News
SpaceX Hyperloop Competition: Top 3 teams duke it out for fastest pod
Hawthorne councilmembers, members of the California Assembly, and Hawthorne Mayor Alex Vargas were in attendance at the headquarters of SpaceX and The Boring Company for their jointly-hosted Hyperloop Competition 2.
The second such Hyperloop competition sponsored by Elon Musk, the eight months that separated them were filled to the brim with press coverage of The Boring Company (TBC), which has begun to seriously develop an experimental tunnel beneath a central street in Hawthorne, CA. Most intriguingly, TBC publicly acknowledged that it is now pursuing the development of its own form of Hyperloop technology, originally developed and released as a white paper by Elon Musk, albeit with tunnels rather than above-ground vacuum tube constructs.
Update: Watch Elon Musk award this team for having the fastest Hyperloop pod at 202 mph
The second competition was focused on one goal, above all others: top speed. The final three teams chosen for testing in SpaceX’s mile-long vacuum tube were as international as ever. Paradigm Hyperloop, a continuation of the Openloop team from Competition 1, is composed of 26 students from the northeastern U.S. and Canada, designed a pod that made use of air bearings to levitate and was intended to travel as fast as 200 mph through SpaceX’s test track. While not yet officially confirmed, a livestream suggested that their pod reached a maximum speed of approximately 100 km/h or 62 mph. While nowhere near its purported top speed, a member of Paradigm Hyperloop said that the team’s pod “levitated perfectly” and that the test generally went great. Their pod was one of the largest, weighing in at almost a metric ton.
SwissLoop, a team of 40 or so students from Swiss university ETH Zurich, developed a pod that levitated with permanent magnets and was propelled by compressed air, sort of like a rocket. SwissLoop’s SpaceX adviser, a mechanical engineer focused on reusing Falcon 9s on normal days, praised the group’s engineering and construction of the pod during a livestream on Facebook. SwissLoop experienced some technical difficulties while Musk waiting to provide the countdown in Swiss German, and he quipped about connectivity issues that the team was having with their pod. Musk later announced that due to those technical difficulties, SwissLoop’s pod would be removed for troubleshooting and WARR Hyperloop would conduct the second live test.
Pod problem. Developing futuristic transport isn't quick. #Hyperloop pic.twitter.com/QJAngYvCbP
— Jack Stewart (@stewart_jack) August 27, 2017
WARR Hyperloop, the victors of the first Competition, prepared their Pod ii to be tested on Sunday afternoon. One of the smallest pods at only 190 lb, the vehicle was intended to have a top speed of approximately 225 mph – a speed it was reported to be capable of reaching in 12 seconds. Designed by students from the Technical University of Munich, the pod was propelled with a 50 kW electric motor connected to polyurethane wheels. While the method of levitation was not specified, it is understood to be a system of permanent magnets similar to SwissLoop’s implementation. WARR is a German organization and stands for Scientific Workgroup for Rocketry and Spaceflight in English.
Elon Musk somewhat controversially revealed that The Boring Company had received “verbal approval” for an underground Hyperloop between Washington D.C. and New York City, appearing to acknowledge some form of back-room deal with the federal government. He later clarified in a series of tweets and replies that the approval was extremely preliminary and unofficial and that The Boring Company was hard at work beginning to form relationships with the numerous municipalities that would be involved along the proposed route. The several Hyperloop-related companies that formed following Musk’s white paper have been reluctant to make room for a new, Musk-headed competitor in the ring, but The Boring Company is aggressively pushing ahead with their demonstration tunnel in Hawthorne, CA and has successfully applied for the initial permits that will be required.
Mirroring Elon’s typically positive opinion of competition, he bid Hyperloop One and all other companies trying to revolutionize transportation the best of luck during Competition 2. Competition 2 is guaranteed to provide SpaceX and The Boring Company an inside glance at some of the best emerging engineering talent. Hosting the competition is quite possibly the most suave and effective method of recruitment one can readily imagine, with all promising teams generally being given private tours of both The Boring Company and SpaceX facilities.
I hope they and any others trying to advance transport technology succeed
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) August 27, 2017
Meanwhile, stay tuned for the two max speed pod tests to come later this afternoon. There is no live coverage from SpaceX itself, but SwissLoop has been kind enough to livestream several of the main events on their Facebook page. You can also follow a live Facebook stream here. Follow along live there and check back at Teslarati for coverage of the events!
