News
Tesla can solve an annoying part of its cars’ ownership experience with Maxwell’s supercapacitors
When Tesla acquired Maxwell technologies, the electric vehicle community was appropriately excited. Maxwell, after all, works on projects such as dry battery electrode tech and supercapacitors, both of which are believed to hold a lot of potential in the emerging electric vehicle sector. But as the countdown to the highly-anticipated Battery Day draws near, speculations suggest that Tesla acquired Maxwell mainly due to the company’s dry battery electrode tech, not its supercapacitors. Yet according to Andrey Shigaev, CEO of Geyser Batteries, supercapacitors still hold some potential uses for Tesla’s electric cars.
In a brief interview with Teslarati, Shigaev, whose company is developing batteries that use aqueous (water-based) electrolytes, noted that while supercapacitors will likely not be involved in Tesla’s million-mile battery project, there are already a lot of local tasks in an electric vehicle that could benefit from the use of supercapacitors. Among these is smart air suspension, a feature that is currently used in the Model S and X and is expected for upcoming vehicles like the Cybertruck. But beyond this, the Geyser Batteries CEO mentioned that supercapacitors could also be utilized as a superior alternative to the 12V battery that Tesla uses for its vehicles today.
“The more stuff gets electrified, the more power you need to perform tasks. The most classical thing (that could benefit from supercapacitors) and the number one item for Tesla is the 12V battery. Supercapacitors can handle this task. If you have a high energy battery onboard, then this secondary circuit could be powered by a supercapacitor that is very efficient. It will even have an extremely long life cycle. Supercapacitors are lighter too, saving weight. And they tend to be smaller than a lead-acid battery,” Shigaev said.
Interestingly enough, the earliest versions of the original Tesla Roadster didn’t use a 12V battery. Instead, the company used a portion of the Roadster’s main lithium-ion battery pack to supply 12V for the vehicles’ accessories and lights. This did not prove ideal, however, and in 2010, Tesla switched to using a 12V battery for the Roadster 2.0. It should be noted that the 12V battery, which has been adopted in every vehicle since the Roadster 2.0, is used to keep systems such as emergency blinkers, airbags, seatbelt pre-tensioners, the MCU, and other functions operational even when a car’s main battery pack is compromised.
Being one of the few parts of the car that is still based on conventional automotive tech, the 12V battery in a Tesla tends to last only a few years. As noted by Tesla Tap, the 12V battery in a brand new Tesla could last about 3-4 years, but this could be reduced to as little as 1-2 years if the vehicle is driven frequently. This could cause annoyances among Tesla owners, especially since the 12V battery’s health could not be actively observed in the vehicle’s systems yet. Social media posts about 12V batteries in Teslas giving out are numerous, with some owners noting that it is the one aspect of the Tesla ownership experience that is still mildly infuriating.
With this in mind, the use of supercapacitors in place of the 12V battery could be pretty in-character for Tesla. Nevertheless, the Geyser CEO explained that using supercapacitors in place of the 12V battery would present some challenges as well. Among these is cost, since supercapacitors are notably more expensive than standard 12V lead-acid batteries. Yet despite this, the advantages they bring could justify their use, especially among flagship vehicles like the next-generation Roadster and the Plaid Model S and Model X.
“Supercapacitors have a main caveat. There are three drawbacks. First and foremost is energy density, which is ten times lower than lead-acid battery. Second is their price since currently, their price is astronomically larger. The third is discharge. If you leave it alone for almost one month, it would discharge completely. However, if you have an electric car and there’s a high energy battery in the car like a lithium-ion battery, that would be the power source for the vehicle,” Shigaev noted.
Other industry experts have suggested uses for Maxwell’s supercapacitors in Tesla’s electric cars in the past. Auto veteran and Munro & Associates Sr. Associate Mark Ellis previously noted that apart from dry electrode tech, Tesla could tap into Maxwell’s supercapacitors to improve its vehicles’ battery management systems.
“One of the issues with the battery is, when I step on the throttle hard, I’m pulling a lot of energy from the battery. And then, when I brake hard, I’m pulling a lot of energy out of the regen, but the batteries can’t take it fast enough. The batteries get really stressed when you try to pull it up too much, so if I had supercapacitors that I could use as a cushion; so when I need energy quickly, (I can) pull it from the supercapacitors and then fill the supercapacitors back up with the battery slowly; and then when I brake, I can capture more of that regen energy and do the supercapacitors faster. I think that just makes logical sense, because now all of a sudden I’ve got a sponge in front of my main energy source and I’m not stressing (the battery) so much,” Ellis said.
News
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions appeared to be dead in the water after a large amount of speculation late last year that the company would add the user interface seemed to cool down after several weeks of reports.
However, it appears that CarPlay might make its way to Tesla vehicles after all, as a recent report seems to indicate that it is still being worked on by software teams for the company.
The real question is whether it is truly needed or if it is just a want by so many owners that Tesla is listening and deciding to proceed with its development.
Back in November, Bloomberg reported that Tesla was in the process of testing Apple CarPlay within its vehicles, which was a major development considering the company had resisted adopting UIs outside of its own for many years.
Nearly one-third of car buyers considered the lack of CarPlay as a deal-breaker when buying their cars, a study from McKinsey & Co. outlined. This could be a driving decision in Tesla’s inability to abandon the development of CarPlay in its vehicles, especially as it lost a major advantage that appealed to consumers last year: the $7,500 EV tax credit.
Tesla owners propose interesting theory about Apple CarPlay and EV tax credit
Although we saw little to no movement on it since the November speculation, Tesla is now reportedly in the process of still developing the user interface. Mark Gurman, a Bloomberg writer with a weekly newsletter, stated that CarPlay is “still in the works” at Tesla and that more concrete information will be available “soon” regarding its development.
