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.
Tesla rolled out Full Self-Driving version 14.2 yesterday to members of the Early Access Program (EAP). Expectations were high, and Tesla surely delivered.
With the rollout of Tesla FSD v14.2, there were major benchmarks for improvement from the v14.1 suite, which spanned across seven improvements. Our final experience with v14.1 was with v14.1.7, and to be honest, things were good, but it felt like there were a handful of regressions from previous iterations.
While there were improvements in brake stabbing and hesitation, we did experience a few small interventions related to navigation and just overall performance. It was nothing major; there were no critical takeovers that required any major publicity, as they were more or less subjective things that I was not particularly comfortable with. Other drivers might have been more relaxed.
With v14.2 hitting our cars yesterday, there were a handful of things we truly noticed in terms of improvement, most notably the lack of brake stabbing and hesitation, a major complaint with v14.1.x.
However, in a 62-minute drive that was fully recorded, there were a lot of positives, and only one true complaint, which was something we haven’t had issues with in the past.
The Good
Lack of Brake Stabbing and Hesitation
Perhaps the most notable and publicized issue with v14.1.x was the presence of brake stabbing and hesitation. Arriving at intersections was particularly nerve-racking on the previous version simply because of this. At four-way stops, the car would not be assertive enough to take its turn, especially when other vehicles at the same intersection would inch forward or start to move.
This was a major problem.
However, there were no instances of this yesterday on our lengthy drive. It was much more assertive when arriving at these types of scenarios, but was also more patient when FSD knew it was not the car’s turn to proceed.
Can report on v14.2 today there were ZERO instances of break stabbing or hesitation at intersections today
It was a significant improvement from v14.1.x
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
This improvement was the most noticeable throughout the drive, along with fixes in overall smoothness.
Speed Profiles Seem to Be More Reasonable
There were a handful of FSD v14 users who felt as if the loss of a Max Speed setting was a negative. However, these complaints will, in our opinion, begin to subside, especially as things have seemed to be refined quite nicely with v14.2.
Freeway driving is where this is especially noticeable. If it’s traveling too slow, just switch to a faster profile. If it’s too fast, switch to a slower profile. However, the speeds seem to be much more defined with each Speed Profile, which is something that I really find to be a huge advantage. Previously, you could tell the difference in speeds, but not in driving styles. At times, Standard felt a lot like Hurry. Now, you can clearly tell the difference between the two.
It seems as if Tesla made a goal that drivers should be able to tell which Speed Profile is active if it was not shown on the screen. With v14.1.x, this was not necessarily something that could be done. With v14.2, if someone tested me on which Speed Profile was being used, I’m fairly certain I could pick each one.
Better Overall Operation
I felt, at times, especially with v14.1.7, there were some jerky movements. Nothing that was super alarming, but there were times when things just felt a little more finicky than others.
v14.2 feels much smoother overall, with really great decision-making, lane changes that feel second nature, and a great speed of travel. It was a very comfortable ride.
The Bad
Parking
It feels as if there was a slight regression in parking quality, as both times v14.2 pulled into parking spots, I would have felt compelled to adjust manually if I were staying at my destinations. For the sake of testing, at my first destination, I arrived, allowed the car to park, and then left. At the tail-end of testing, I walked inside the store that FSD v14.2 drove me to, so I had to adjust the parking manually.
This was pretty disappointing. Apart from parking at Superchargers, which is always flawless, parking performance is something that needs some attention. The release notes for v14.2. state that parking spot selection and parking quality will improve with future versions.
Any issues with parking on your end? 14.1.7 didn’t have this trouble with parking pic.twitter.com/JPLRO2obUj
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 21, 2025
However, this was truly my only complaint about v14.2.
You can check out our full 62-minute ride-along below:
Elon Musk
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX has issued an initial statement about Starship Booster 18’s anomaly early Friday. The incident unfolded during gas-system pressure testing at the company’s Massey facility in Starbase, Texas.
SpaceX’s initial comment
As per SpaceX in a post on its official account on social media platform X, Booster 18 was undergoing gas system pressure tests when the anomaly happened. Despite the nature of the incident, the company emphasized that no propellant was loaded, no engines were installed, and personnel were kept at a safe distance from the booster, resulting in zero injuries.
“Booster 18 suffered an anomaly during gas system pressure testing that we were conducting in advance of structural proof testing. No propellant was on the vehicle, and engines were not yet installed. The teams need time to investigate before we are confident of the cause. No one was injured as we maintain a safe distance for personnel during this type of testing. The site remains clear and we are working plans to safely reenter the site,” SpaceX wrote in its post on X.
Incident and aftermath
Livestream footage from LabPadre showed Booster 18’s lower half crumpling around the liquid oxygen tank area at approximately 4:04 a.m. CT. Subsequent images posted by on-site observers revealed extensive deformation across the booster’s lower structure. Needless to say, spaceflight observers have noted that Booster 18 would likely be a complete loss due to its anomaly.
Booster 18 had rolled out only a day earlier and was one of the first vehicles in the Starship V3 program. The V3 series incorporates structural reinforcements and reliability upgrades intended to prepare Starship for rapid-reuse testing and eventual tower-catch operations. Elon Musk has been optimistic about Starship V3, previously noting on X that the spacecraft might be able to complete initial missions to Mars.
Investor's Corner
Tesla analyst maintains $500 PT, says FSD drives better than humans now
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Tesla (NASDAQ:TSLA) received fresh support from Piper Sandler this week after analysts toured the Fremont Factory and tested the company’s latest Full Self-Driving software. The firm reaffirmed its $500 price target, stating that FSD V14 delivered a notably smooth robotaxi demonstration and may already perform at levels comparable to, if not better than, average human drivers.
The team also met with Tesla leaders for more than an hour to discuss autonomy, chip development, and upcoming deployment plans.
Analysts highlight autonomy progress
During more than 75 minutes of focused discussions, analysts reportedly focused on FSD v14’s updates. Piper Sandler’s team pointed to meaningful strides in perception, object handling, and overall ride smoothness during the robotaxi demo.
The visit also included discussions on updates to Tesla’s in-house chip initiatives, its Optimus program, and the growth of the company’s battery storage business. Analysts noted that Tesla continues refining cost structures and capital expenditure expectations, which are key elements in future margin recovery, as noted in a Yahoo Finance report.
Analyst Alexander Potter noted that “we think FSD is a truly impressive product that is (probably) already better at driving than the average American.” This conclusion was strengthened by what he described as a “flawless robotaxi ride to the hotel.”
Street targets diverge on TSLA
While Piper Sandler stands by its $500 target, it is not the highest estimate on the Street. Wedbush, for one, has a $600 per share price target for TSLA stock.
Other institutions have also weighed in on TSLA stock as of late. HSBC reiterated a Reduce rating with a $131 target, citing a gap between earnings fundamentals and the company’s market value. By contrast, TD Cowen maintained a Buy rating and a $509 target, pointing to strong autonomous driving demonstrations in Austin and the pace of software-driven improvements.
Stifel analysts also lifted their price target for Tesla to $508 per share over the company’s ongoing robotaxi and FSD programs.
Tesla Full Self-Driving v14.2 – Full Review, the Good and the Bad
SpaceX issues statement on Starship V3 Booster 18 anomaly
