Has Tesla Given Up On Providing Actual Smart Summon On The CT?

[Hollywood25]

Months ago Tesla said that it was actively working on bringing A.S.S. to the CT. Heck, at this point I would settle for "Dumb Summon"
Tesla has been very quiet on this feature. I'm worried that Tesla is putting features destined for the CT on the back burner in favor for the Model Y.

Sponsored

 

[AO-Pete]

Sure seems that way. Not sure if it's lack of training data (limited/small fleet) or just more focus on tuning the Robotaxi fork (I very much doubt CT will be Robotaxi-capable anytime soon).

 

[jimbaum]

I paid outright for FSD thinking ASS would be included...I guess I'm the ass now

 

[Ranger George]

Tesla, if you monitor this forum, please install Actual Smart Summons on Cybertruck.

 

[drjohnf]

If you look carefully after the latest update, there is a "greyed out" option in the CT that mentions auto-summon that can be activated by toggle. It looks like the interface has been added, but the functionality will probably be rolled out jurisdictionally - my guess is places like Phoenix with relatively reliable weather....then data collection and analysis followed by additional rollouts. This seems to be Tesla's very intelligent and measured approach to ongoing evolution which is something 20 years ahead of the nearest competitors. This is so awesome that I'm going to buy a Model X soon to have in the family fleet....

 

[Leifmb]

Tesla is for sure prioritizing the model Y (and 3) over all other models AND of course the Robotaxi/Cybercab platform! For sure, the entire software team is majorly working on that. Other platforms will see some attention once the major milestone’s are achieved (FSD Unsupervised). Once the pressure of proving FSD is reduced, more resources can be allocated to “map” the improvements to the CT, and other vehicle platforms. It will come, suddenly, most likely.

 

[DaBagBoy]

Months ago Tesla said that it was actively working on bringing A.S.S. to the CT. Heck, at this point I would settle for "Dumb Summon"
Tesla has been very quiet on this feature. I'm worried that Tesla is putting features destined for the CT on the back burner in favor for the Model Y.

Patience grasshoper -- all good things to come

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Months ago Tesla said that it was actively working on bringing A.S.S. to the CT. Heck, at this point I would settle for "Dumb Summon"
Tesla has been very quiet on this feature. I'm worried that Tesla is putting features destined for the CT on the back burner in favor for the Model Y.

It is a dumb, useless feature unless you happen to have a garage that’s too tight to open the doors. We have it on my wife’s MY. Pure party trick, nothing more.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

Tesla is for sure prioritizing the model Y (and 3) over all other models AND of course the Robotaxi/Cybercab platform! For sure, the entire software team is majorly working on that. Other platforms will see some attention once the major milestone’s are achieved (FSD Unsupervised). Once the pressure of proving FSD is reduced, more resources can be allocated to “map” the improvements to the CT, and other vehicle platforms. It will come, suddenly, most likely.

Pure speculation with zero evidence. Tesla’s software development teams are siloed. They have plenty of capital and resources to do multiple things simultaneously. The fact that we receive regular CT updates is evidence. I have received more software updates to the CT in the past three months than on our ‘26 MY.

 

[koolio]

It is a dumb, useless feature unless you happen to have a garage that’s too tight to open the doors. We have it on my wife’s MY. Pure party trick, nothing more.

I disagree about ASS, especially on a HW4 vehicle. When I had my 2020 Y (HW3) ASS was really good. Then, I used it a few times on my wife's 2024 Model 3 (HW4) and it was better. One time it was at a super busy Costco parking lot and it handled it perfectly. I (and my mother) were super surprised.

Having dumb summon is helpful for the rare times you need to move the vehicle bc somone parked way too close to you or you want to squeeze the vehicle in a tight spot.

Admittedly, the frequency in which I used ASS was not that much but when I did use it it was super helpful and impressive. Most of my use cases was for fun or when it was raining heavily and I didn't want to walk in the rain.

I truly hope Tesla will be releasing ASS for the Cybertruck this year...but I'm guessing it'll be sometime in 2026.

 

[AO-Pete]

Pure speculation with zero evidence. Tesla’s software development teams are siloed. They have plenty of capital and resources to do multiple things simultaneously. The fact that we receive regular CT updates is evidence. I have received more software updates to the CT in the past three months than on our ‘26 MY.

I mean, there is some evidence. The FSD team does have some that are vehicle-focused, but most are platform focused. We know there's around 50k of CT's in the wild, and the front camera still is not used for FSD. The fleet telemetry is limited just by virtue of having a smaller fleet. We don't know how many CT drivers regularly use FSD compared to car drivers, but I do know that FSD in the CT is not the same as it is in the M3H or MYJ. The latter feel much more fluid, the CT FSD still feels a bit awkward. CT, of course, only exists in North America, so the value of the telemetry is lower compared to the global fleets.

We don't know how many Junipers have been sold so far, but it's likely to surpass CT in the next couple of months, if not sooner, so yeah, for a company like Tesla, that is still resource-constrained (or resource-efficient), in terms of human and compute, it makes sense to focus on the golden goose, which is Robotaxi, and therefore M3 & MY.

This is all still speculation, granted, but there's some pretty tangible stuff there to suggest there's some truth to it.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

I disagree about ASS, especially on a HW4 vehicle. When I had my 2020 Y (HW3) ASS was really good. Then, I used it a few times on my wife's 2024 Model 3 (HW4) and it was better. One time it was at a super busy Costco parking lot and it handled it perfectly. I (and my mother) were super surprised.

Having dumb summon is helpful for the rare times you need to move the vehicle bc somone parked way too close to you or you want to squeeze the vehicle in a tight spot.

