News
Audi e-tron navigation system provides detailed petrol information to drivers (UPDATE)
It appears that while the Audi e-tron is a solid-built all-electric SUV with a premium price to match, the German automaker might have neglected to adjust some of the vehicle’s finer details. Take the e-tron’s navigation system, for example, which was recently observed to have a very interesting, and notably humorous feature: it gives drivers useful information about nearby petrol stations and current gas prices.
The e-tron, similar to other electric vehicles such as Tesla’s electric cars, uses its navigation to help drivers find rest stops and charging spots during trips. This is incredibly important for electric vehicles, particularly SUVs like the e-tron that only have a rather limited 204 miles of range per charge as per the vehicle’s EPA rating. Tesla’s electric cars perform this feature flawlessly, with vehicles laying out a route for drivers that clearly indicates where charging services are available.
As noted by drivers who shared images of the e-tron’s navigation in action, the all-electric SUV’s infotainment screen displays information about petrol stations on a selected route. The information is quite detailed too, as it includes the current price of petrol in selected locations. Images shared by Robin Engelhardt, for one, showed that the SUV had information about diesel prices in the area.
While humorous, the bug in the e-tron’s current navigation is likely due to the fact that the all-electric SUV’s infotainment system is taken from other vehicles in the company’s lineup. The e-tron melds well with Audi’s other vehicles in the way that its design theme is very similar to the company’s internal combustion cars. As such, components like the e-tron’s infotainment system are likely used for gas-powered vehicles as well.
The gas stations and diesel price information on the e-tron’s navigation system are likely the result of an honest oversight from Audi, and it is one that could be addressed through a software update. Nevertheless, the quirk does highlight a notable lack of attention to detail on the carmaker’s part. Audi is a premium brand, and the e-tron is not a vehicle that is designed for the mass market. At prices that are closer to the Tesla Model X than the Model 3, consumers purchasing the e-tron would likely expect a car that was meticulously tuned as an electric vehicle. Having a navigation system that is optimized for petrol stations does not help much in this sense.
This is especially notable considering that the e-tron continues to receive glowing reviews from organizations such as Consumer Reports, whose reviewers actually listed the vehicle’s infotainment system as a strong point of the all-electric SUV. Consumer Reports has warmly received the e-tron, even describing the vehicle’s deliberate acceleration as a more of an “elegant pull away.” That said, the e-tron remains a pretty solid vehicle, as revealed by its stellar safety ratings from the IIHS, which recently gave the SUV a Top Safety Pick+ rating.
Update: An Audi spokesperson has reached out to us with regards to the e-tron’s Navigation quirk. Following is the carmaker’s statement:
“The Audi MMI navigation system is designed to aid in everyday situations, including finding stops along the way of any given journey. Oftentimes, that means stopping at gas stations where drivers and passengers can stop for breaks or food. While the Audi e-tron is fully electric, these conveniences go a long way toward helping our customers, and displaying gas prices can be turned off in the MMI’s sub-menus. Additionally, the Audi e-tron comes with an up-to-date roster of available charging stations throughout the U.S. and elsewhere in its navigation to support long-distance driving.“
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
