News
Porsche Taycan showcases track abilities beside high-performance cars in the Nurburgring
Porsche has been very vocal about its aim to ensure that the Taycan, its first all-electric car, would be at home on the racetrack. Porsche’s gasoline-powered cars are famed for their performance and their “soul,” and the company has maintained that the Taycan would be no different.
This means that the upcoming electric four-door sedan would have to be proficient and tuned enough to handle the world’s most challenging racecourses. To accomplish this, Porsche has been taking some of the Taycan’s camouflaged prototypes to one of Germany’s most iconic tracks — the Nurburgring. The intense, twisting 12.93-mile racetrack is famed for its difficulty, resulting in an adage which states that “if a vehicle runs on the Nurburgring, it can run anywhere.”
Just recently, the Porsche Taycan was sighted sharing the famous racetrack with some of Germany’s most iconic high-performance cars, as well as a number of fellow camouflaged prototypes from Audi, BMW, and Mercedes-Benz, to name a few. A video of the vehicles was posted by YouTube’s cvdzijden – Supercar Videos channel, which shares clips of vehicle testing sessions in the racetrack.
The recent Nurburgring session is part of the Industry Pool, an initiative that involves more than two dozen OEMs, all of which combine financial resources to rent out the racetrack four days a week, 16 weeks a year (usually two weeks/month between April and October). In true Industry Pool fashion, several unreleased vehicles could be seen aggressively tackling the turns of the track, but among all of the cars, the Taycan stands apart due to its stealthy way of hugging turns and then exploding forward with its instant torque.
Porsche’s approach to refining the track capabilities of the Taycan is indicative of its experience in the auto industry. Over the past months, the automaker has been taking its camouflaged Taycan prototypes to the Nurburgring for track sessions. This approach seems to be a little bit different from Tesla and its Track Mode for the Model 3 Performance, which was largely developed in-house and heavily software-based. Tesla CEO Elon Musk dubbed Track Mode as an “Expert User Mode” for the electric car, in the way that it would allow drivers to tweak their vehicles’ settings according to their preferences.
The Porsche Taycan is expected to be marketed as a competitor for the Tesla Model S, but its listed specs are more comparable to the Model 3 Performance. The German automaker states that the Taycan would be able to accelerate from 0-60 mph in 3.5 seconds, eventually hitting a top speed of 155 mph. The vehicle is also expected to feature a 310-mile range per charge, and it would be supported by Porsche’s upcoming Charge Parks, a fast-charging network not unlike Tesla’s Superchargers.
Porsche seems to be the one legacy automaker that is really committed to its electric car push. While companies like Jaguar and Mercedes-Benz have released electric vehicles, neither one has announced a dedicated charging infrastructure for their cars. That said, this is not to say that everything about the Taycan is going well.
The company plans to build the Taycan at its Zuffenhausen facility in Stuttgart, Germany, a location that also manufactures the Porsche 911, 718 Boxster, and the 718 Cayman. Last July, Porsche head of production Albrecht Reimold noted that it is quite difficult to find a location to set up the Taycan’s assembly lines in the facility, especially considering the work that would have to be done to transform the factory and optimize it for the electric car’s production. Ultimately, Porsche aims to build 20,000 Taycans per year when the vehicle enters production, which is expected to begin in 2019.
Watch the Porsche Taycan fit right in with other high-performance cars 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