Admittedly, the frequency in which I used ASS was not that much but when I did use it it was super helpful and impressive. Most of my use cases was for fun or when it was raining heavily and I didn't want to walk in the rain.

I truly hope Tesla will be releasing ASS for the Cybertruck this year...but I'm guessing it'll be sometime in 2026.

I agree that ASS is really good, works great on the models where it exists. But I also assert that it is a useless feature in most respects. No one needs their vehicle to come to them across a busy parking lot. Literally no one who isn't handicapped. Pure party trick. And dangerous in my experience - made multiple mistakes. But now that it works fairly well, I reassert its uselessness. ASS certainly is quite low on the list of software development priorities for the CT. Like maybe 10% as important as getting CT's FSD up to MY levels. In the scheme of desirable Tesla features, I put ASS way below things that I really miss on the CT, such as the self-presenting and self-closing doors on the MX. But they are ALL first-world wish list items found on almost no other vehicle for sale today - so begging for priority seems silly.

 

[PungoteagueDave]

I mean, there is some evidence. The FSD team does have some that are vehicle-focused, but most are platform focused. We know there's around 50k of CT's in the wild, and the front camera still is not used for FSD. The fleet telemetry is limited just by virtue of having a smaller fleet. We don't know how many CT drivers regularly use FSD compared to car drivers, but I do know that FSD in the CT is not the same as it is in the M3H or MYJ. The latter feel much more fluid, the CT FSD still feels a bit awkward. CT, of course, only exists in North America, so the value of the telemetry is lower compared to the global fleets.

We don't know how many Junipers have been sold so far, but it's likely to surpass CT in the next couple of months, if not sooner, so yeah, for a company like Tesla, that is still resource-constrained (or resource-efficient), in terms of human and compute, it makes sense to focus on the golden goose, which is Robotaxi, and therefore M3 & MY.

This is all still speculation, granted, but there's some pretty tangible stuff there to suggest there's some truth to it.

Well, you asserted it as "for sure". We do know that the CT software team is platform-focused and we have evidence they are working feature-by-feature down the list, or in some cases, deciding to abandon. The systems engineers determined the range extender must die, so it did. We still get significant updates every couple weeks, proof that the CT developers didn't run off to other priorities.

You are correct that CT FSD is quite a step behind other platforms. My wife's '26 MY is far better at self-driving, for example. However, we do receive regular FSD updates.

I'm not in the camp thinking the CT's future is dead, but that it is likely to be relegated to priority second-tier status, akin to the S and X. Now all three models will be seen as Tesla's premium series vehicles, sold by appointment in volumes around 50k per year for each model. That's a far cry from the 250k annual volume target, but given the design and expensive content decisions, was always a self-limiting price point and form factor. While a case study in bad resource allocation and hubris, it's actualy not as bad as golks think. If Tesla can sell 40-50k per year, averaging $75-80k, that beats out the model run numbers for many Porsche, Audi, Mercedes, and Cadillac models. It would still be a niche vehicle, but not insignificant at that level.

To put this in context, I own a 1952 MG-TD. This is one of history's iconic sports cars. Mine happens to be an original-paint survivor in near showroom condition. Over the life of the MG-T series (MG-TA through MG-TF) from 1936 to 1955, or 19 years, the MG car company made a total of 49,264 cars, including the MG-TA, MG-TC, MG-TD, and MG-TF. About 30,000 of those cars were the 1950-1952 MG-TD run that includes mine. Despite low volumes, it was and remains an important vehicle in automotive history. Yet Tesla has already sold far more CTs in just 18 months time.

Put another way, Mercedes sold about 9,000 S-class vehicles in the US last year, and about 62,000 worldwide. BMW sold about 58,000 of its 7 and 8 Series luxury models last year worldwide. The Porsche 911 sells about 50,000 units per year. While all three of the luxury German marques obviously make good money on these premium models, Tesla actually does better on margin, so the issue is right-sizing the sunk cost for development and factory tooling. That's not nothing, but it is what it is, and the reality will likely be 150k total annual volume for the CT, X and S, and if they play it right, all isn't lost, just requires adjustment. The consumer's purchasing capacity for these kinds of premium vehicles was overestimated across the industry.

 

[AO-Pete]

Well, you asserted it as "for sure". We do know that the CT software team is platform-focused and we have evidence they are working feature-by-feature down the list, or in some cases, deciding to abandon. The systems engineers determined the range extender must die, so it did. We still get significant updates every couple weeks, proof that the CT developers didn't run off to other priorities.

Wasn't me that said for sure, but I agree, the CT is destined to slot in as a tier 2 with Model S, and Model X for as long as that survives (I love the MX, but really don't think it's long for this world). Like those two, seems unlikely CT will ever get any meaningful updates (at least, another that fundamentally changes the exterior appearance). As an aside, my grandad worked for MG in Abingdon from just after the war until the late 50s; I wasn't around then, but he had a raft of different Midgets, based on photos from that time.

 

[Known-Background]

Might also have to do with all the people that left the company… it’s not looking good…

Name	Role at Tesla	Departure & Next Move
Doug Field	Head of Vehicle Engineering	Left in early 2023; now leads advanced vehicle software at Ford
Rebecca Tinucci	Head of Supercharging (charging network)	Laid off in ~June 2023 as her 500-person team was dissolved; now works on EV efforts at Uber
David Lau	Vice President of Software Engineering	Departed after 12+ years in late April 2025
Head of Battery Technology		Exited since April 2025 (name not specified)
Head of Humanoid Robotics		Also exited since April 2025

Sponsored