News
Tesla Model S vs. Toyota Mirai Comparison
With the introduction of the new hydrogen-powered Toyota Mirai (the name means “future” in Japanese), there has been a lot of media hype about vehicles that use hydrogen fuel cells as their power source. Toyota, Honda and a number of other automobile companies have announced plans to build cars based on fuel cell technology.
Fundamentally, a hydrogen fuel cell produces electricity via an electro-chemical reaction that drives an electric motor that creates the motive force for a car. The technology requires high-pressure storage of liquid hydrogen, a fuel cell to convert the H2 to electrons, a control system to deliver the resultant electricity to an electric motor and/or battery that in turn drives the wheels of the vehicle. It’s a workable, if somewhat complex system that produces zero emissions and water as a by-product.
In the media, there are three major claims that are being made about cars powered by hydrogen: (1) that H2 is a 21st century energy source and will ultimately become the preferred power source for automobiles; (2) that hydrogen-powered fuel cells represent a significant improvement in environmentally safe automotive fuel, and (3) that cars like the Toyota Mirai represent a major threat to battery electric vehicles (BEVs) like the Tesla Model S.
Are any or all of these claims true? We thought we’d take a look.
After going through the popular literature and government/academic reports, we decided that the best way to present the array of information collected was with an infographic, “Tesla Model S vs. Toyota Mirai: A Technology/Vehicle Comparison,” that examines four broad categories of concern:
- underlying technology that powers the vehicle
- the two vehicles themselves
- technology required for refueling the vehicle, and
- environmental impact
Tesla Model S vs. Toyota Mirai
Technology
EV technology has been around for 100 years. It represents a remarkably simple method for automotive power that is constrained solely by the capacity of the vehicle’s batteries. Fuel cells are evolving rapidly and provide more energy capacity than modern Li-Ion batteries, but they require liquid hydrogen to be stored on board the vehicle in pressurized tanks. The Tesla Model S has an energy capacity of either 60 kWh or 85 kWh while the Toyota Mirai produces 114 kWh. The overall energy efficiency (from an environmental viewpoint) of BEVs is dependent on the efficiency of the electric grid from which a BEV obtains its diet of electrons. The efficiency of hydrogen-powered cars is impacted by the process that extracts hydrogen from other sources and the method by which hydrogen is transported to a refueling station.
The winner: It’s close, but the simplicity of the BEV system gives the underlying technology of the Model S a slight edge.
The Vehicles
Both the Tesla Model S and the Toyota Mirai are expensive, but that’s the price of new technology. The Model S is a premium, high performance automobile in ever sense of the word. It is a visually beautiful car that conjures images of a Aston Martin or Jaguar and has been lauded as one of the best sedans in the world. It has won praise from virtually every automotive media source, and is one of the safest, roomiest cars on the planet. The Toyota Mirai has an eccentric look that gives it a boxy Prius-like feel. It appears to provide good, basic transportation, but it is not for those who want a bit more than good, basic transportation. Finally, the Tesla Model S is here today. By 2017, there will be about 160,000 Model S vehicles on the road. Toyota projects that only 3,000 Mirais will be in the field by the same date.
The winner: No contest! The Model S is far superior to the Mirai in virtually every respect except for range.
Fueling the Vehicle
In our view, one of the major benefits of BEVs is that you refuel them at home, overnight, while you’re sleeping, so that your Model S is “full” every morning. Unless you travel long distances on a regular basis, you will rarely need a Tesla Supercharger or any other refueling source away from home. That’s huge, and often get’s lost in the discussion of “range anxiety” that always seems to invade the thinking of those who don’t own a Model S. Although fuel cells are sexy, it seems odd to us that Toyota has returned to a 20th century fueling station paradigm. In essence, there is little difference between refueling a Mirai and refueling a Camry. Sure, the fuel is different, but you have to hunt for a specific refueling station as your Mirai slowly depletes its hydrogen. No charging at home—ever.
