News
Will Faraday Future’s FF 91 ever see production without a factory?
Faraday Future finally took the wraps off its planned production car, named FF 91, last night at CES 2017. What the public finally saw was a low slung, four passenger crossover style vehicle that is intended to compete with the Tesla Model X.
The California-based electric car startup says the car will utilize an industry leading 130 kWh battery that’s capable of driving 378 miles on a single charge. Powered by three electric motors — one in front and two at the rear — FF 91’s all wheel drive system will be capable of blasting off a 0-60 mph time of 2.39 seconds, making it the world’s quickest electric vehicle.
The battery, which Faraday Future claims has the highest energy density in the industry, is supplied by LG Chem. Pete Savagian, vice president of propulsion engineering at Faraday, says the FF 91 is equipped for 200 kW fast charging and can charge at a rate of 500 miles per hour.
The rear doors are hinged at the rear to provide ease of access to the interior. The doors are fitted with radar sensors that protect them from damage from cars or objects parked nearby. Those sensors also are part of the advanced self-driving system built into the car. Rear seating is said to be spacious and sumptuous.
Those are the specs but specs don’t sell cars. People buy on emotion and justify their decision later with facts. The FF 91 is an emotional car in a way that the equally capable Lucid Air is not. The Lucid sedan looks like a very nice Audi. That’s not a bad thing; it just means it doesn’t have a lot of visual excitement. No car appeals to every taste, of course, but the FF 91 does have curb appeal. It is visually attractive and mimics the body lines of BMW’s i3 and i8 — thoroughly modern without being too bizarre.
Richard Kim, Faraday Future’s head of design, says much of the car was designed using virtual reality technology. “If you want to have the most progressive, forward thinking vehicle design, you have to have use the most progressive and forward thinking methodologies,” Kim told Automotive News during a tour of the company’s headquarters in Gardena, California late last year.
Faraday Future says owners will be assigned an FFID — a personal identification code that will allow any Faraday Future car to configure itself to the personal preferences of the owner. That raises a significant point. Will there ever be enough Faraday Future cars on the road to make FFID relevant? The company is said to have serious financial difficulties. Work on its factory in North Las Vegas has been shut down for almost two months and senior company executives have left the company in the past few weeks.
Not to worry, Nick Sampson, senior vice president of R&D and engineering, told the audience Tuesday night in Las Vegas. Brimming with confidence, he assured those in attendance that Faraday Future is in the middle of a “multifaceted disruption” that will “reformat the auto industry.” Then he added, “Despite all the naysayers and the skeptics, we will persist,” before adding that the company’s “clean sheet” gives it an advantage over traditional automakers. Maybe so. But with the first cars scheduled to be delivered in 2018 and no factory yet in existence, there are plenty of skeptics.
Are Faraday Future and the FF 91 ready for prime time? Interested parties can reserve a car now or pay a $5,000 fee to secure a “priority reservation” for one of 300 “Alliance Edition” cars. With the company teetering on the edge of financial collapse, the CES reveal is seen by many as a Hail Mary event. If the reaction to the FF 91 is positive, new investors may be brought on board. But without fresh funds, it is hard to see how the company can survive long enough to be part of CES 2018.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
