Tesla Cybertruck owners are exploring a class-action lawsuit against the company for allegedly misleading promises about a range-extender battery pack that was later canceled. One owner from Los Angeles claims he purchased his vehicle relying on the promised feature, which would have extended its range to 450 miles. The pack's cancellation in May 2025 has left some owners dissatisfied with the truck's actual range of about 240 miles on an 80% charge.
Joseph Baker, a Cybertruck owner in Los Angeles, has initiated discussions on the Cybertruck Owners Club forum about launching a class-action lawsuit against Tesla. He purchased a tri-motor performance Cybertruck for $135,000, including taxes, based on Tesla's promise of a range-extender battery pack that would boost the vehicle's range to 450 miles. Baker paid a $2,000 reservation fee for the pack, but received an email on May 7, 2025, informing him that Tesla would not sell it and that his deposit would be refunded.
Without the extender, Baker reports that his Cybertruck achieves only 240 miles on the recommended daily 80% charge, falling short of his needs. In his forum post, he argues that the cancellation amounts to misrepresentation or fraudulent inducement. "I—and likely others—relied on the promised Range Extender when deciding to purchase the $135,000 Foundation Series Performance Cybertruck," Baker wrote. "I would not have purchased the Cybertruck without the promised range increase from the Range Extender. Is there any support and momentum among the club to move forward with a class-action claim for misrepresentation?"
Forum responses varied. Another owner, Jay, expressed similar frustration, noting that his vehicle came with 'autopilot included' which was later changed to 'Traffic Aware Cruise Control included.' He suggested contacting Tesla support but highlighted the sales contract's arbitration agreement, which may prevent class actions. "Your best bet is to start with [email protected] and see if they can help you feel better," Jay wrote.
A defending owner argued that Baker has no valid claim for damages, as he did not pay for the extender and received fair value for the truck. "What are your damages for them not selling you a product you didn't pay for?" the owner asked, adding that class actions often benefit lawyers more than individuals. A third commenter suggested the timing—seven months after the cancellation—might undermine the case, calling it a "small fish in a big pond scenario. You will not win."
The article, published on February 18, 2026, reflects ongoing debates among owners about Tesla's commitments.
