Connect with us

News

Tesla is looking to build on-site housing for Gigafactory 1 employees, says Elon Musk

Credit: Tesla

Published

on

At some point in the future, some employees working at Tesla’s Gigafactory 1 in Nevada would be able to simply walk or bike to their homes after a shift at the massive facility. Tesla is looking to expand Gigafactory 1, with Elon Musk recently stating during a conversation with NV Gov. Brian Sandoval that he envisions the company to hire more than 20,000 people for the factory. To help house this upcoming influx of workers, Musk noted that Tesla is looking to create an on-site housing compound in Gigafactory 1’s premises.

Tesla’s NV Gigafactory is less than 30% complete, but it already employs roughly 7,000 people. During a technology and innovation summit held at the factory on Tuesday, Elon Musk stated that in order for Gigafactory 1 to hit its target number of employees, the area needs to offer more infrastructure, such as schools, buildings, roads, and affordable housing. As a way to address the need for more housing units for Gigafactory 1’s future workers, Musk noted that Tesla is considering a project that involves building a housing compound for its employees.

“The biggest constraint on growth here is housing and infrastructure. We’re looking at creating a housing compound on site at the Gigafactory, using kind of high-quality mobile homes,” Musk stated.

Nevada’s real estate market was affected by the arrival of Gigafactory 1. The state of Nevada took a blow during the housing crash and recession, and by 2010, the state had a 14% unemployment rate, with more than 175,000 Nevada residents being unemployed. When Brian Sandoval became governor after winning the 2010 race, Nevada was ranked as one of the worst states in terms of bankruptcies and home foreclosures. To push the state’s recovery, Sandoval worked to attract tech companies to set up shop in the state. One of these companies was Tesla, which chose Nevada as the site for its Gigafactory 1.

Gigafactory 1 is located about 25 miles east of Reno, NV. For now, many of the facility’s employees live in Reno, as well as several surrounding cities linked to the battery factory via I-80 and the newly-completed Hwy 50, such as Carson City, Fernley, and Sparks. Real-estate prices in areas around Gigafactory 1 have risen over the past years. In Reno alone, the average monthly rent is now $1,318 per month, a 58% increase over rental rates six years ago. In the Reno/Sparks area, median home prices recently hit an all-time high, reaching $389,000 in July. Considering Musk’s new guidance, Gigafactory 1’s employees would almost triple once the facility is complete. Thus, there is definitely a need for practical, affordable housing around the facility.

Advertisement
-->

It remains to be seen what type of housing Tesla would introduce for Gigafactory 1’s employees. That said, the housing initiative does go in line with some ideas that Elon Musk recently expressed. During his now-infamous podcast with Joe Rogan, for one, Musk teased the concept of a smart home with a more efficient air conditioning system. Musk’s side venture, The Boring Company, has also developed the Boring Bricks, which are designed as a cost-effective way to construct homes. Considering Elon Musk’s penchant for the creative, there is a good chance that Tesla’s on-site housing compound at Gigafactory 1 might feature some notable elements as well.

The concept of the mill towns, or settlements that are built around factories, have been around since the late 1800’s. In recent years, some of Silicon Valley’s most prominent companies have explored a rather similar concept. Last year, for example, Google and Facebook issued a proposal to build self-contained towns near their respective headquarters. These towns would feature amenities such as their own grocery stores, shops, cafes, movie theaters, gyms, and hundreds of apartments that can accommodate the companies’ expanding employee base. If Elon Musk’s words would prove to be true, it might only be a matter of time before a sort of “Tesla town” emerges just outside of Reno, Nevada.

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

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.

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.

Advertisement
-->

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:

Advertisement
-->

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.

Advertisement
-->
Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

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.

Advertisement
-->

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.

Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

Credit: Grok Imagine

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.

Advertisement
-->

“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.

Continue Reading