Broadcaster Jeremy Clarkson has detailed an “unsettling” experience behind the wheel—or lack thereof—in Tesla’s autonomous Cybercab, admitting he felt powerless during a ride in Austin, Texas. Writing in his Sunday Times column on November 8, 2026, the former Top Gear host recounted the psychological and practical hurdles of a vehicle designed entirely without manual overrides.
The encounter took place during the 2026 United States Grand Prix weekend. While Austin has become a testing ground for various autonomous vehicle platforms, the Tesla Cybercab represents a specific shift in design: it features no steering wheel, no pedals, and no mirrors. This total removal of human agency formed the core of Clarkson’s critique.
Recounting the sensation of being in a moving vehicle with no physical way to intervene, Clarkson stated, “there was absolutely nothing I could do.” He described the experience as “worrying,” noting that the absence of controls created a fundamental disconnect between the passenger and the road. During the trip, the vehicle relied entirely on its sensor suite and software to navigate the urban environment, a process Clarkson found significantly less comforting than a traditional human driver.
Regulatory Scrutiny and Technical Limitations
Clarkson’s account arrives as the Tesla Cybercab faces increased scrutiny from federal regulators. Since the service officially launched its autonomous taxi fleet in Austin in September 2026, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has been investigating the vehicle’s safety profile. The primary focus of the inquiry is the lack of manual controls, which prevents passengers from taking over in the event of software confusion or hardware failure.
During his visit, Clarkson experienced two distinct types of autonomous transport. He noted a sharp contrast between “standard” driverless vehicles—which often retain a steering wheel that moves on its own—and the Cybercab’s minimalist cabin. The total absence of a wheel in the Tesla model amplified the sense of vulnerability when the car made unexpected maneuvers or navigated complex traffic patterns.
Despite the technological milestones represented by the Cybercab, Clarkson remained unconvinced by the trade-off. He expressed a clear preference for human-operated transit, humorously referring to the reliability of human drivers over the algorithmic decision-making of the Cybercab.
The “ordeal” described by Clarkson was characterized by psychological discomfort and the frustration of being a passive observer in a machine rather than a physical collision. However, his account highlights a growing tension in the automotive world: the gap between the engineering goal of total autonomy and the consumer’s desire for a fail-safe manual backup.