Investor's Corner
Tesla has a Cybercab problem nobody saw coming
Tesla’s Cybercab line now builds robotaxis faster than Tesla can deploy them, Lars Moravy says.
Tesla’s Cybercab line in Texas can now build the two seat robotaxi faster than the company can put it into service, according to Lars Moravy, Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering. “We don’t run every day because the line can run so fast. It’s currently outpacing our deployments,” Moravy said in a new Cybercab deep dive from Munro Live. “So, it’s a bit of a race right now. Who’s going to go faster? Right now the manufacturing line’s ahead.”
Tesla’s official Robotaxi account shared a Cybercab analysis video on X on Monday, calling it a “Cybercab engineering deep dive.” Moravy’s comments go further than what he told analysts on the Q3 earnings call last week, when he said the Cybercab line’s listed capacity of more than 125,000 units a year undersells what it can actually run.
The tour shows where that speed comes from. Tesla’s unboxed process splits the Cybercab into front, rear, side and center modules that are built and tested on their own before they meet on a short final line. That final line has just 25 fully automated stations, which Tesla’s team estimated is a fifth to a tenth of what a Model Y needs. The full line is about 78% automated, the framing line is already at 100%, and the layout uses roughly 50% less floor space per vehicle. The stated goal is “100% automation in 10 second cycle time,” or one finished Cybercab every 10 seconds.
Tesla also deleted the paint shop. Only the side modules are coated, and the exterior panels get their color inside the molding machine. Engineers said the car is designed to run at least 500,000 miles, which matters for a vehicle that will spend most of its day carrying riders.
The battery got the same treatment. The Cybercab uses an 88S6P pack of 4680 cells in a steel enclosure, a first for Tesla, with each module potted separately so a single failed module can be swapped instead of the whole pack. Wireless battery management boards replace a wiring harness, and new contactors are fast enough to drop the pyro fuse entirely. Tesla’s battery director graded the pack an A minus, compared with a D for the Model Y structural pack and a B minus for Cybertruck. Up front, the drive unit runs an 11:1 gear ratio versus roughly 9:1 on most Teslas, since the Cybercab does not need a high top speed.
Cybercab engineering deep dive — Robotaxi (@robotaxi) October 26, 2026
The deployment side is now the bottleneck Moravy described. Tesla had more than 50 Cybercabs working the Formula 1 weekend in Austin, and Texas records show 463 Cybercabs registered. Tesla said on its earnings call that Cybercab service will launch in Dallas next month, and Moravy said the company is aiming to get Cybercabs to customers by the end of 2026. Every unit built so far has gone into Tesla’s own fleet since the line moved into volume production in April.
Munro Live also asked when it could get a Cybercab to tear down. Tesla’s answer: “Not yet.”
Elon Musk
How SpaceX Is raising Raptor’s sea-level thrust while holding engine mass steady
SpaceX’s Raptor engine family has steadily increased sea-level thrust while simultaneously reducing mass, turning iterative engineering gains into substantially higher performance for the Super Heavy booster. CEO Elon Musk shed more light on how powerful Raptor 4 will be, and it’s pretty crazy.
Raptor 1 delivered 185 metric tons of thrust at roughly 2,080 kilograms, while Raptor 2 raised that to 230 tons while cutting mass to about 1,630 kilograms. SpaceX data for Raptor 3 lists a target of 280 tons at 1,525 kilograms (with further reductions in associated vehicle hardware), while operational flight ratings have been cited near 250 tons.
This morning, Elon Musk stated that Raptor 4 is expected to reach 300 tons of sea-level thrust at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3. Across these versions, thrust has risen by more than 60 percent from the first engines while engine mass has fallen, producing a sharp improvement in thrust-to-weight ratio. This is a true testament to how great SpaceX engineering has been:
🚀 Elon says Raptor 4 will make 300 tons of thrust at sea level at roughly the same mass as Raptor 3.
