News
SpaceX ships Raptor to Texas for first Starhopper hover tests after fixing vibration bugs
After a brisk week of no fewer than three lengthy static fire tests, SpaceX has effectively confirmed that a critical vibration-related fault was solved, delivering the company’s latest completed Raptor engine to Boca Chica, Texas earlier today.
SpaceX technicians are now in the process of installing the engine – believed to be Raptor SN06 – on Starhopper, a low-fidelity prototype meant to act as a sort of flying testbed for Starship technologies and a mobile test stand for Raptor test fires. According to SpaceX CEO Elon Musk, if Raptor SN06 is installed, successfully checks out, and supports Starhopper’s first untethered hover test within the next 3-7 days, he will deliver an updated presentation on SpaceX’s Starhip/Super Heavy launch vehicle and (hopefully) the company’s plans for the Moon and Mars around the end of July.
This Raptor is the third to be installed on Starhopper. The first engine (SN02) was installed in March 2019 and became the first Raptor to ignite as part of a vehicle meant to eventually fly. During a duo of more or less successful test fires, Starhopper strained against its tethers, lifting a few inches off the ground. Although it did technically mark Starhopper’s inaugural hop, Raptor SN02 also suffered damage during the tests that demanded its removal.
As recently noted by observant fans after Musk revealed that SpaceX had been dealing with a “600 Hz” vibration issue, the horn-like noise during shutdown actually happens to be in the 600 Hz range, with an additional spike at 300 Hz a likely sign of an issue with acoustic and/or mechanical resonance. With SN06, SpaceX engineers and test/production technicians have managed to rapidly implement a fix for that undesirable resonance, powering through several successful static fires with durations as high as 80+ seconds, approaching the propellant storage limits of SpaceX’s McGregor test facilities.
Raptor SN04?
Shortly after its static fire tests in Boca Chica, Raptor SN02 was removed. According to a source familiar with the test process, the engine was brought up to McGregor, TX and repaired before SpaceX technicians – urged by CEO Elon Musk – effectively ran the engine until it failed catastrophically. Some two months after its removal (early June), a new Raptor engine – this time believed to be Raptor SN04, effectively an inert test article – was installed on Starhopper for a handful of days.
SN04 was exclusively used to check fitment and verify Raptor’s thrust vector control (TVC) gumball capabilities – quite successfully, by all appearances. A few days after installation, it was removed and shipped elsewhere. Subsequently, Raptor SN05 was tested in McGregor with the hopes that it would be able to support the first Starhopper hover tests, but the vibration issue described by Musk caused damage or at least killed confidence that the engine (a single point of failure on Starhopper) was reliable enough to support hover tests.
Raptor SN06 thus entered our story, arriving at McGregor around July 4th. SpaceX’s world-class team of engineers and technicians demonstrated their famous speed and agility, firing up SN06 less than 24 hours after its arrival. This initial test showed nothing out of order and was followed by no less than 3-4 30-80-second static fire tests, all of which were more or less successful. Per Musk, things were looking good as of July 8th, and Raptor’s July 11th arrival at Boca Chica is a foolproof confirmation that the engine is healthy and ready for the Raptor family’s first true flight.
Stay tuned for coverage of SpaceX’s imminent Starhopper static fire and hover test campaign.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