The winner: No contest! Refueling your vehicle at home is a convenience that represents 21st century thinking. Model S provides that convenience. Mirai does not.
Environmental Impact
Both the Model S and the Mirai are environmentally impressive. Both have zero emissions and relatively low “well-to-wheel” inefficiencies. In our view, the beauty of a BEV is that it becomes increasingly friendly to the environment as our electric grid infrastructure improves. There is no need to separately transport fuel to a refueling station (a requirement for a hydrogen fuel cell vehicle) eliminating both the cost and the environmental impact of secondary fuel transport.
The winner: It’s a toss up. Both cars are environmentally friendly and both will improve as the grid becomes cleaner and as hydrogen extraction processes become more efficient and cost effective.
As a young engineering student I was taught that when you consider alternative systems that both achieve the same result, always choose the less complex approach. That’s common sense, but it appears that when faced with the same choice, Toyota chose the more complex option. Possibly, their engineers or marketing people were driven by concern about range, but that’s simply not as big an issue as they think it is. BEVs represent simplicity, and in an increasingly complex world, that’s something that many consumers like.
Is the Mirai (or another similar H2 vehicle) a “Tesla Killer”? Not a chance!
Originally published on EVannex
News
Tesla Supercharger vandalized with frozen cables and anti-Musk imagery amid Sweden union dispute
The incident comes amid Tesla’s ongoing labor dispute with IF Metall.
Tesla’s Supercharger site in Vansbro, Sweden, was vandalized during peak winter travel weeks. Images shared to local media showed frozen charging cables and a banner reading “Go home Elon,” which was complete with a graphic of Musk’s controversial gesture.
The incident comes amid Tesla’s ongoing labor dispute with IF Metall, which has been striking against the company for more than two years over collective bargaining agreements, as noted in a report from Expressen.
Local resident Stefan Jakobsson said he arrived at the Vansbro charging station to find a board criticizing Elon Musk and accusing Tesla of strikebreaking. He also found the charging cables frozen after someone seemingly poured water over them.
“I laughed a little and it was pretty nicely drawn. But it was a bit unnecessary,” Jakobsson said. “They don’t have to do vandalism because they’re angry at Elon Musk.”
The site has seen heavy traffic during Sweden’s winter sports holidays, with travelers heading toward Sälen and other mountain destinations. Jakobsson said long lines formed last weekend, with roughly 50 Teslas and other EVs waiting to charge.
Tesla Superchargers in Sweden are typically open to other electric vehicle brands, making them a reliable option for all EV owners.
Tesla installed a generator at the location after sympathy strikes from other unions disrupted power supply to some stations. The generator itself was reportedly not working on the morning of the incident, though it is unclear whether that was connected to the protest.
The dispute between Tesla and IF Metall centers on the company’s refusal to sign a collective agreement covering Swedish workers. The strike has drawn support from other unions, including Seko, which has taken steps affecting electricity supply to certain Tesla facilities. Tesla Sweden, for its part, has insisted that its workers are already fairly compensated and it does not need a collective agreement,
Jesper Pettersson, press spokesperson for IF Metall, criticized Tesla’s use of generators to keep charging stations running. Still, IF Metall emphasized that it strongly distances itself from the vandalism incident at the Vansbro Supercharger.
“We think it is remarkable that instead of taking the easy route and signing a collective agreement for our members, they are choosing to use every possible means to get around the strike,” Pettersson said.
News
Tesla Cybertruck owner credits FSD for saving life after freeway medical emergency
The incident was shared by the Tesla owner on social media platform X, where it caught the attention of numerous users, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
A Tesla Cybertruck owner has credited Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised for saving his life after he experienced a medical emergency on the freeway.
The incident was shared by the Tesla owner on social media platform X, where it caught the attention of numerous users, including Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
In a post on X, Cybertruck owner Rishi Vohra wrote that he had unintentionally fasted for 17 hours, taken medication, and experienced what he described as a severe allergic reaction while driving.
