News
Multiple Porsche Taycan prototypes rip through Nurburgring for track testing
German carmaker Porsche appears to be putting the pedal to the metal with regards to the Taycan’s track capabilities, with multiple pre-production prototypes recently being spotted on the Nurburgring. As could be seen in a video taken earlier this month, several of Taycan’s test mules were spotted taking on the iconic track’s turns and straights in true Porsche fashion.
The video, which was taken by auto enthusiast Automotive Mike, shows at least seven Taycan prototypes being track tested on the Nurburgring. Based on clips of the vehicles, particularly the way some prototypes accelerated after navigating a turn, Porsche seems to be refining and testing the track capabilities of the Taycan’s different variants. While all of the Taycan test mules featured impressive acceleration as they hugged the track very well, some of the prototypes seemed to have slight differences in terms of performance.
The prototype fitted with the LB EF 2925 plate, for one, seemingly featured electric motors that were a bit more audible than the other test mules, as seen in 0:31 in the video. The prototype with the LB EF 923 license plate, on the other hand, almost appeared like it was moving in a more deliberate manner (2:04 in the video). While these differences might simply be due to the varying driving styles of the Taycan prototypes’ drivers, the non-uniform behavior of the test mules could also correspond to the different, upcoming performance trims of Porsche’s first all-electric car.
Porsche, after all, has not announced the specific price of the vehicle, though the Taycan’s model-line director, Rober Meier, noted to Automotive News that the company is expecting a price “somewhere between a Cayenne and a Panamera.” This means that while the Taycan would likely start at $75,000 (considering that the Cayenne starts at $66,000 and the Panamera starts at $85,000), there will certainly be versions of the vehicle that feature more performance for a higher price.
The continuous track testing of the Taycan test mules in the Nurburgring shows Porsche’s dedication in releasing an electric car capable of extended high-speed driving. Earlier this year, Porsche VP of Product Line BEV Stefan Weckbach noted that the Taycan (dubbed the Mission E sedan at the time), would be a track-capable alternative to the Model S, which is impressive in straight line races but handicapped in closed circuits. Porsche also promoted the Taycan as a vehicle that would have a “soul,” just like the company’s other cars like the iconic 911.
Porsche has released the specs and features of the Taycan, with the legacy carmaker stating that the vehicle would be fitted with two permanently excited synchronous motors (PSM) that produce a combined 600 hp (440 kW), allowing the electric car to accelerate from 0-60 mph in 3.5 seconds and achieve a top speed of 155 mph. The vehicle is also equipped with an 800-volt battery, which gives the car 310 miles of range per charge. Porsche has further noted that one of the Taycan’s key features would be its charging speed, which could replenish 248.5 miles worth of range in roughly 15 minutes, thanks to a 350 kW charging system.
Pre-orders for the Taycan have been opened in the United States, and so far, Porsche has stated that the reception to the upcoming all-electric vehicle has been very positive. The Taycan is expected to enter production sometime in 2019.
Watch Automotive Mike‘s sighting of the Porsche Taycan prototypes 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
