Tesla to Replace Wood Trim on Model 3 With Non-woven Fabric

Tesla appears to be ready to replace the wood trim in some of its vehicles

Tesla

Tesla appears ready to replace the natural wood trim in the Model 3 with non-woven fabric. The wood trim has long been a hallmark of luxury cars, and it is often associated with a classic and timeless aesthetic. However, the look has started to look dated in vehicles, especially as many manufacturers have moved to fake wood to reduce costs.

With this move, Tesla may be embracing a more modern and sustainable design approach. Non-woven fabrics are often made from recycled materials and are designed to be more durable and longer-lasting than traditional wood.

Cost Cutting

According to Chris Zheng, which one of our sources later confirmed, Tesla is replacing the wood trim in the Model 3, and possibly other models with a non-woven fabric that will be significantly cheaper to produce. The move is in line with the company's efforts to reduce the costs of its vehicles and make them more affordable and environmentally friendly.

The wood trim has been a notable feature of the Model 3 since its inception in 2017, but it is also a costly one. By removing it and replacing it with fabric, Tesla can reduce the vehicle's manufacturing costs.

This is in line with the upcoming Model 3 revamp which is rumored to be centered around cost-cutting and is expected to be available later this year.

Environmentally Friendly

It is important to note that the move away from wood trim is not just about cost-cutting. While wood is a natural and renewable resource, its production and harvesting can have significant environmental effects. In contrast, non-woven fabrics are often made of recycled materials, which can help to reduce the environmental impact of vehicle production.

Tesla has always been committed to sustainable and eco-friendly design practices, and this change is in line with that philosophy. By using recycled materials and reducing the environmental impact of vehicle production, Tesla is staying true to its mission of creating a more sustainable future.

Different Colors

While the use of non-woven fabric in place of wood trim is a significant change, Tesla may also be considering using different fabrics for different models or trim levels.

In the Model 3 Tesla changes the trim based on the interior color of the vehicle. However, with the use of fabric, Tesla could increase the number of options available. Tesla could offer carbon fiber trim for the performance model, or white/black fabric based on the interior of the vehicle.

More Customization

However, they could go one step further. One of the often-mentioned downsides of owning a Tesla is the lack of customizable options. If Tesla wants to provide more customization options for its customers, it could offer a variety of trim colors, much like you'd pick the exterior color of the vehicle.

Tesla could also change the interior trim to match the exterior color of the vehicle to offer a more cohesive look. 

Which Models This Will Apply To

Tesla has often shared as many parts as possible between their models, especially 'sibling' vehicles such as the Model 3 and Model Y. While the Model 3 vehicle is the one spotlighted in news regarding Tesla's revamp, it's likely that many of the features that are being talked about for the Model 3 will also carry over to the Model Y.

While the Model S and Model X also include wood trim on the dash, doors and center console, it's not clear whether Tesla will take a similar approach to their luxury line of vehicles.

The decision to replace wood trim with non-woven fabric in Tesla's vehicles is a multi-faceted one. While it will help reduce costs and make their cars more affordable, it is also part of a broader trend toward sustainable design practices. 

Tesla Debuts Super Manifold V2 in the New Model Y—But Not Every Car Has It Yet

Tesla Service Manual

The Super Manifold is Tesla’s solution to reducing the complexity of a heat pump system for an EV. Tesla showed off its engineering chops back with the original Model Y in 2019, where it introduced a new 8-way valve (the Octovalve) and a new heat pump alongside the uniquely designed Super Manifold to improve efficiency.

Now, Tesla is launching an improved version with the refreshed Model Y - the Super Manifold V2. We got to hear about it thanks to Sandy Munro’s interview with Tesla’s Lars Moravy (Vice President of Vehicle Engineering) and Franz Von Holzhausen (Chief of Vehicle Design). You can watch the video further below.

What Is The Super Manifold?

The Super Manifold (get it, Superman?), is an all-in-one package that brings in all the components of a heat pump system into one component. The Super Manifold packs all the refrigerant and coolant components around a 2-layer PCB (printed circuit board).

This Super Manifold would normally have 15 or 20 separate components, but Tesla managed to integrate them all into one nice package. That presented Tesla with a new challenge: how to integrate a heat pump—capable of both heating and cooling—into a single, efficient platform?

