News
SpaceX stacks Starship nose section for the first time in months
SpaceX has stacked a Starship nosecone section to its full height for the first time in almost a year, featuring an upgraded design that could soon support an ambitious series of flight tests.
Back in August 2019, SpaceX first began stacking the nose section of Starship Mk1 – the first full-scale prototype of any kind. It became clear a few months later that Starship Mk1 was more of a rough proof of concept than a full-fidelity test article, but it still became the first (and only, so far) Starship to reach its full ~50m (~160 ft) height. After serving as a centerpiece during CEO Elon Musk’s September 2019 Starship presentation, SpaceX removed the nose and attempted to test the Mk1 tank section itself, ultimately destroying the ship.
Now eight months distant from Mk1’s demise, SpaceX’s Starship R&D program has entered the prototype mass-production phase. Since January 2020, SpaceX has built five upgraded Starship tank sections (and tested three to destruction), built and tested four stout test tanks, and completed at least 4-5 new nosecone prototypes. For the first time since nosecone production began several months ago, one of the noses has finally been stacked to its full height atop five steel rings.

At the moment, SpaceX is hard at work preparing Starship SN5 for its first wet dress rehearsals (WDRs) with methane and oxygen propellant and either one or several Raptor engine static fire tests. If successful, SpaceX will quickly move to flight test preparations, readying SN5 for a nominal ~150m (~500 ft) hop, though the company is technically no longer restricted to that ceiling. For such a low-altitude test, aerodynamic features like a nosecone or flaps serve no functional purpose, meaning that SN5 is unlikely to ever receive those additions.


Roughly two miles west of the coastal launch and test site SN5 is stationed at, SpaceX has already more or less finished Starship SN6, although the newest ship’s fate is unclear. Pictured above on July 10th, the task of stacking an even newer ship (likely SN8) may already be underway. Last month, SpaceX tested a new ‘test tank’ built out of a different steel alloy said by CEO Elon Musk to be theoretically superior. Two cryogenic pressure tests seemingly confirmed that suspicion, proving that 304L stainless steel fails more gracefully than 301 while still offering similar strength at the pressures Starships operate at. The SN7 test tank was built and tested around the same time as SpaceX was finishing up SN6, implying that the ship was almost certainly built out of 301 steel.
If 304L really is the way forward for future Starship prototypes, the next step will be building an entire ship out of the steel alloy and performing a full cryogenic proof test and wet dress rehearsal. Given that SN5 and SN6 are likely identical (or nearly so), SN6 may have been made redundant before the ship even left the factory floor.

This is all to say that it’s a bit of a mystery where the first upgraded nosecone will find itself in the coming weeks. Like SN6 or SN7, it could either be redundant on arrival, built as practice, or both. It could also be the first nosecone installed on a flightworthy Starship prototype. It’s unlikely but not impossible that SN5 survives its static fires and first hops and is modified to support three Raptors and aerodynamic control surfaces, while SN8 and SN9 are more probable candidates for the first high-altitude, high-velocity test flight(s). SpaceX has at least 3-5 more Starship nosecones strewn about its Boca Chica factory, though, so odds are good that the first new nose section to reach full height won’t be the first to take flight.
For now, Starship SN5 (sans nose) is scheduled to attempt its first wet dress rehearsal (WDR) no earlier than July 16th. If successful, a static fire could follow a few days after that and a hop test another few days later.
Check out Teslarati’s Marketplace! We offer Tesla accessories, including for the Tesla Cybertruck and Tesla Model 3.
News
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
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.
