range concern persisted. I submitted multiple service requests, two of which Tesla closed without resolving my concerns. Tesla later performed additional remote diagnostics and stated that nothing was wrong with the vehicle. However, my concerns remain, and I have not received a documented in-person evaluation addressing the battery capacity, BMS operation, or cell/module balance. The specific cause is UNKNOWN. I cannot confirm whether the condition presents a safety risk, and I have not identified a specific safety incident, such as an unexpected loss of propulsion or battery thermal event. I have no specific warning lamps or fault messages to report. The vehicle and high-voltage battery are available for inspection. I am requesting that the reported condition be evaluated to determine whether an underlying battery or BMS defect exists and whether it could affect the vehicle's safe operation.
On XXX, at approximately 8:10 PM PDT in [XXX], I was driving my 2025 Tesla Model 3 (VIN [XXX]) with Full Self-Driving (Supervised) engaged. While FSD was actively steering a right turn at an intersection, the vehicle turned too wide, crossed into the oncoming lane, and collided head-on with another vehicle. Both vehicles were totaled and the airbags deployed. Tesla's own Vehicle Data Report for this crash confirms the FSD system (state: ACTIVE_FSD) was engaged and steering the vehicle in the seconds before impact at approximately 20-26 mph, and that FSD disengaged less than one second before the collision. I was lightly pressing the accelerator (Tesla's documented method to confirm proceeding through an intersection) while FSD controlled steering. No automatic emergency braking prevented the vehicle from entering the oncoming lane during the FSD-executed turn. I sustained injuries requiring six months of psychological treatment. I believe FSD's intersection turning behavior is defective: the system executed a turning maneuver that placed the vehicle into oncoming traffic, causing a head-on collision. INFORMATION REDACTED PURSUANT TO THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT (FOIA), 5 U.S.C. 552(B)(6)
while waiting on left signal i changed my destination address when signal turned green car take straight on red signal .car is on fsd mode . happend on sep-19 at south ridding junction
While driving on the interstate my passenger was attempting to connect their phone to the bluetooth when they accidentally selected the driver profile. I was in the drivers seat and the seat immediately started moving back and I couldn't reach the gas or brake. I pulled over immediately and was able to reset it. The driver profile should be locked and not accessible while driving to prevent this.
Compare the 2025 Tesla Model 3
Model 3 vs Tesla Model YModel 3 vs Hyundai Ioniq 5Model 3 vs Nissan LeafModel 3 vs Volkswagen ID.4Model 3 vs Chevrolet Bolt EVModel 3 vs Ford Mustang Mach EModel 3 vs Kia EV6
Other model years
Questions about the 2025 Tesla Model 3
Is the 2025 Tesla Model 3 reliable?
Owners have filed 125 complaints about the 2025 Tesla Model 3, fewer than a typical Model 3 model year.
What is the most common problem with the 2025 Tesla Model 3?
Driver assistance and stability, with 42 complaints. Next is steering (27).
How many recalls does the 2025 Tesla Model 3 have?
3 recalls, covering electrical system, back over prevention and tires.
Was there a recall on the 2025 Tesla Model 3 driver assistance?
Yes, 1 recall: 25V002000. Check your VIN to see if your car still needs the free repair.
What year does the Tesla Model 3 have the most driver assistance problems?
The Tesla Model 3 model years with the most driver assistance complaints are 2022 (559 complaints), 2021 (431 complaints) and 2018 (253 complaints).
What gas mileage does the 2025 Tesla Model 3 get?
The 2025 Tesla Model 3 is rated at 131-137 MPGe combined, with up to 363 miles of range.
VIN decoder
See the problems and recalls for an exact car
Buying a used 2025 Tesla Model 3?
Check the exact car before you pay: accidents, salvage or flood titles, odometer readings and previous owners.
Check its history