 |
| Teslas FSD on the street |
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system is often talked about as a big step toward automated driving, but a new real-world test in Belgium suggests it still has trouble with some basic traffic rules—especially where pedestrians and cyclists are meant to be protected.
A Belgian mobility NGO put Tesla’s FSD through its paces in July 2026, mainly in Brussels. Over three days, researchers covered around 400 km in the city, with a few additional trips in Flanders and Wallonia. The routes were not chosen at random. The team deliberately focused on places where vulnerable road users should get extra protection: 30 km/h zones, residential streets with a 20 km/h limit, and bicycle streets.
In 30 km/h zones, FSD often sped
One of the most striking findings involved speed limits. In 30 km/h zones, the Tesla vehicle exceeded the limit in more than half of all cases—55 percent. When it did speed, it averaged 44 km/h instead of 30 km/h, roughly 47 percent above the posted limit.
That is a serious problem in areas designed to reduce the risk of crashes involving pedestrians and cyclists. But why did it happen?
According to the study, the car often recognized a 30 km/h sign correctly at first. Then, the driver’s display showed a persistent 50 km/h limit. Researchers say this happened in 90 percent of the tested 30 km/h zones. In other words, the camera detected 30 km/h, but the system apparently adopted 50 km/h when processing the camera data.
The NGO’s full technical report on the FSD 30 km/h tests sets out how often the system misread or overrode the posted speed limit.
Bicycle streets exposed a bigger rule problem
Tesla’s driving system also appeared not to know Belgium’s specific traffic rules. On bicycle streets, the autonomous driving system repeatedly tried to overtake cyclists, even though doing so is strictly prohibited in Belgium.
During one test, the vehicle attempted to overtake the same cyclist four times. Each time, the human driver had to intervene. That is not a minor detail. Bicycle streets are designed to prioritize cyclists, and illegal overtaking can put riders in danger.
The findings suggest the problem is not just about camera accuracy or speed-limit recognition. It is also about whether FSD understands country-specific traffic laws and applies them correctly in real driving conditions.
EU approval leaves the driver responsible
The approval process for FSD raises further questions. In the EU, FSD is not legally considered an “autonomous car.” That means the driver remains legally responsible and must stay alert at all times in order to intervene.
According to the study, Tesla’s FSD was approved in the Netherlands, but that approval is only provisional. Other EU countries have in some cases adopted that approval without carrying out a new assessment. The NGO argues this patchwork approach failed to uncover the fact that Tesla’s FSD does not always recognize country-specific traffic rules—such as Belgium’s ban on overtaking cyclists on bicycle streets.
Why this matters for drivers and regulators
For drivers, the message is clear: FSD may assist, but it is not autonomous. In Belgium, the tested system sometimes sped in 30 km/h zones and attempted overtakes that are illegal on bicycle streets. A human driver still needs to monitor the road and be ready to take over.
For regulators, the Belgian test adds evidence that one approval or one market’s validation may not fit every country. Traffic rules, road design, and protections for cyclists and pedestrians vary across Europe. If FSD cannot reliably handle those differences, responsibility stays with the human driver—and with authorities to make sure automated systems do not create new risks.
As Tesla continues to expand FSD in Europe, the Belgian findings are a reminder that the gap between marketing and real-world performance can be significant. The system may be called Full Self-Driving, but on these streets, it still needed a human to step in.