Elon Musk is once again declaring victory in the driverless car race, insisting that Waymo never truly threatened Tesla’s ambitions in autonomous driving. His latest volley casts Tesla’s progress as an early win over a rival that, in his telling, was always destined to fall behind, even as Waymo rolls out fully driverless robotaxis in major cities.
Framing the contest as already decided lets Musk argue that Tesla’s camera-based Full Self-Driving system is on a fundamentally stronger path than Waymo’s robotaxi fleets. The reality on the road is more complicated, and the gap between his rhetoric and the current numbers is where the real story sits.
Musk’s “never had a chance” claim, in his own words
When Tesla CEO Elon Musk says a competitor “never had a chance,” he is not just critiquing a product, he is trying to rewrite the scoreboard. In his latest comments, he has portrayed Waymo as a company that was always structurally outmatched by Tesla’s scale, data, and software-first culture, casting the rivalry as a mismatch rather than a close race. By framing Waymo as effectively doomed from the start, Musk is inviting investors and drivers to see Tesla as the inevitable winner in autonomous driving rather than one contender among several.
On X, Elon Musk has leaned into that narrative, asserting that Waymo “never had a chance” against Tesla and positioning TSLA as the only serious long term platform for self-driving at consumer scale. In parallel coverage, his remarks have been described as a fresh escalation in the long running Tesla versus Waymo autonomy rivalry, with one report summarizing the exchange under the line “Elon Musk Says Waymo ‘Never Had a Chance’ Against Tesla.” Another account notes that Tesla CEO Elon Musk dismissed Alphabet’s Waymo as a serious competitor, reinforcing his message that the Alphabet-backed unit is not a real threat to Tesla’s ambitions.
Waymo’s real world lead, from Phoenix to London
For all of Musk’s bravado, Waymo’s current footprint on public roads looks very different from a company that “never had a chance.” Waymo has spent years methodically building out fully driverless ride hailing services in dense urban cores, operating robotaxis that do not require a human behind the wheel. That approach has produced a network of commercial services that, while limited in geography, are already carrying paying passengers in complex city environments.
That lead is visible in new markets as well. In London, Waymo has been highlighted for beating Tesla to truly driverless service, with one analysis noting that Waymo beats Tesla to driverless in London (for now), even as the commentator stresses that the Waymo service is “only ever a cab” and cannot be bought as a consumer product. The same discussion contrasts that model with the idea that “But Tesla FSD can be in your car,” underscoring the philosophical divide between a fleet based robotaxi operator and a company trying to ship autonomy as an option on individual vehicles.
Two business models, two definitions of “winning”
Part of Musk’s confidence rests on a simple argument: Waymo is a fleet operator, while Tesla is a mass market automaker that wants to turn every car into a potential robotaxi. In his telling, a service that only exists as a branded cab will always be constrained compared with software that can be deployed to millions of vehicles already on the road. That distinction lets him claim an early win even if Waymo’s robotaxis are more capable in specific cities, because he is defining victory as ubiquity rather than local performance.
Waymo, for its part, has focused its business on larger cities, building out dedicated robotaxi fleets with in car safety supervisors or fully driverless operations depending on the market. Reporting on Musk’s latest comments notes that Waymo has geared its business toward larger cities, while Tesla has repeatedly said its self driving efforts will eventually expand to every vehicle it sells. That divergence in strategy is central to Musk’s claim that Waymo’s ceiling is lower, even if its current deployments look more polished.
The sensor debate that shapes both companies’ futures
Beneath the rhetoric sits a deep technical disagreement about how to build safe autonomy. Tesla has bet on a camera only approach, arguing that vision based neural networks can eventually match or exceed human driving without the cost and complexity of additional hardware. Waymo has taken the opposite path, layering multiple sensor types on top of detailed maps to give its vehicles a redundant, high resolution view of the world.
A detailed comparison of the two strategies notes that Tesla’s strategy is different from Waymo’s in a few key ways, starting with its reliance on cameras alone instead of the camera, lidar, and radar stack that Waymo uses. A separate head to head test of Tesla’s robotaxi concept against Waymo One reminds readers to “Remember, the Waymo has a complex array of Lidar and radar sensors” in addition to cameras and comprehensive real world maps, while Tesla’s prototype relies on a smaller array of cameras. Those sensor choices are not just engineering trivia, they are the foundation for Musk’s argument that Tesla’s simpler hardware will scale faster, and for critics’ concern that it may struggle in edge cases where Waymo’s redundancy shines.
FSD as Musk’s core narrative, and the numbers question
Musk has spent years telling investors and customers that Tesla FSD, short for Full Self-Driving, is the company’s crown jewel. He has tied Tesla’s valuation to the idea that each car can become a revenue generating robotaxi, and he has repeatedly promised that software updates will unlock higher levels of autonomy for existing owners. That narrative makes it essential for him to portray any rival, especially Waymo, as fundamentally behind, regardless of current deployment stats.