Several years ago, Tesla designed the Octovalve. It combines inlets and outlets and can variably change between heating or cooling on the fly - without needing to be plumbed in different directions. This is especially important for EVs, which may need to heat the battery with the waste heat generated from the motors or the heat pump while also cooling the cabin - or vice versa.

Original Super Manifold V1.1

Tesla launched the Super Manifold V1.1 back in 2022, and it provided some minor improvements to the waste heat processing of the heat exchange system. It also tightened up the Octovalve, preventing the leakage of oils into the HVAC loop that could cause it to freeze at extremely low temperatures.

Tesla has been using the V1.1 for several years now, and it has really solved the vast majority of issues with the heat pump system that many older Model Ys experienced.

Super Manifold V2 Coming Soon

Now, Tesla is introducing the Super Manifold V2 in the new Model Y. It will improve the overall cooling capacity provided by the original Super Manifold, but unfortunately, not every single new Model Y will come with it equipped. Tesla will be introducing it slowly across the lineup and at different rates at different factories, depending on part availability.

Eventually, the Super Manifold V2 will also make its way to other vehicles, potentially including the upcoming refresh for the Model S and Model X, but initially, it’ll be exclusive to the new Model Y. Tesla expects to have the new manifold in every new Model Y later this year.

If you’re interested in checking out the whole video, we’ve got it for you below.

Follow

Follow

Follow

Breaking Down Tesla’s Autopilot vs. Wall “Wile E. Coyote” Video

Mark Rober

Mark Rober, of glitter bomb package fame, recently released a video titled Can You Fool A Self-Driving Car? (posted below). Of course, the vehicle featured in the video was none other than a Tesla - but there’s a lot wrong with this video that we’d like to discuss.

We did some digging and let the last couple of days play out before making our case. Mark Rober’s Wile E. Coyote video is fatally flawed.

The Premise

Mark Rober wanted to prove whether or not it was possible to fool a self-driving vehicle, using various test scenarios. These included a wall painted to look like a road, low-lying fog, mannequins, hurricane-force rain, and bright beams.

All of these individual “tests” had their own issues - not least because Mark didn’t adhere to any sort of testing methodology, but because he was looking for a result - and edited his tests until he was sure of it.

Interestingly, many folks on X were quick to spot that Mark had been previously sponsored by Google to use a Pixel phone - but was using an iPhone to record within the vehicle - which he had edited to look like a Pixel phone for some reason. This, alongside other poor edits and cuts, led many, including us, to believe that Mark’s testing was edited and flawed.

Flaw 1: Autopilot, Not FSD

Let’s take a look at the first flaw. Mark tested Autopilot - not FSD. Autopilot is a driving aid for lane centering and speed control - and is not the least bit autonomous. It cannot take evasive maneuvers outside the lane it is in, but it can use the full stable of Tesla’s extensive features, including Automatic Emergency Braking, Forward Collision Warnings, Blind Spot Collision Warnings, and Lane Departure Avoidance.

On the other hand, FSD is allowed and capable of departing the lane to avoid a collision. That means that even if Autopilot tried to stop and was unable to, it would still impact whatever obstacle was in front of it - unlike FSD.

As we continue with the FSD argument - remember that Autopilot is running on a 5-year-old software stack that hasn’t seen updates. Sadly, this is the reality of Tesla not updating the Autopilot stack for quite some time. It seems likely that they’ll eventually bring a trimmed-down version of FSD to replace Autopilot, but that hasn’t happened yet.

Mark later admitted that he used Autopilot rather than FSD because “You cannot engage FSD without putting in a destination,” which is also incorrect. It is possible to engage FSD without a destination, but FSD chooses its own route. Where it goes isn’t within your control until you select a destination, but it tends to navigate through roads in a generally forward direction.

The whole situation, from not having FSD on the vehicle to not knowing you can activate FSD without a destination, suggests Mark is rather unfamiliar with FSD and likely has limited exposure to the feature.

Let’s keep in mind that FSD costs $99 for a single month, so there’s no excuse for him not using it in this video.

Flaw 2: Cancelling AP and Pushing Pedals

Many people on X also followed up with reports that Mark was pushing the pedals or pulling on the steering wheel. When you tap on the brake pedal or pull or jerk the steering wheel too much, Autopilot will disengage. For some reason, during each of his “tests,” Mark closely held the steering wheel of the vehicle.