While Tesla already has a very capable and widely accepted user interface, CarPlay would still be an advantage, considering many people have used it in their vehicles for years. Just like smartphones, many people get comfortable with an operating system or style and are resistant to using a new one. This could be a big reason for Tesla attempting to get it in their own cars.
Tesla gets updated “Apple CarPlay” hack that can work on new models
For what it’s worth, as a Tesla owner, I don’t particularly see the need for CarPlay, as I have found the in-car system that the company has developed to be superior. However, many people are in love with CarPlay simply because, when it’s in a car that is capable, it is really great.
It holds one distinct advantage over Tesla’s UI in my opinion, and that’s the ability to read and respond to text messages, which is something that is available within a Tesla, but is not as user-friendly.
With that being said, I would still give CarPlay a shot in my Tesla. I didn’t particularly enjoy it in my Bronco Sport, but that was because Ford’s software was a bit laggy with it. If it were as smooth as Tesla’s UI, which I think it would be, it could be a really great addition to the vehicle.
With the launch of a new trim level for the Model Y last night, something almost went unnoticed — the loss of a moniker that Tesla just recently added to a couple of its variants of the all-electric crossover.
Tesla launched the Model Y All-Wheel-Drive last night, competitively priced at $41,990, but void of the luxurious features that are available within the Premium trims.
Upon examination of the car, one thing was missing, and it was noticeable: Tesla dropped the use of the “Standard” moniker to identify its entry-level offerings of the Model Y.
The Standard Model Y vehicles were introduced late last year, primarily to lower the entry price after the U.S. EV tax credit changes were made. Tesla stripped some features like the panoramic glass roof, premium audio, ambient lighting, acoustic-lined glass, and some of the storage.
Last night, it simply switched the configurations away from “Standard” and simply as the Model Y Rear-Wheel-Drive and Model Y All-Wheel-Drive.
There are three plausible reasons for this move, and while it is minor, there must be an answer for why Tesla chose to abandon the name, yet keep the “Premium” in its upper-level offerings.
“Standard” carried a negative connotation in marketing
Words like “Standard” can subtly imply “basic,” “bare-bones,” or “cheap” to consumers, especially when directly contrasted with “Premium” on the configurator or website. Dropping it avoids making the entry-level Model Y feel inferior or low-end, even though it’s designed for affordability.
Tesla likely wanted the base trim to sound neutral and spec-focused (e.g., just “RWD” highlights drivetrain rather than feature level), while “Premium” continues to signal desirable upgrades, encouraging upsells to higher-margin variants.
Simplifying the overall naming structure for less confusion
The initial “Standard vs. Premium” split (plus Performance) created a somewhat clunky hierarchy, especially as Tesla added more variants like Standard Long Range in some markets or the new AWD base.
Removing “Standard” streamlines things to a more straightforward progression (RWD → AWD → Premium RWD/AWD → Performance), making the lineup easier to understand at a glance. This aligns with Tesla’s history of iterative naming tweaks to reduce buyer hesitation.
Elevating brand perception and protecting perceived value
Keeping “Premium” reinforces that the bulk of the Model Y lineup (especially the popular Long Range models) remains a premium product with desirable features like better noise insulation, upgraded interiors, and tech.
Eliminating “Standard” prevents any dilution of the Tesla brand’s upscale image—particularly important in a competitive EV market—while the entry-level variants can quietly exist as accessible “RWD/AWD” options without drawing attention to them being decontented versions.
You can check out the differences between the “Standard” and “Premium” Model Y vehicles below:
@teslarati There are some BIG differences between the Tesla Model Y Standard and Tesla Model Y Premium #tesla #teslamodely ♬ Sia – Xeptemper
Elon Musk
Tesla bull sees odds rising of Tesla merger after Musk confirms SpaceX-xAI deal
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
A prominent Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) bull has stated that the odds are rising that Tesla could eventually merge with SpaceX and xAI, following Elon Musk’s confirmation that the private space company has combined with his artificial intelligence startup.
Dan Ives of Wedbush Securities wrote on Tuesday that there is a growing chance Tesla could be merged in some form with SpaceX and xAI over the next 12 to 18 months.
“In our view there is a growing chance that Tesla will eventually be merged in some form into SpaceX/xAI over time. The view is this growing AI ecosystem will focus on Space and Earth together…..and Musk will look to combine forces,” Ives wrote in a post on X.
Ives’ comments followed confirmation from Elon Musk late Monday that SpaceX has merged with xAI. Musk stated that the merger creates a vertically integrated platform that combines AI, rockets, satellite internet, communications, and real-time data.
In a post on SpaceX’s official website, Elon Musk added that the combined company is aimed at enabling space-based AI compute, stating that within two to three years, space could become the lowest-cost environment for generating AI processing power. The transaction reportedly values the combined SpaceX-xAI entity at roughly $1.25 trillion.
Tesla, for its part, has already increased its exposure to xAI, announcing a $2 billion investment in the startup last week in its Q4 and FY 2025 update letter.
While merger speculation has intensified, notable complications could emerge if SpaceX/xAI does merge with Tesla, as noted in a report from Investors Business Daily.
SpaceX holds major U.S. government contracts, including with the Department of Defense and NASA, and xAI’s Grok is being used by the U.S. Department of War. Tesla, for its part, maintains extensive operations in China through Gigafactory Shanghai and its Megapack facility.
Tesla’s Apple CarPlay ambitions are not dead, they’re still in the works
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
