oceangate isn't a good comparison.

carbon fiber is great in tension, i.e. a compressed air tank, or COPV

carbon fiber is much less great in compression, i.e. OceanGate

Also the OceanGate construction process was bad, even for carbon fiber, because the CEO didn't listen to actual engineers.

CF can make a fine pressure vessel it's just difficult to build and they require constant inspection that OceanGate didn't perform (and ignored evidence from their own monitoring system that the PV was responding differently to pressure after a hard bang it suffered when docking in one of the last few dives). SpaceX already has experience building the COPVs that Tesla is probably using and knows their limits pretty well though I don't want to be standing near one in a major crash either.

Professor Farnsworth: "Dear Lord! That's over 150 atmospheres of pressure!"

Fry: "How many atmospheres can the ship withstand?"

Professor Farnsworth: "Well, it's a space ship, so I'd say anywhere between zero and one."

Different forces: expansive (Roadster) vs compressive (OceanGate). This makes some logical sense since fibers/strands/ropes are good for tensile strength vs. compressive forces.

Some off piste skiers carry a carbon fiber canister with pressurized nitrogen gas, to inflate airbags from backpack in case of an avalanche. Carbon fiber is not that good with point pressure, but strong for evenly distributed loads.

At this point I look at wikipedia what happened to the submarine bamboozled mentioned. Ooops. Heh, the pressure of water is as evenly distributed as can be. Seems my background in watersports is not enough to moonlight in material engineering.

SpaceX has been using carbon fiber pressure tanks for awhile. Rocket Labs has been using them too.