Connect with us
hertz tesla model 3 fleet hertz tesla model 3 fleet

News

Hertz gives several updates on its Tesla and Polestar EV fleet

(Credit: Hertz)

Published

on

Update: Lede paragraph date revised to Thursday to reflect accuracy.

Hertz gave several updates on its fleet of Tesla and Polestar all-electric vehicles, which it started offering to customers earlier this year, during its Earnings Call for Q2 2022 held on Thursday.

Hertz expanded its EV offerings to sixteen new cities earlier this month and has experienced widespread success in its EV fleet.

Initial Order of 100,000 Teslas

Hertz initially ordered 100,000 Tesla Model 3 and Model Y vehicles in October 2021. The move was Hertz’s introduction into EV adoption, which has expanded to other automakers, including Polestar, who announced a 65,000 unit deal with the rental agency just months later. The 100,000 vehicle deal was not offered at a discount. However, Hertz has maintained that its adoption of Teslas has resulted in a dramatic spike in interest from renters.

Advertisement

“With respect to EV specifically, over 15,000 Uber drivers to date have rented a Tesla from Hertz, at a minimum rate of $334 per week, comprising over half a million transaction days,” company CEO Stephen Scherr said. “Driver feedback has been positive and they remain drawn to the opportunity as gasoline prices remain elevated and demand for the service among Uber customers is strong. Our Tesla’s enabled Uber drivers could differentiate themselves and to improve upon the quality of their riders experience, and that translates into higher earnings for them.”

20,000 Teslas and Polestar EVs Delivered

Hertz detailed on the call that it has accepted around 20,000 electric vehicles in its fleet since it started taking deliveries of its various EVs. Scherr continued that deliveries are ongoing.

Maintenance Reductions

Electric vehicles are most often noted for their drastic reductions in service compared to combustion engine vehicles, which results in more savings over the lifespan of the car due to fewer moving parts. Hertz is learning that lesson pretty easily, according to Scherr, who stated the company is seeing a roughly 50 to 60 percent decrease in maintenance costs:

“On maintenance, I think Kenny said to you, we are running kind of 50% to 60% of what maintenance costs are on ICE vehicles. That’s roughly in line with where we are. If there’s anyone surprised, it’s probably a slightly higher expense on tires, but not much more, and that’s embedded in the figure I’m giving you. So I would say, overall, we are very pleased with the results. They’re coming in roughly in line with what we thought when we first underwrote the move in this strategic direction.”

Advertisement

Additionally, Kenny Cheung, Hertz’s CFO, also commented on the maintenance cost reductions:

“As for the primary drivers of the year-on-year increase, we experienced higher cost and transportation and fuel, reflecting the effect of broader inflationary trends as well as in maintenance on order fleet. We expect maintenance expenses to moderate as our fleet continues to grow younger. On the forward, we anticipate additional operating leverage as more expensive third-party labor strategically replaced with Hertz employees and we further reduced maintenance expense as we rejuvenate the fleet and continue to grow our number of EVs.”

Return Customers

Scherr said that customers seem to be more interested in renting Teslas over and over again, which has translated to an increase in repeat clients for the company. “I think we have schooled our customers on how to use them, so much so that I think there’s an embedded tether there,” he said, referring to Tesla’s key card. “They’re coming back to use the car and rent the car more frequently. And I think all of those are expressions of the first mover edge that we have around EVs.”

Consumers may be hesitant to try a new, technologically-advanced product, especially when dealing with a car. However, it seems that once Hertz’s rental clients make the jump to try an EV, they’re much more likely to come back simply because of the ease of access and features.

Advertisement

Less Vehicle Depreciation

Company executives also stated that the depreciation of EVs in their rental fleet is moving at a slower pace than its ICE vehicles. Cheung said that the performance of the EV fleet early on has the company “more confident” in the economics of the BEVs compared to their ICE offerings.

This is comparable to the scenario that police departments have when purchasing an EV. Initially, the cost of a quality electric vehicle is somewhat higher than an ICE vehicle. Over time, as fuel costs, maintenance, and other costs pile up, the EVs will be more advantageous to Hertz and other adoptees in the books. The cost of savings is exponentially more in an EV compared to an ICE car. This has been proven on several occasions, including with the Westport, Connecticut Police Department.

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Advertisement

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

News

Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

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.

Advertisement

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.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

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.

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Advertisement

Continue Reading