Investor's Corner
Auto experts reveal why Tesla’s batteries hold a comfortable lead in range
One of the reasons why the narrative of the “Tesla Killer” has effectively died is due to the pervading lead that Tesla holds over the competition in terms of range. Amidst the long-predicted entrance of competing vehicles from established automakers including Audi, Jaguar, and Porsche, Tesla’s vehicles have proven to be vastly superior in range, as evidenced by the Model S Long Range, which can last 370 miles in between charges.
Take Tesla’s very first car, the original Tesla Roadster. The vehicle featured Tesla’s efforts at creating a desirable all-electric sports car, and it showed in the Roadster’s robust 245-mile range. There weren’t even Superchargers when the Roadster was released, but the car proved that EVs could comfortably go beyond the 200-mile mark, and then some more. Interestingly, even modern EVs from veteran carmakers are finding it hard to match the Roadster’s 245-mile EPA range. The Audi e-tron, for example, just has 204 miles of range per charge, while the award-winning I-PACE has an EPA rating of 234 miles per charge.
This, according to veteran auto experts Sandy Munro and Mark Ellis of Munro & Associates, has a lot to do with Tesla’s all-electric platform and the company’s proprietary battery tech. Tesla is only 16 years old, and thus, it only has a fraction of the experience that its rivals in the auto market has. Yet in the EV segment, Tesla is among the veterans, having worked solely on electric cars since Day One.
All-Electric
As such, vehicles that Tesla releases such as the Model S, Model X, and Model 3, are designed as EVs from the get-go. In contrast, carmakers such as Mercedes-Benz and Audi opted to convert existing platforms for EV production. This reduces costs, but it is a double-edged strategy in the EV segment, which is starting to gain serious ground in several key markets. “If you’re designing something radically different, or if you want to have something that’s going to be a world-beater in the marketplace, that parts bin is the worst thing imaginable,” Munro said.
This could be seen in the difference between the Porsche Taycan and a vehicle such as the Mercedes-Benz EQC. Porsche opted to design the Taycan from a clean sheet, and the result was an all-electric sports car that can attack the track just as aggressively as the next 911. It even has a frunk like a Tesla, albeit smaller. Mercedes, on the other hand, opted to base the EQC on its existing GLC platform, and the result is an EV that still has echoes of its internal combustion roots. Between the two vehicles, it is easy to see which carmaker put more effort, and it shows. Today, it appears that the non-Tesla EV community is far more excited about the Taycan than they are for the EQC.
Mark Ellis, a senior master of lean design and battery consultant, notes that this is a key advantage that is inherent in Tesla. “One of Elon Musk’s big advantages is, basically, that the vehicle is designed to be an electric car. Musk designed every aspect of this car to be as efficient as possible,” he said.
The Secret Sauce
Apart from their all-electric design, Tesla’s secret sauce for its vehicles lies in their batteries, from the design of the pack to the chemistry of the cells themselves. Comparing the Model 3’s battery pack to those found in other EVs such as the Chevrolet Bolt EV, Nissan Leaf, Jaguar I-PACE, and BMW i3, Ellis stated that Tesla’s battery pack is superior, especially with regards to the placement of battery cells in relation to the current collectors. “It’s the best design of any battery pack I’ve seen so far,” he said.
But this is not all. Ellis added that Tesla’s cylindrical cells have inherent advantages compared to the prismatic or pouch cells used by the competition. Prismatic cells, for one, expand and contract as they charge and discharge, which means that manufacturers using them have to design their battery packs with the necessary parts to handle the expansion and contraction process of the cells. These add unnecessary weight to a battery, which Tesla’s packs don’t have to deal with.
Ultimately, Ellis explained that Tesla’s battery cells simply have a higher energy density than those utilized by its competition. Tesla was able to achieve this because its batteries have superior chemistry, the consultant said. Part of the reason behind this is the fact that Tesla as a company does not really stop innovating. Tesla’s Automotive President Jerome Guillen hinted at this in a previous interview, when he said that the company’s batteries are never frozen since they are always in a state of improvement. “We are improving the design of the cell. The design of the cell is not frozen. It evolves, and we have a nice roadmap of technology improvements for the coming years,” Guillen said.
Range is something that is one of the most important factors consumers consider when purchasing an electric car. With the number of EV charging stations not yet on par with the number of gas stations on the road, it is pertinent for customers for many car buyers to acquire a vehicle that can go the distance. Tesla’s long-range vehicles, together with the company’s Supercharger Network, are a perfect fit for these types of customers.
In a pointed message on X, Elon Musk warned that firms maintaining significant short positions in SpaceX over time face “very low” survival probability.
The statement comes amid post-IPO volatility for the rocket company, now trading under the ticker $SPCX.
The survival probability of firms who maintain a significant short position in SpaceX over time is very low
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 17, 2026
Five weeks after what was described as the largest IPO in history, the stock had fallen roughly 30% from its peak above $2.6 trillion, briefly surpassing Microsoft and Amazon in market value. Short sellers celebrated gains of about $8.7 billion, but Musk’s reply underscores his long-term conviction.
The warning directly echoes a detailed bullish analysis arguing that Starship’s cost reductions could unlock a multi-trillion-dollar space economy. Projects ranging from solar power beamed from orbit and asteroid mining to orbital data centers and Mars terraforming were projected to create over $100 trillion in new market capitalization.
In this vision, SpaceX acts as the essential infrastructure provider, akin to AWS for cloud computing, capturing monopoly-like revenues from launches, crew transport, and data traffic across a rapidly expanding frontier.
This is far from the first time Musk has targeted short sellers. With Tesla, he has repeatedly framed persistent bears as destined for major losses. In July 2024, Musk declared that once Tesla achieves full autonomy and volume production of Optimus robots, “anyone still holding a short position will be obliterated. Even Gates,” referencing Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates’ reported short bets.
Elon Musk reveals what Tesla stock surge could do to Bill Gates
Earlier, in 2018, he taunted shorts that they had “about three weeks before their short position explodes,” a remark followed by sharp stock gains. Musk has also called short selling “value destroying” and once suggested it “should be illegal,” viewing it as betting against innovation and progress.
Critics often dismiss Musk’s optimism as hype, especially when near-term metrics like quarterly deliveries or stock fluctuations disappoint.
Yet his pattern remains consistent: framing short positions against his companies as fundamentally misjudging exponential technological leaps. For SpaceX shorts, the message is clear: betting against multi-planetary ambitions and the infrastructure monopoly they enable carries existential risk for the firms involved.
As Musk and supporters see it, the space economy’s upside dwarfs Earth-bound valuation models, making today’s dips temporary in a decades-long ascent.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
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 reveals 2026 Summer Update with crazy fixes to Nav and more
Tesla’s reason for Starlink integration on Cybercab might surprise you