How far Raptor has come:
Raptor 1: 185 tf, 2,080 kg
Raptor 2: 230 tf, 1,630 kg
Raptor 3: 250 tf, 1,525 kg
Raptor 4: 300 tf33 on Super Heavy = ~9,900 tf, nearly 3x Saturn V https://t.co/HQDswZhyvL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
With 33 engines on SuperHeavy, the jump from earlier versions to a 300-ton Raptor 4 would produce roughly 9,900 metric tons of total liftoff thrust, nearly three times the Saturn V’s approximately 3,400 metric tons from its five F-1 engines.
This is not just a larger number on a data sheet, either, as sea-level thrust is the force available the moment the vehicle leaves the pad. This is when it is heaviest and still deep in Earth’s gravity well and dense atmosphere.
Higher levels of sea-level thrust directly improves the initial thrust-to-weight ratio of the full stack. A higher ratio produces faster acceleration off the pad, which shortens the time the rocket has to spend fighting gravity, and gravity losses during the first minute or two of the flight are a major drain on total available delta-v. Every second shaved off of that early climb preserves more propellant energy for reaching orbital velocity or for carrying extra payload.
Because Super Heavy’s engine count is constrained by vehicle diameter and packing density, increasing thrust per engine is the most straightforward way to raise total liftoff performance without redesigning the booster structure or design.
The same-mass target for Raptor 4 is equally important. Holding engine mass roughly constant while raising thrust improves the engine’s own thrust-to-weight ratio and reduces the structural and propellant mass fraction that must be carried solely to support the engines.
Earlier Raptor iterations also simplified or eliminated extensive vehicle-side hardware such as heat shields. These gains compound: more force for less installed mass leaves additional capacity for propellant, payload, or operational margins such as engine-out capability.
For Starship’s architecture, the practical effects are large. Greater liftoff thrust supports heavier vehicles, larger propellant loads, and higher payloads to low Earth orbit, figures SpaceX has targeted in the 100-plus-ton reusable range. That capacity underpins orbital refueling, lunar missions, and eventual Mars cargo and crew flights.
Continued growth in sea-level thrust therefore tightens the gap between theoretical rocket performance and the high flight rates and reusability needed to make large-scale space transport practical.
News
Tesla Assisted Driving expands to tenth EU country
Tesla has expanded its Tesla Assisted Driving (TAD) suite to its tenth European country, as Latvia joined a growing list of European Union member states authorizing the company’s advanced driver assistance technology.
Tesla Europe announced this morning that the system is now approved in Latvia, with a software rollout to begin soon.
The approval and rollout follow recognition of a provisional European type approval originally granted by the Netherlands’ RDW authority on April 10.
🚨 Latvia has just received approval for Tesla Full Self-Driving (Supervised)
This is the 10th country in the EU to gain approval:
1. Netherlands — 10 April 2026 (original RDW approval)
2. Lithuania — 20 May 2026
3. Estonia — 29 May 2026
4. Denmark — 9 June 2026
5. Belgium — 10 June 2026
6. Slovenia — 7 September 2026
7. Czechia — 21 September 2026
8. Croatia — 29 September 2026
9. Slovakia — 16 October 2026— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) October 26, 2026
Latvia’s Road Traffic Safety Directorate (CSDD) evaluated the Dutch documentation, coordinated with the other national authorities, and reviewed updates from Tesla. These included tightened limits on speed offsets, automatic resets of any manual speed adjustments after each trip, and stronger driver monitoring.
In Europe, the feature is marketed as Tesla Assisted Driving after a recent rule change that labeled the name “Full Self-Driving” as misleading.
The system remains an SAE Level 2 driver assistance tool, not unsupervised autonomy. It can control speed, steering, braking, lane changes, and intersections while following a navigation route. Drivers need not keep their hands on the wheel at all times, yet they must continuously monitor the road and be prepared to intervene immediately.
The sequence of EU recognitions began with the Netherlands in April and continued through Lithuania, Estonia, Denmark, Belgium, Slovenia, Czechia, Croatia, and Slovakia. Most have relied on mutual recognition of the single Dutch provisional approval rather than independent national testing.
These national clearances do not yet constitute bloc-wide authorization. An EU-wide decision requires a qualified majority in the Technical Committee on Motor Vehicles: at least 15 of 27 member states representing 65 percent of the EU population. Larger markets, like Germany, France, and Italy, remain under review, and a vote is expected this December.
However, for Latvian Tesla owners with compatible vehicles and software, the imminent rollout expands access to the supervised system while underscoring that attentive human oversight remains essential.