This comes off as rather odd - at the extremely short distances he was enabling AP at, there wouldn’t be enough time for a wheel nag or takeover warning required. In addition, we can visibly see him pulling the steering wheel before “impact” in multiple tests.

Over on X, techAU breaks it down excellently on a per-test basis. Mark did not engage AP in several tests, and he potentially used the accelerator pedal during the first test - which means that Automatic Emergency Braking is overridden. In another test, Mark admitted to using the pedals.

Flaw 3: Luminar Sponsored

This video was potentially sponsored by a LiDAR manufacturer - Luminar. Although Mark says that this isn’t the case. Interestingly, Luminar makes LiDAR rigs for Tesla - who uses them to test ground truth accuracy for FSD. Just as interesting, Luminar’s Earnings Call was also coming up at the time of the video’s posting.

Luminar had linked the video at the top of their homepage but has since taken it down. While Mark did not admit to being sponsored by Luminar, there appear to be more distinct conflicts of interest, as Mark’s charity foundation has received donations from Luminar’s CEO.

Given the positivity of the results for Luminar, it seems that the video had been well-designed and well-timed to take advantage of the current wave of negativity against Tesla, while also driving up Luminar’s stock.

Flaw 4: Vision-based Depth Estimation

The next flaw to address is the fact that humans and machines can judge depth using vision. On X, user Abdou ran the “invisible wall” through a monocular depth estimation model (DepthAnythingV2) - one that uses a single image with a single angle. This fairly simplified model can estimate the distance and depth of items inside an image - and it was able to differentiate the fake wall from its surroundings easily.

Tesla’s FSD uses a far more advanced multi-angle, multi-image tool that stitches together and creates a 3D model of the environment around it and then analyzes the result for decision-making and prediction. Tesla’s more refined and complex model would be far more able to easily detect such an obstacle - and these innovations are far more recent than the 5-year-old Autopilot stack.

While detecting distances is more difficult in a single image, once you have multiple images, such as in a video feed, you can more easily decipher between objects and determine distances by tracking the size of each pixel as the object approaches. Essentially, if all pixels are growing at a constant rate, then that means it’s a flat object — like a wall.

Case in Point: Chinese FSD Testers

To make the case stronger - some Chinese FSD testers took to the streets and put up a semi-transparent sheet - which the vehicle refused to drive through or drive near. It would immediately attempt to maneuver away each time the test was engaged - and refused to advance with a pedestrian standing in the road.

Would FSD hit a transparent film wall?
This test showed it just avoids it.

Added English subtitles.

Credit: Douyin 第一智驾 pic.twitter.com/IU8IyuRG01

— Aaron Li (@boolusilan) March 18, 2025

Thanks to Douyin and Aaron Li for putting this together, as it makes an excellent basic example of how FSD would handle such a situation in real life.

Flaw 5: The Follow-Up Video and Interview

Following the community backlash, Mark released a video on X, hoping to resolve the community’s concerns. However, this also backfired. It turned out Mark’s second video was of an entirely different take than the one in the original video - this was at a different speed, angle, and time of initiation.

Mark then followed up with an interview with Philip DeFranco (below), where he said that there were multiple takes and that he used Autopilot because he didn’t know that FSD could be engaged without a destination. He also answered here that Luminar supposedly did not pay him for the video - even with their big showing as the “leader in LiDAR technology” throughout the video.

Putting It All Together

Overall, Mark’s video was rather duplicitous - he recorded multiple takes to get what he needed, prevented Tesla’s software from functioning properly by intervening, and used an outdated feature set that isn’t FSD - like his video is titled.

Upcoming Videos

Several other video creators are already working to replicate what Mark “tried” to test in this video.

To get a complete picture, we need to see unedited takes, even if they’re included at the end of the video. The full vehicle specifications should also be disclosed. Additionally, the test should be conducted using Tesla’s latest hardware and software—specifically, an HW4 vehicle running FSD v13.2.8.

In Mark’s video, Autopilot was engaged just seconds before impact. However, for a proper evaluation, FSD should be activated much earlier, allowing it time to react and, if capable, stop before hitting the wall.

A wave of new videos is likely on the way—stay tuned, and we’ll be sure to cover the best ones.

Follow

Follow

Follow