Doubts may still linger about the potential of battery electric vehicles for mainstream transportation, but EVs are getting progressively better. And if the data from the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y fleet is any indication, it appears that these improvements could result, at least to some degree, in an all-electric crossover being more efficient than the early production versions of an all-electric sedan.
In a recent conversation with Teslarati, David Hodge, the founder and CEO of Embark — a transportation app company that was sold to Apple in 2013 — explained that his work on a little passion project has shown something incredibly interesting about the Model 3 and Model Y’s efficiency. Hodge is currently working on the Nikola app, a service that he hopes will eventually grow to be the CarFax for EVs. So far, users of the app have driven about 7,000,000 miles, and over 2,000 Model 3s are registered in the fleet.
These Model 3s are comprised of vehicles that were produced from the beginning of Elon Musk’s first “alien dreadnought” attempt to cars that rolled off the line this quarter. Based on data that the Nikola app proprietor shared, it is evident that the Model 3 has gotten significantly more efficient over the years. Users of the app with vehicles produced in 2018, for example, showed a real-world average MPGe of 90.3, while cars that were produced in 2019 had a real-world average of 100.4.
These efficiency improvements continued in the first half of 2020, when Nikola app users who owned Model 3s showed a real-world average MPGe of 105.2. Interestingly enough, Tesla appears to have rolled out a major improvement to the Model 3’s efficiency in the second half of the year, as vehicles produced after June 2020 have shown a real-world average MPGe of 125.7. That’s the biggest improvement in the Model 3’s efficiency yet, at least as reflected in data from the Nikola app’s users.
Inasmuch as the improvements in the Model 3’s MPGe are notable, the efficiency of the Model Y appears to be even more noteworthy. The Model Y is the newest vehicle in Tesla’s lineup today, having started deliveries earlier this year. But even with its early ramp, it is becoming quite evident that Tesla did something special with the all-electric crossover.
Nikola app users who owned Model Ys that were produced in the first half of 2020 showed a real-world average MPGe of 103.2, which was very close to the MPGe of Model 3s that were manufactured in the same period. And just like the Model 3s, Model Ys that were produced after June 2020 exhibited a significant improvement in efficiency, with the vehicles having a real-world average MPGe of 118.7. That’s higher than the MPGe of Model 3s that were produced just last year.
As noted by Hodge, such efficiency figures from the Model Y are extremely impressive, especially considering that it is larger and significantly heftier than the Model 3. This is also a pretty unique situation considering that the company’s flagship sedan, the Model S, has always been significantly more efficient than its SUV counterpart, the Model X.
“This is pretty impressive considering the obvious aerodynamic differences in the Y and the fact that the S has always outperformed the X by about 15. If you just look at cars made since June, the Model Y MPGe climbed to 119 on average, but it looks like some of the tech improvements made it over to the 3, which is seeing 125.6 MPGe average in that period,” Hodge noted.
Tesla has a habit of rolling out improvements to its vehicles as soon as they are available. The latest Teslas are therefore expected to have the best tech that the company has to offer at the time of their production. With this in mind, and as per the findings of auto teardown expert Sandy Munro, the Model Y is indeed equipped with Tesla’s best, both in tech and in design. And considering that the all-electric crossover is expected to share components with its sedan sibling, it is not very surprising to see the Model 3 experience efficiency gains as soon as the Model Y started ramping up. Such is simply the nature of Tesla.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.
The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