Recent coverage of his latest comments notes that Musk has been rallying behind the Tesla FSD (Full Self-Driving) system for years, describing it as core to his vision for Tesla and for America. That same report poses the uncomfortable follow up, asking who has better numbers right now, a nod to the fact that Waymo’s fully driverless services are operating at scale in some cities while Tesla’s FSD remains a driver assistance system that requires human supervision. Musk’s answer is to point to the sheer number of Teslas on the road and the volume of data they generate, but the gap between his long term promise and today’s capabilities remains a live question.
Waymo’s fleet milestones and Musk’s “rookie numbers” jab
Waymo has tried to answer that numbers question with hard figures about its robotaxi operations. The company has disclosed that its current robotaxi fleet includes 1,000 vehicles in the San Francisco Bay Area, a concrete sign of how far its service model has progressed in one of the world’s most scrutinized urban testbeds. For a company that started with limited pilots in Phoenix, that expansion into a dense, hilly city with complex traffic is a significant milestone.
Musk’s response has been to belittle those figures. When Waymo highlighted its fleet size, he brushed it off as “Rookie numbers” and argued that Tesla’s autonomous program, with its vast installed base of vehicles running FSD, is on a different scale entirely. That contrast captures the heart of his “early win” claim: Waymo can tout 1,000 robotaxis in the San Francisco Bay Area, but Tesla can point to hundreds of thousands of cars collecting data and running driver assistance software, even if those cars are not yet operating as true robotaxis.
Critics, safety supervisors, and the “delusional” label
Musk’s insistence that Waymo never stood a chance has not gone unchallenged. Some analysts and commentators have described his latest remarks as detached from the current state of the market, pointing out that Waymo’s fully driverless services are already carrying passengers while Tesla’s system still requires a human in the driver’s seat. That disconnect has led to sharper language around his claims, especially when he dismisses Waymo’s progress outright.
One detailed critique characterizes his assertion as a case where Elon Musk “delusionally” claims Waymo “never had a chance” against Tesla, noting that Waymo’s robotaxis have in car safety supervisors or operate fully driverless depending on the route. That same report cites specific engagement figures, including 37 and 389, as it tracks reaction to his comments, underscoring how polarizing his statements have become among investors and enthusiasts. The presence of safety supervisors in some Waymo vehicles also complicates Musk’s narrative, since it shows that even the most advanced deployments are still navigating the trade off between safety, regulation, and full autonomy.
History cuts both ways: Tesla’s stumbles and Waymo’s doubts
Both companies carry scars from a decade of overpromises and setbacks in self driving. Tesla has repeatedly missed Musk’s own timelines for full autonomy, while Waymo has been criticized for moving too slowly and burning through capital without clear profitability. Those histories matter because they shape how credible each new claim of victory or inevitability sounds to regulators, investors, and the public.
On the Waymo side, former CEO John Krafcik once took a hard line on Tesla’s approach, saying of Tesla’s self driving efforts that “They’ve failed utterly and completely at this” when asked about the company’s progress. That blunt assessment shows that skepticism has flowed in both directions, with Waymo leaders once dismissing Tesla’s chances much as Musk now dismisses theirs. The fact that both sides have been wrong, at least in timing if not in direction, is a reminder that autonomy has humbled nearly everyone who has tried to predict its arrival.
Defiant promises and the politics of national pride
Musk’s latest comments about Waymo are not just about corporate rivalry, they are also wrapped in a broader narrative about American innovation and national pride. By casting Tesla as the standard bearer for autonomy, he is appealing to investors and fans who see the company as a symbol of technological leadership. That framing helps him argue that backing Tesla is not only a smart financial bet but also a patriotic one.
In one recent exchange, Elon Musk defiantly retorted to Waymo, “You don’t even have a chance to compete with Tesla”, and promised to remove human drivers and start fully driverless passenger service. That defiance is of a piece with his long standing habit of setting aggressive public goals, then using them to rally support even when the timelines slip. By telling Waymo “You” have no chance, he is personalizing the rivalry and reinforcing the idea that Tesla’s eventual success is a foregone conclusion rather than an open question.
What “early win” really means in a race still underway
When I look at the current landscape, Musk’s claim of an early win over Waymo rests less on today’s deployments and more on his confidence in Tesla’s long term architecture. Waymo has more fully driverless miles in specific cities, more tightly controlled robotaxi services, and a proven ability to operate without a human behind the wheel in defined zones. Tesla has a vastly larger fleet, a camera only system that is improving quickly, and a CEO who is willing to declare victory long before regulators or safety statistics do.
Whether that counts as an early win depends on how one defines success. If the metric is fully driverless rides in places like London or the San Francisco Bay Area, Waymo’s 1,000 vehicle fleet and its ability to beat Tesla to driverless service in some markets suggest it is ahead on the ground. If the metric is potential scale, the number of cars that could one day run FSD, and the simplicity of a camera based hardware stack, Musk has a plausible case that Tesla’s ceiling is higher. For now, his “never had a chance” line is less a statement of fact than a high stakes bet that his vision of autonomy will eventually make those words look prescient rather than premature.
More from MorningOverview
