News
Tesla and EVs didn’t brake for the pandemic, and now the age of oil is ending
During the first nine months of 2020, car sales cratered, with every major automaker seeing a steep drop in sales as the pandemic raged across the globe. That is, of course, every major automaker except Tesla. Despite the world practically stopping due to the pandemic, the Silicon Valley-based electric car maker sold more cars than ever before. Tesla even maintained its momentum from the previous year by posting five profitable quarters in a row, and it’s poised to end 2020 with an inclusion into the S&P 500 index.
A Make or Break Year, and EVs Made It
What’s quite interesting is that it was not only Tesla that saw some serious momentum this year. Even as sales of internal combustion vehicles collapsed, EVs in general managed to thrive. A good example of this could be seen in Daimler and Volkswagen’s electric car sales in 2020. Both companies saw record-setting declines in their ICE divisions, but both companies also saw their EV sales this year doubling. This, if any, further highlighted that there is a growing demand for electric cars.
Even more impressive was the fact that 2020 was a year when the electric vehicle movement could have been crushed once more. The year saw the launch of some of the most important EVs for their respective companies. In Tesla’s case, this was the Model Y, a vehicle that Elon Musk expects would outsell the Model S, Model 3, and Model X combined. Volkswagen also launched the ID.3, a car that, if successful, could very well be the second coming of the ubiquitous Beetle. Failure on the Model Y and the ID.3’s part could have resulted in the EV movement getting set back again. That did not happen.
Peak Oil
To state that 2020 was challenging would be a gross understatement. Amidst lockdowns in several countries, the world changed. Air travel all but stopped and working from home became the norm. Then in September, British oil firm BP Plc announced something remarkable: peak oil may have very well happened, and the demand for oil may never return to its prior levels. Granted, oil prices rose in November as vaccine trials continued and demand recovered somewhat in Asia. But even as the world approached a return to some form normalcy, it was evident that things would no longer be the same.
US Federal Reserve Chairman Jerome Powell echoed this sentiment last month. “We’re not going back to the same economy. We’re recovering, but to a different economy,” he said. Powell has a valid point. In the post-pandemic world, more people will likely continue to work from home. A good number of people will likely travel less as well. BP’s estimates noted that about 2/3 of the pandemic’s impact on oil demand will be from adverse effects on the global economy, and 1/3 will be due to permanent changes in human behavior. This behavior, it seems, includes a shift to electric cars.
A Point of No Return for the Internal Combustion Engine
The transportation sector accounts for a large part of the world’s oil consumption. Bloomberg notes that over half of the world’s crude is used by the transportation sector, and 3/4 of that amount is taken up by wheels on the road. With car buyers going for sustainable vehicles during a pandemic, and with sales of ICE cars dropping steeply, it is starting to seem like the transportation sector’s demand for oil is only bound to get less in the coming years. With this drop in demand comes the end of the internal combustion engine.
-->
Signs of the ICE extinction actually started becoming notable before the pandemic hit. As early as 2018, EVs started bucking the trend in auto sales, resulting in some analysts speculating if sales of gas and diesel-powered vehicles will no longer return to levels seen in years prior. The idea of “peak oil” happening seemed farfetched then, but amidst the pandemic and the collapse of ICE sales, the end of the oil age is looking very plausible.
Batteries and a Path to ICE Extinction
The electric car age will be powered by batteries. It is then fortunate that batteries are a technology, not a consumable fuel. This means that as battery production reaches higher levels, battery prices are bound to get lower. Data tracked by BloombergNEF revealed that every time battery supplies doubled worldwide, the cost of batteries declined by about 18%. And considering that companies like Tesla are actively pursuing plans to produce batteries at unprecedented volumes, there is a good chance that battery prices will decline to such a degree that electric cars may reach price parity with gas and diesel-powered cars sooner than expected.
Price parity will likely be the final nail in the ICE coffin. Cost, after all, is the one area where the internal combustion engine still has an edge against EVs. Once this edge is taken away, and once rapid chargers become as ubiquitous as gas stations, there will quite literally be no more reason left to own a vehicle equipped with an internal combustion engine.
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
