News
First reviews of Porsche Mission E Cross Turismo are in, and they are glowing
Porsche recently offered auto reviewers a chance to experience its latest all-electric vehicle, the Mission E Cross Turismo concept, firsthand. As could be seen in the initial reactions to the vehicle’s design and performance, Porsche’s off-road-capable, shooting brake-esque variant of the original Mission E sedan would likely be a strong contender in the electric car market.
The Mission E Cross Turismo concept, just like its Tesla Model S-rivaling sedan counterpart, features a highly aerodynamic design. Featuring generous vents on the side, a shape that optimizes airflow around the vehicle, and design elements such as Model S-esque pop-up door handles, the Mission E Cross Turismo was created with form and function in mind. Sitting on treaded General Grabber AT275/40R-20 tires, the Cross Turismo concept also adopts an aggressive stance.
Reviewers of the Mission E Cross Turismo gave the electric vehicle much praise, mainly due to its performance, which is unanimously dubbed as true to the car’s badge. Car and Driver, for one, lauded the Cross Turismo for its capability to sprint from 0-62 mph in 3.5 seconds, its electric motors that generate 600 hp, and its 90 kWh battery that gives a range of 310 miles. The Mission E Cross Turismo’s compatibility with the 350 kW IONITY network, which is capable of recharging 250 miles of range in just 15 minutes, was also mentioned as a strong point for the upcoming car.
The Porsche Mission E Cross Turismo concept. [Credit: Porsche]
The Mission E Cross Turismo is equipped with several fancy bells and whistles as well, including a drone that can take aerial videos of the electric car in action. Considering that the Mission E Cross Turismo is designed to be a vehicle that can perform equally well on and off-road, reviewers of the electric car lauded its adaptive air-spring suspension, which allows the car to raise or lower its ride height as necessary.
Inside the car itself, reviewers took particular notice to the vehicle’s rather sparse but classy interior, from its generous binnacle in front of the steering wheel to its touch panel on the passenger side. Though not as radically minimalistic as the Tesla Model 3, the Cross Turismo concept’s dashboard was found to be a departure from Porsche’s tendency to place a generous number of knobs and switches in its vehicles.
CNET Roadshow‘s Tim Stevens, one the reviewers who was given the opportunity to drive the Cross Turismo concept, ultimately stated that considering its design, features, and driving performance, the upcoming vehicle could very well make a significant impact in the electric car industry.
“The global electric car market is still quite young, and while companies like Tesla have done a great job building the stage, I can’t help but think that when the Mission E hits the market next year, it’s gonna steal the show.”
Ultimately, the Porsche Mission E Cross Turismo looks like a solid contender in the electric car market. When it starts production early next decade, vehicles such as the Tesla Model Y would likely find some competition from the electric off-roader. Porsche’s all-electric line stands to make an impact as early as next year, however, as the Mission E sedan is set to start production in 2019, followed by the Cross Turismo in 2020. Pricing for the Mission E sedan and the Cross Turismo have not been revealed by the German carmaker, though expectations are high that the latter’s cost would be in the same ballpark as the Panamera S E-Hybrid.
As Porche prepares to launch its first all-electric vehicle, the German legacy automaker is starting to increase its marketing efforts for the upcoming car. Just recently, a Mission E prototype was driven around the track by former Formula One driver Mark Webber, who noted that the sedan had similarities as the Porsche 919 Hybrid, a high-performance vehicle he drove for the company in competitions such as the 24 Hours of Le Mans.
The Mission E sedan’s concept version, which debuted at the 2015 Frankfurt Motor Show, was also taken for a spin by Maroon 5 frontman Adam Levine in a recent ad for the vehicle. In the United States, Porsche Cars North America has revealed that that it is building a network of 500 fast chargers to support the Mission E sedan’s rollout next year.
Watch Tim Stevens of CNET Roadshow take the Mission E for a test drive in the video 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
