News
Tesla’s 400-mile Model S is a subtle update, but it’s a chilling reminder to rival carmakers
There is a particularly interesting trend happening in the electric vehicle sector. While it is undeniable that Tesla is leading the industry’s shift to EVs, veteran carmakers are prone to claim that they have or are developing technology that is at par or superior to the electric car maker’s innovations. The Tesla Model S’ 402-mile EPA rating subtly sends a message that this is not necessarily the case.
For some time now, there has been a lot of talk surrounding Tesla and its upcoming Battery Day event. The company has been pretty thin on the specifics of the event, but speculations are abounding that discussions will be held surrounding the company’s next-generation batteries. Tesla has not formally hinted at the details of these batteries, though all signs point to cells that would be able to last a million miles. Discussions about other innovations such as cobalt-free cells for China-made Model 3s are also expected to be held at the event.
Similar to how vehicles like the Porsche Taycan and the Audi e-tron were dubbed as “Tesla Killers” in previous years, veteran automakers such as GM appear to be keen on establishing the idea that it is not being left behind in the EV race. Just last month, for example, GM Executive Vice President Doug Parks stated that the automaker’s own “million-mile” battery is “almost there.” Parks stated that there are multiple teams within GM that are working on zero cobalt batteries as well.
Such statements from GM only validate Tesla’s points about electric vehicles. The fact that the veteran automaker’s battery plans seem to be inspired, at least in some way, by the younger EV maker means that the auto industry has now reached a point where electric powered transportation is a given. That being said, there is very little doubt that the Model S’ updated EPA ratings, which show that the 100 kWh flagship sedan could go 402 miles on a single charge, is likely sending some chills down the spine of Tesla’s rivals.
As noted by Tesla CEO Elon Musk, every Model S that has been produced since January has been equipped with a 402 mile range. This feat, as stated by the company in an announcement on its official website, was accomplished through a variety of means, including significant mass reduction, new aero wheels that optimize efficiency, increased drive unit efficiencies, and optimized regenerative braking.
What this means is that Tesla was able to draw out 400 miles of EPA range from a 100 kWh battery pack using its current battery technology. The 400-mile Model S today is just a hyper-optimized version of the Raven series that came out last year. Unless Tesla states otherwise on Battery Day, it appears that the current generation Raven Model S is not yet equipped with the company’s next-generation million-mile batteries.
It should be noted that other companies have pledged to release vehicles with a range of 400 miles as well. Electric pickup maker Rivian’s flagship R1T pickup truck goes 400 miles too, but that vehicle is equipped with a 180 kWh battery pack. The GMC Hummer EV, widely speculated to be a legitimate competitor to the Tesla Cybertruck, is also poised to be released with a 400-mile range. But just like the Rivian R1T, there’s a good chance that its battery pack will be substantially bigger than the 100 kWh pack used in Tesla’s flagship sedan.
Of course, it would be easy to argue that larger vehicles like the Rivian R1T and the GMC Hummer EV would obviously need more batteries due to their size, but it should be noted that Tesla’s Cybertruck, which will likely have a battery that’s far larger than the Model S’ 100 kWh pack, has some impressive range as well. During its unveiling, Elon Musk noted that the all-electric pickup’s tri-motor variant will have over 500 miles of range. The specifics of the Cybertruck’s battery have not been disclosed by Tesla yet, though it is almost certain that it will be utilizing the company’s million mile battery cells.
So what does this mean for the Model S? With a million-mile battery and a 100 kWh pack, the flagship sedan’s succeeding generations will most likely achieve a range estimate that’s even more impressive than its current 402-mile EPA rating. And this, ultimately, is something that will be very hard to meet or compete with, especially among veteran automakers that have not dedicated the same amount of time and effort into developing battery technology from the ground up.
Investor's Corner
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.
Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.
The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.
What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.
Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry
By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.
TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.
Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.
The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.
News
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
