News
Tesla Model 3 has an important upper middle class audience to please
As Elon Musk continues to focus on his top 3 priorities for Tesla, emphasis on preparing for Model 3 production – arguably the most important vehicle in the company’s history – couldn’t be more pertinent.
The Model 3 will be emblematic of Tesla’s capacity to offer a highly safe and efficient means of transport for a middle to upper middle class segment that largely depends on vehicle reliability in order to commute. It looks like these upwardly mobile folks are buying into that Tesla promise (pun intended): by October 2016, nearly 400,000 reservations had already been placed on the Tesla Model 3.
Starting at $35,000 before incentives, the Model 3 will achieve a minimum of 215 miles of range per charge and has been designed to attain the highest safety ratings in every category. According to the Tesla website, “The Model 3 combines real world range, performance, safety, and spaciousness into a premium sedan that only Tesla can build.” Potential Model 3 buyers make a reservation through the company’s website by putting down a $1000 deposit. The Model 3 has a starting price of about half the base price of the flagship Tesla Model S and has the size and stance of the Mazda 3.
Jessica Caldwell, an Edmunds.com analyst, argues that, if Tesla Motors wants “to bring the EV to the mass market, they need the Model 3 to be successful.”
The Model 3 will be a sedan, although other versions may one day include a Model Y compact SUV. Base rear-wheel-drive Model 3 vehicles are expected to achieve at least 215-miles of range; all-wheel drive will be offered, and a larger battery capacity with longer range is expected. Tesla’s Full Self-Driving Capability is also expected to be a standard offering.
“This is their chance to prove that they are not just a specialized niche automaker, but actually a long-term volume automaker,” said Karl Brauer, an analyst at Kelley Blue Book. “They have to establish that they can build a high-quality volume vehicle.”
Being upper middle class is a swirling confluence of financial comfort, identity, dreams, and lifestyle options. The Tesla Model 3 may very well become one of the most significant markers of status stability, with its associated components of having a college education, white-collar work, economic security, and home ownership. Soon, many upwardly mobile consumers will be adding “owning a Tesla” to that definition. Indeed, fewer than 5% of reservation holders are likely to choose a minimalist entry level Model 3 car. By contrast, close to 7% say they intend to check every available check box in the Model 3 Design Configurator once it becomes available.
If there’s an option available, the future upscale Tesla Model 3 audience will get it, as the number of options will be new indicators of levels of wealth and class.
Of course, these soon-to-be Tesla owners will have high expectations for all aspects of the Tesla process. First production of Model 3 is still scheduled for mid 2017, while delivery estimates for new reservations are expected to take place mid 2018 or later. Musk admitted that Tesla had hubris in designing and engineering the complicated Model X. As a result, Tesla learned a lot about selling, building, and delivering, which it applied to the Model 3 with much greater production streamlining. “With any new technology, it takes multiple iterations and economies of scale before you can make it affordable,” Musk has said. A mass-market car “was only possible to do . . . after going through the prior steps.”
The Model 3 is the next step in the learning process, but Tesla has done the preparation.
The Model 3 was unveiled in March of 2016 with operational prototype cars. In anticipation of much higher delivery numbers associated with the Model 3, Tesla hired former Audi executive Peter Hochholdinger as its Vice President of Vehicle Production. Hochholdinger had been in charge of production for the A4, A5, and Q5 vehicles, with around 400,000 vehicles per year under his watch. He should be a key asset as Tesla looks to roll out Model 3s in quantities that far exceed the number of cars the company has made to date.
Tesla has dealt lately with some supplier issues and has brought production of some components in-house. Other components, however, continue to be manufactured by established companies. For example, reports indicate that the Model 3’s center touchscreen will be supplied by LG Display.
By spring 2017, Model 3 photos and videos — shot both by bystanders and insiders — should start to circulate. Eventually, too, the government will need to ascertain the safety of Model 3 via crash-testing, and resulting reports will have a big impact on eventual delivery dates.
The Model 3 sedan will use some of the same glass technology that the company is using for its solar roof tiles, which should introduce an upper middle class audience to new ways of thinking about residential energy systems. The Model 3 is said to accelerate with an alluring still rush. It is just that rush— as well as zero-emissions and self-driving capability— that the upper middle class market has been awaiting.
Energy
Tesla’s newest “Folding V4 Superchargers” are key to its most aggressive expansion yet
Tesla’s folding V4 Supercharger ships 33% more per truck, cuts deployment time and cost significantly.
Tesla is rolling out a folding V4 Supercharger design, an engineering change that allows 33% more units to fit on a single delivery truck, cuts deployment time in half, and reduces overall installation cost by roughly 20%.
The folding mechanism addresses one of the least glamorous but most consequential bottlenecks in charging infrastructure: getting hardware from factory floor to job site efficiently. By collapsing the form factor for transit and unfolding into an operational configuration on arrival, the new design dramatically reduces the logistics overhead that has historically slowed Supercharger rollouts, particularly at large or remote sites where multiple units are needed simultaneously.
The timing aligns with a broader acceleration in Tesla’s network strategy. In March 2026, Tesla’s Gigafactory New York produced its final V3 Supercharger cabinet after more than seven years and 15,000 units, pivoting entirely to V4 cabinet production. The V4 cabinet itself is already a generational leap, delivering up to 500 kW per stall for passenger vehicles and up to 1.2 MW for the Tesla Semi, while supporting twice the stalls per cabinet at three times the power density of its predecessor. The folding transport innovation layers logistical efficiency on top of that technical foundation.
Tesla launches first ‘true’ East Coast V4 Supercharger: here’s what that means
Tesla Charging’s Director Max de Zegher, commenting on the V4 cabinet when it launched, captured the operational philosophy behind these changes: “Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.” The design philosophy has always been about maximizing real-world throughput, not just peak specs, and the folding transport upgrade extends that thinking into the supply chain itself.
Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.
No more DC busbar between cabinets. Power comes from a single V4 cabinet to 8 stalls. Easier to install, cheaper, more reliable.
Introducing Folding Unit Superchargers
– V4 cabinet with 500kW charging
– 8 posts per unit
– 2 units per truck
– 2 configurations: folded, unfoldedFaster. Cheaper. Better. pic.twitter.com/YyALz0U5cA
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) March 25, 2026
The network is expanding rapidly on multiple fronts. The first true 500 kW V4 Supercharger on the East Coast opened in Kissimmee, Florida in March 2026, followed closely by a new site in Nashville, Tennessee. A public Megacharger for the Tesla Semi launched in Ontario, California in early March, with 37 additional Megacharger sites targeted for completion by end of year. Meanwhile, more than 27,500 Supercharger stalls are now accessible to non-Tesla EVs from brands including Ford, GM, Rivian, Hyundai, and most recently Stellantis, whose Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Fiat, and Maserati BEV customers gained access in March 2026.
As Tesla pushes toward a denser, faster, and more open charging network, innovations like the folding V4 Supercharger reflect the company’s growing focus on deployment velocity, not just hardware performance. Getting chargers to the ground faster, cheaper, and in greater volume per shipment may ultimately matter as much as the kilowatts they deliver.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.
The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.
On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.
The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.

Image Credit: The Boring Company/Twitter
The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.
The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.
The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.
The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.
Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package
The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”
The New York Post initially reported the story.
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
This appears to be unequivocal proof she denied the pay package because of her own personal beliefs and not the law.
Corruption. https://t.co/8dvgcfYuvh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:
“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”
The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.
McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.
The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.
Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.
After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.
Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.
The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.
Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.
A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.
