News
Lucid Air Dream Edition gets an in-depth review and speedy test drive at the hands of Jay Leno
Automotive enthusiast Jay Leno is one of the most knowledgeable celebrities in the world when it comes to cars. In recent years, Leno has gotten his hands on some of the best and most exciting vehicles to enter the electric sector, including the Tesla Cybertruck. Despite Leno’s close-knit friendship with Elon Musk, the former late-night TV show host does not show bias when displaying his thirst for the newest and most advanced electric powertrains in the world. Recently, Leno got his hands on the Lucid Air Dream Edition. Following discussions with Senior VP of Design Derek Jenkins and company CEO/CTO Peter Rawlinson, Leno was impressed with what Lucid brought to the table with its first vehicle offering.
Leno’s first thoughts regarding the introduction of the Lucid Air were simple: competition is great for the automotive sector. He notes that Ford and Chevrolet, with their constant need to one-up each other and break competition barriers, made one another better.
It appears to be the same narrative with Tesla and Lucid, two electric car companies fighting for the top spot as the marker of the EV sector’s most luxurious vehicles. Tesla may be slightly more notable due to its fourteen-year history of building electric cars, starting with the Roadster in 2008, a vehicle that Leno still speaks about to this day. However, Lucid has come into the market with a very competitive product that undoubtedly rivals the Tesla Model S Plaid, another vehicle Leno has taken for a spin in the past.
Jenkins showed Leno the finer points of the Lucid Air, detailing the all-aluminum body, a wide-set wheelbase that is more comparable to a Mercedes-Benz S Class than any other vehicle, and the spacious interior that provides a luxurious feel.
Credit: Jay Leno’s Garage | YouTube
Then came the fun part: driving the Lucid Air Dream Edition. Leno has driven many of the world’s most unique vehicles, but his narrative of the Air was definitely positive. He seemed to enjoy the company’s vertical integration with its in-house produced motors, a part that Rawlinson said was designed from the ground up by Lucid engineers. Rawlinson also stated that all of the Air’s EV technology, including the battery pack, were all designed and developed at the company’s Arizona-based facility.
Jay’s synopsis regarding the Air’s performance catalyzed some interesting thoughts regarding Lucid’s development of the vehicle’s most-premier variant. Rawlinson says the Air Dream Edition was not geared for a world-record 0-60 MPH time, although it stands at a lightning-quick 2.4 seconds.
Leno enjoyed hearing the finer points of the Lucid Air from CEO/CTO Peter Rawlinson (Credit: Jay Leno’s Garage | YouTube)
Rawlinson says that Lucid’s goal wasn’t to necessarily have the car launch from a standstill to 60 MPH, but it was designed to give instant torque when the car is already in motion. One example of where the quick acceleration is applicable is on the freeway, Rawlinson said, when trying to overtake a car or fill in a gap. The mid-range punch that the vehicle’s powertrain provides is more than enough acceleration to make each of these maneuvers on a highway easily attainable.
Check out Leno’s full review of the Lucid Air Dream Edition below.
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
