News
Tesla Model 3 Performance drag races McLaren 570S in impressive 1/4 mile showdown
There is no denying that the Model 3 Performance is quick, especially considering VBOX data validating the car’s 0-60 mph acceleration figures. But the question is, would it be fast enough to beat an actual supercar on the drag strip? Perhaps, even something as daunting as a McLaren 570S?
This was something explored recently by Tesla owner-enthusiast Erik Strait, better known as the host of YouTube’s DÆrik channel. Thanks to a friendly owner in the area, Erik has been able to test out the capabilities of the Model 3 Performance, which adds dual motors and a $5,000 Performance Upgrade package to the base trim, including 20″ Performance Wheels, Michelin Pilot Sport 4S summer tires, a carbon fiber rear spoiler, aluminum alloy pedals, and a top speed boost that enables the electric car to max out at 155 mph.
Tesla lists the Model 3 Performance with a 0-60 mph time of 3.5 seconds, which is plenty fast for a high-performance midsize sedan. Erik’s tests have shown that the Model 3 Performance is actually quicker than Tesla’s estimates, with the electric car hitting 60 mph in as low as 3.18 seconds when fully charged. Nevertheless, with a McLaren 570S as its opponent, the cards are stacked against the Model 3 Performance.
McLaren’s supercars are actually embedded in the history of Tesla, with CEO Elon Musk famously buying a McLaren F1 when he made his first millions after selling Zip2, his first company. Musk would later infamously wreck his McLaren F1 in a joyride with Peter Thiel, but the supercar would hold a special place in the Tesla CEO’s heart for years to come. When Musk unveiled the Model S P85D, for example, he made it a point to highlight that the electric car’s 0-60 mph time of 3.2 seconds is comparable to the acceleration of the supercar.
The 570S is McLaren’s “baby” supercar, slightly less powerful than its flagship vehicles like the 650S but incredibly fast just the same. The 570S is equipped with a twin-turbo 3.8-liter V8 engine making 562 hp and 443 lb-ft of torque. The car is also fitted with a slick-shifting 7-speed dual-clutch automatic transmission, which helps propel the vehicle from 0-60 mph in 3.0 seconds. The 570S’ top speed of 204 mph places it beside popular supercars like the Lamborghini Huracan 610-4 Spyder and the Ferrari 488 Spider 3.9 V8 Turbo. Compared to the McLaren 570S, the Model 3 Performance appears completely outclasses, with its dual motors producing a combined 450 hp and 471 lb-ft of torque and its top speed of 155 mph.
The Model 3 Performance dueled the McLaren 570S twice, and on both times, the electric car left the gas-powered supercar off the line. The Model 3 Performance did get the jump on the 570S to the quarter-mile mark, but stats-wise, Tesla’s electric car fell just around .2 seconds short of the supercar. The Model 3 Performance finished the quarter mile in 11.79 seconds at a speed of 115.18 mph in the first round, which was just slightly lower than the McLaren 570S’ 11.62 seconds and 124 mph. A second race rendered similar results, with the Model 3 Performance finishing the run in 11.79 seconds at 115.35 mph and the 570S completing the run in 11.58 seconds at 125.68 mph.
The Model 3 Performance is not a supercar, both in design and in function. While the McLaren 570S had bad launches on both races, the time differences between the two vehicles’ quarter-mile runs were just way too close. With stickier tires and a possible Ludicrous upgrade in the future, the Model 3 Performance could most certainly establish itself as a force to be reckoned with on the drag strip, just like its two larger siblings — the Model S P100D and the Model X P100D.
Watch the Model 3 Performance stand up to the McLaren 570S in the video below.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
