News
SpaceX Dragon spacecraft returns to California port for the last time
SpaceX has returned one of its reusable Dragon spacecraft to the Port of Los Angeles for the last time, wrapping up almost a decade of West Coast recovery operations as the company prepares to move East.
Marking the fully successful completion of Cargo Dragon’s CRS-20 space station resupply mission for NASA, the spacecraft’s arrival in port aboard recovery vessel NRC Quest is SpaceX’s 21st since December 2010. CRS-20 was the original Cargo Dragon spacecraft’s very last mission, meaning that the historic vehicle will have effectively entered retirement once SpaceX has finished capsule C112’s post-flight processing. More likely than not, it and its siblings may soon find themselves displayed in SpaceX facilities and aerospace museums across the US, a fitting end for an orbital spacecraft that effectively launched SpaceX onto the world’s spaceflight stage.
Cargo Dragon is by no means the last of its kind, however. SpaceX has already launched Crew Dragon – also known as Dragon 2 – on a flawless March 2019 orbital debut. An uncrewed variant of the same upgraded spacecraft will soon replace Cargo Dragon for uncrewed space station resupply missions under a second NASA Commercial Resupply Services contract (CRS2). For a variety of reasons, SpaceX has decided to move all Dragon 2 recovery operations to its Port Canaveral, Florida hub, now also the sole home of Falcon booster drone ship recoveries and payload fairing catch attempts. This means that April 9th’s Cargo Dragon homecoming is the last time a SpaceX spacecraft will return to the West Coast — a bittersweet end of an era.
Upon its safe return to shore, Cargo Dragon C112 is now the third Dragon spacecraft to successfully complete three separate orbital resupply missions, as well as the ninth Dragon reuse overall. While the recovered spacecraft may look like a very well-toasted marshmallow, all that visible wear and tear comes from a single orbital-velocity reentry, as SpaceX extensively refurbishes each Dragon before they are reused.
Before Cargo Dragon C112 lifted off on a Falcon 9 rocket for the third time on March 7th, it looked about as pristine as it did the first time it departed SpaceX’s Hawthorne, California factory in 2016. Aside from a duo of International Space Station badges added to the spacecraft’s exterior, it is functionally and visually identical, although parts of the capsule – like landing parachutes and its ablative heat shield – must be replaced after each mission.
Still, despite having to clean and resurface the spacecraft’s white thermal protection, replace heat shields, fabricate new disposable trunk sections, and much more for every launch, SpaceX CEO Elon Musk has stated that even the first Dragon reuse (likely the most expensive) was at least 50% cheaper than building a new spacecraft. Additionally, SpaceX clearly began to find its stride on Dragon capsule C112’s CRS-20 refurbishment, completing the process with record-breaking speed.
As previously discussed on Teslarati, “measured from splashdown to the capsule’s shipment to the launch pad, SpaceX may have spent less than a year refurbishing Cargo Dragon C112, potentially more than a 50% faster than all prior Dragon refurbishment operations.” Cargo Dragon’s Dragon 2 replacement is expected to be far easier to refurbish, while also potentially allowing for up to five orbital missions per spacecraft, while Dragon 1’s design was capped at three missions.
-->
CRS-21 – SpaceX’s first NASA CRS2 mission and the first planned Cargo Dragon 2 launch – is scheduled for no earlier than (NET) October 2020. Meanwhile, Crew Dragon’s “Demo-2” astronaut debut is set to launch as early as late May. If successful, NASA says Crew Dragon’s first operational astronaut launch could happen as early as a month or two after splashdown (~Q4 2020).
After completing their orbital duties, all of those upgraded Dragon spacecraft are scheduled to reenter and splash down in the Atlantic Ocean, where they will be brought back to Cape Canaveral for processing and refurbishment. In the event that weather in the Atlantic Ocean is unacceptable for recovery operations, SpaceX has developed a backup recovery zone in the Gulf of Mexico. In short, it’s possible that Cargo Dragon’s April 7th Port of Los Angeles return will be the last time ever that the US West Coast supports orbital spacecraft recovery operations.
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
