News
What cars did Elon Musk drive before Tesla?
Musk’s first car was a 1978 BMW 320i that he bought in 1994 for $1,400. It was a fixer upper according to the now Tesla CEO which he drove for two years. One day, he loaned it to a colleague who phoned a short time later to say one of the wheels had literally fallen off the car, leaving a deep gouge in the pavement. Musk junked the car.
The next car would be a 1967 Series I Jaguar XK-E inspired by a book on exotic cars which he received as a present at 17 years of age. The Jaguar caught his eye and he promised himself that one day he would buy one as soon as he could afford to. He and his brother Kimbal Musk had co-founded their first company called Zip2 at the time. When Musk received his first dividend check for $40,000 from the company, sure enough it went straight to buying a Jaguar. And why not? Enzo Ferrari once proclaimed the XX-E the most beautiful production car ever made.
“That one was like a bad girlfriend. It kept breaking down on me and causing me all sorts of trouble”, Musk once said.
Soon after, Elon would be catapulted to Silicon Valley stardom after cashing out of PayPal. What followed would be the purchase of the ultimate tech entrepreneur status symbol, the McLaren F1. “I had it for several years and I put 11,000 miles on it and I drove it from LA to San Francisco. I had it as a daily driver,” Musk said in a interview with Pando Daily.
He would ultimately total the McLaren one day while driving with serial investor Peter Thiel to go chat up Michael Moritz, a venture capitalist with Sequoia Capital. “Peter said ‘so what can this do’ and like probably number one on the list of famous last words I said ‘watch this.’ So I floored it and did a lane change on Sand Hill,” a road in Menlo Park. In a heartbeat, the car went up an embankment, landed on its roof and tore all four wheels off the car. The F1 was a total loss. To make matters worse, the million dollar F1 wasn’t insured.
Image credit: YouTube/Beijing Satellite TV via Business Insider
Following the purchases of a BMW M5 in 2007 and a Porsche 911 in 2012, the Tesla CEO would also buy the famous Lotus Esprit S1 used in the movie The Spy Who Loved Me. This would become the inspiration to Tesla’s James Bond easter egg found in the Model S and Model X.
Musk bought the movie prop in 2013 at an auction in London for $886,000. “It was amazing as a little kid in South Africa to watch James Bond in ‘The Spy Who Loved Me’ drive his Lotus Esprit off a pier, press a button and have it transform into a submarine underwater,” he told the Huffington Post.
“I was disappointed to learn that it can’t actually transform. What I’m going to do is upgrade it with a Tesla electric powertrain and try to make it transform for real,” he says. This would explain Elon’s tweet after a video surfaced showing a Model S driving through a flooded tunnel.
Image credit: AP/ Lefteris Pitarakis
However, the car that most directly influenced an actual Tesla automobile is the Audi Q7 SUV that Musk owns in present day. It was the inspiration for the falcon wing doors on the Model X. Musk says he wanted to make a car with doors that could open in tight spaces. He also wanted to be able to access the third row seats without folding the second row seats forward.
“The Audi Q7 is particularly horrendous,” he told Forbes during an interview in 2012. “Even in the best case scenario, you need to be a dwarf mountain climber to get into the back seat.”
Image credit: Audi
That makes a total of 7 cars Elon Musk has owned and every one of them has been performance oriented. Maybe that’s where the fascination with Teslas that can scoot to 60 mph in under 3 seconds comes from.
Source: Business Insider
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