“What started as a normal drive turned terrifying fast. My body shut down. I passed out while driving on the freeway, mid-conversation with my wife on the phone,” he wrote.
Vohra stated that his Tesla was operating with FSD Supervised engaged at the time. According to his account, the Cybertruck detected that he had lost consciousness using its driver monitoring system, slowed down, activated hazard lights, and safely pulled over to the shoulder.
“Thank God my Tesla had Full Self-Driving engaged. It detected I lost consciousness (thanks to the driver monitoring system), immediately slowed, activated hazards, and safely pulled over to the shoulder. No crash. No danger to anyone else on the road,” Vohra wrote.
The Cybertruck owner added that his wife used Life360 to alert emergency services after hearing him go silent during their call. He said responders located him within five minutes. After being attended to, Vohra stated that the vehicle then drove him to the emergency room after he refused to leave his truck on the freeway.
“So the Tesla autonomously drove me the rest of the way to the ER. I walked in, got admitted, and they stabilized me overnight,” he wrote.
He later posted that he was being discharged and thanked Tesla and Elon Musk. Musk replied to the post, writing, “Glad you’re ok!” The official Tesla X account also reposted Vohra’s story with a heart emoji.
Tesla recently published updated safety data of vehicles operating with FSD (Supervised) engaged. As per Tesla’s latest North America figures, vehicles operating with FSD (Supervised) engaged recorded one major collision every 5,300,676 miles. The U.S. average is one major collision every 660,164 miles.
Considering the experience of the Cybertruck owner, Tesla’s safety data does seem to hold a lot of water. A vehicle that is manually driven would have likely crashed or caused a pileup if its driver lost consciousness in the middle of the freeway, after all.
News
Tesla Cyberbeast price drops to less than $100k but loses Luxe package with FSD
The change adjusts the truck’s positioning in the high-performance premium EV pickup truck segment, where several rivals now command six-figure price tags.
Tesla has reduced the price of the Cyberbeast to below $99,990, but the update also removes a compelling feature set from the vehicle.
The change adjusts the truck’s positioning in the high-performance premium EV pickup truck segment, where several rivals now command six-figure price tags.
Prior to its price adjustment, the Cyberbeast was listed for $114,990. However, the vehicle’s prior configuration included a Luxe package that bundled features such as Full Self-Driving Supervised and other premium inclusions. That package is no longer listed as part of the Cyberbeast.
For its sub $100,000 price, the Cyberbeast offers 325 miles of estimated range, a 0-60 mph time of 2.6 seconds, a payload capacity of 2,271 lbs with the Cyber Wheel, and Powershare.
Interestingly enough, the Cyberbeast now undercuts some of its most powerful competitors with its updated price. The Rivian R1T Quad, for example, starts at $116,900, though the R1T has more range at 374 miles per charge, and it is also a bit faster with a 0-60 mph time of 2.5 seconds.
Other rivals include the GMC Hummer EV 3X Omega Edition Truck, which has a starting MSRP of approximately $148,000 before dealer markups, the Chevy Silverado EV LT Max Range, which starts at over $91,000 before dealer markups, and the GMC Sierra EV Denali Max, which starts at about $101,000.
Considering that rivals like the Rivian R1T Quad, Chevy Silverado EV LT Max Range, and GMC Sierra EV Denali Max outgun the Cyberbeast in raw range, the Cyberbeast’s competitiveness will likely rely on its Full Self Driving Supervised system, which allows it to navigate inner city streets and highways.
For $99 per month, the Cyberbeast practically becomes a self-driving vehicle, and that is something that its rivals cannot match, at least for now.
Tesla Supercharger vandalized with frozen cables and anti-Musk imagery amid Sweden union dispute
Tesla Cybertruck owner credits FSD for saving life after freeway medical emergency
