News
Porsche Taycan vs Tesla Model S: Powertrain, battery, performance, and features
The Tesla Model S has been sitting on top of the full-sized electric sedan market for a while now — and for good reason. The vehicle, after all, has played a huge part in changing the public’s perception of what electric cars are capable of. Fast, sleek, and equipped with real range, the Model S is a true no-compromises vehicle.
Among all the competitors for the Model S, there is one that is being developed to compete directly with the electric car. That is the Porsche Taycan, formerly known as the Mission E sedan. The Taycan made its debut during the 2015 Frankfurt Motor Show, and it has captured the imagination of EV enthusiasts ever since. Porsche is yet to unveil the production version of the Taycan, though it has several camouflaged units doing real-world tests today.
Porsche appears to be a legacy automaker that is really serious about making the Taycan a successful vehicle — so much so that the company actually released the car’s specs earlier this year. That said, how does the Taycan compare to the golden standard of four-door electric sedans? Here’s a brief comparison.
Powertrain
The Tesla Model S was initially released with an RWD option, though all variants of the vehicle today are now Dual Motor AWD. The Model S uses three-phase, four pole AC induction motors with copper rotors as its powertrain. The car is also equipped with a drive inverter with variable frequency drive and regenerative braking system.
In contrast, Porsche is using permanently excited synchronous motors (PSM) for the Taycan. In true Porsche tradition, the PSM motors are race-bred, having been used in the Porsche 919 Hybrid racecar. Naser Abu Daqqa, Porsche’s director of electric drive systems, notes that the coils used in the Taycan’s PSM motors are “made of wires that aren’t round, but rather rectangular, making it possible to pack the wires more tightly and get more copper into the coil machines—increasing power and torque with the same volume.”
Batteries and Charging
Tesla’s battery packs hold the standard as some of the finest in the industry. With the Model S, Tesla is using 75 kWh or 100 kWh microprocessor controlled, lithium-ion batteries. The Model S also uses 18650 cells as the components of its packs, which allow the vehicle to reach up to 315 miles per charge. The Tesla Model S is fully compatible with the ~120 kW Supercharger Network, which currently has more than 10,900 stalls worldwide.
The Porsche Taycan is set to use lithium-ion batteries as well. In a press release about the vehicle, the German legacy automaker noted that it would use 4-volt cells in the Taycan’s 800-volt battery pack. Porsche is designing the Taycan for rapid charging at speeds of up to ~350 kW through the upcoming IONITY Network, whose initial construction is underway.
The Porsche Taycan track testing at the Nurburgring.
Performance
The Tesla Model S has a reputation for being a family sedan that can humiliate supercars on the drag strip. The Model S P100D, the vehicle’s top trim, is capable of going from 0-60 mph in just 2.4 seconds with its Ludicrous Mode upgrade. The vehicle’s top speed is software-limited to 155 mph.
Porsche notes that the Taycan would have a 0-60 mph time of 3.5 seconds and a top speed of 155 mph. While this is not as quick as the top-tier Model S P100D, Porsche maintains that the Taycan would be able to handle extended track driving — an area that the Model S does not excel in. Porsche appears to be putting its foot where its mouth is with the Taycan’s track capabilities, as the vehicle has been spotted testing in the Nurburgring multiple times over the past few months.
Software
Tesla is noted for its Autopilot driver-assist system and firmware updates that add features to its vehicles. This was particularly exhibited last year when the company opted to “uncork” the 75D and 100D variants of the Model S and Model X, which lowered the vehicles’ 0-60 mph times. Tesla CEO Elon Musk also noted during the company’s Q2 2018 earnings call that Software V9 would be coming soon, which should introduce the first features of Tesla’s Full Self-Driving suite.
Porsche plans to feature the same system for the Taycan. In an interview with Autocar at the Geneva Motor Show, Porsche chairman Oliver Blume stated that the automaker is also looking to give the Taycan (then called the Mission E sedan) firmware upgrades that improve the car’s performance. Blume also alluded to some degree of self-driving for the vehicle, stating that “there are situations in traffic jams where you will be able to read a newspaper, but our customers take pleasure from driving and this will remain.”
Cargo Space
The Tesla Model S features a lot of space for cargo. The vehicle has a total cargo volume of 31.6 cu ft, comprised of 5.3 cu ft in the frunk, and 26.3 cu ft at the rear. With the back seats folded, the Model S features a very spacious 58.1 cu ft, which is enough to fit an inflatable twin mattress, for those times when drivers would prefer to sleep in their vehicles.
Porsche has not revealed the storage capacity of the Taycan yet, but Stefan Weckbach, the head of electric vehicles at the company, did mention that the car would have 100 liters of storage in the frunk. That’s about 3.53 cu ft, which is smaller than the Model S.
Price
The Model S 75D (the current base model) starts at $74,500, though higher trims like the supercar-slaying P100D could cost as much as $135,000. On the other hand, Porsche expects the Taycan to start at around the ~$75,000 – $85,000 range, putting it close to the price of an entry-level Panamera.
Availability
The Tesla Model S is currently available for purchase, though there are rumors that a refresh featuring an updated interior would be rolled out within the next few quarters. The Porsche Taycan, on the other hand, is expected to start production sometime in 2019, with deliveries likely hitting their stride around 2020.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
