News
Tesla Model 3 “Phantom Drain” compared to Model S and Model X
Tesla Model 3 currently leads the pack in terms of having the highest parasitic battery drain, or better known as “Phantom Drain”, over Tesla’s more mature Model S and Model X.
Phantom Drain represents the amount of charge an electric vehicle loses when it is not being driven or operated by a person, similar to how smartphones lose battery power while in standby mode. In the case of Tesla vehicles, the battery discharges while the car is not being driven in order to provide power to its onboard electronics and auxiliary functions, such as the battery’s thermal management system. According to the Model 3 Owners Guide, the vehicle, on average, should discharge at a rate of around 1% per day, similar to Tesla’s quotes for the Model S and Model X’s battery drain levels.
However, looking at data collected through TezLab, a popular app among the Tesla owners community that tracks vehicle power usage, efficiency, and other statistics, Ben Sullins of the Teslanomics YouTube channel was able to see a significantly larger discharge rate from the Model 3. Ben was also able to compare the differences in vampire drain between the 3,855 Model S, 1,281 Model X, and 362 Model 3 being sampled.
Looking at the distribution of Phantom Drain between the Model S, Model 3 and Model X, it could be seen that around 60% of TezLab’s users experienced drain levels similar to Tesla’s quoted levels, which are on the 1-2% range per day. However, the differences between battery drain of the Model 3 and the Model S and X become more prominent over time. It’s worth noting that any parasitic losses as a result of TezLab connecting to the vehicle on a recurring basis may also be accounted for in the results being reported.
- Phantom Drain Info Graphic comparing Model S, Model 3, Model X [Credit: TezLab]
- A comparison of the Phantom Drain levels of the Model 3, Model S, and Model X. [Credit: Ben Sullins/YouTube]
- A comparison of the Phantom Drain levels of the Model 3, Model S, and Model X. [Credit: Ben Sullins/YouTube]
As noted by Ben, the Model 3’s Phantom Drain levels exhibited volatility sometime during the November 2017 to January 2018 period. Ben’s recent real-world range test using his RWD Long Range Model 3 on an LA to Las Vegas route showed an even more drastic level of Phantom Drain, with his car losing almost 20 miles of range while he and his companion ate lunch. That’s a loss of more than 6% from the Model 3’s rated 310-mile range in the span of an hour.
The drain levels of Model 3 owners using the TezLab app has started becoming more normalized, suggesting that the longer the vehicles are on the road, and as Tesla pushed firmware updates to its Model 3 fleet, the more consistent the cars’ drain levels became. Back in 2015, we covered a Model S that lost an average of 2.3% rated range per day while the vehicle was left in 16-degree Fahrenheit (-9 C) weather.
Overall, Tezlab’s data shows that the Model 3 is becoming more consistent as the maturity of the vehicle’s software is improving. Other features like its battery thermal management systems and its auxiliary functions are improving over time as well. These improvements are a trademark of Tesla, which is known as one of the only carmakers whose vehicles get better after they roll off the showrooms.
Watch Ben’s video on the Phantom Drain of the Model 3 compared to the Model S and Model X.
News
Tesla FSD (Supervised) fleet passes 8.4 billion cumulative miles
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (Supervised) system has now surpassed 8.4 billion cumulative miles.
The figure appears on Tesla’s official safety page, which tracks performance data for FSD (Supervised) and other safety technologies.
Tesla has long emphasized that large-scale real-world data is central to improving its neural network-based approach to autonomy. Each mile driven with FSD (Supervised) engaged contributes additional edge cases and scenario training for the system.

The milestone also brings Tesla closer to a benchmark previously outlined by CEO Elon Musk. Musk has stated that roughly 10 billion miles of training data may be needed to achieve safe unsupervised self-driving at scale, citing the “long tail” of rare but complex driving situations that must be learned through experience.
The growth curve of FSD Supervised’s cumulative miles over the past five years has been notable.
As noted in data shared by Tesla watcher Sawyer Merritt, annual FSD (Supervised) miles have increased from roughly 6 million in 2021 to 80 million in 2022, 670 million in 2023, 2.25 billion in 2024, and 4.25 billion in 2025. In just the first 50 days of 2026, Tesla owners logged another 1 billion miles.
At the current pace, the fleet is trending towards hitting about 10 billion FSD Supervised miles this year. The increase has been driven by Tesla’s growing vehicle fleet, periodic free trials, and expanding Robotaxi operations, among others.
With the fleet now past 8.4 billion cumulative miles, Tesla’s supervised system is approaching that threshold, even as regulatory approval for fully unsupervised deployment remains subject to further validation and oversight.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk fires back after Wikipedia co-founder claims neutrality and dubs Grokipedia “ridiculous”
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Elon Musk fired back at Wikipedia co-founder Jimmy Wales after the longtime online encyclopedia leader dismissed xAI’s new AI-powered alternative, Grokipedia, as a “ridiculous” idea that is bound to fail.
Musk’s response to Wales’ comments, which were posted on social media platform X, was short and direct: “Famous last words.”
Wales made the comments while answering questions about Wikipedia’s neutrality. According to Wales, Wikipedia prides itself on neutrality.
“One of our core values at Wikipedia is neutrality. A neutral point of view is non-negotiable. It’s in the community, unquestioned… The idea that we’ve become somehow ‘Wokepidea’ is just not true,” Wales said.
When asked about potential competition from Grokipedia, Wales downplayed the situation. “There is no competition. I don’t know if anyone uses Grokipedia. I think it is a ridiculous idea that will never work,” Wales wrote.
After Grokipedia went live, Larry Sanger, also a co-founder of Wikipedia, wrote on X that his initial impression of the AI-powered Wikipedia alternative was “very OK.”
“My initial impression, looking at my own article and poking around here and there, is that Grokipedia is very OK. The jury’s still out as to whether it’s actually better than Wikipedia. But at this point I would have to say ‘maybe!’” Sanger stated.
Musk responded to Sanger’s assessment by saying it was “accurate.” In a separate post, he added that even in its V0.1 form, Grokipedia was already better than Wikipedia.
During a past appearance on the Tucker Carlson Show, Sanger argued that Wikipedia has drifted from its original vision, citing concerns about how its “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” framework categorizes publications by perceived credibility. As per Sanger, Wikipedia’s “Reliable sources/Perennial sources” list leans heavily left, with conservative publications getting effectively blacklisted in favor of their more liberal counterparts.
As of writing, Grokipedia has reportedly surpassed 80% of English Wikipedia’s article count.
News
Tesla Sweden appeals after grid company refuses to restore existing Supercharger due to union strike
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons.
Tesla Sweden is seeking regulatory intervention after a Swedish power grid company refused to reconnect an already operational Supercharger station in Åre due to ongoing union sympathy actions.
The charging site was previously functioning before it was temporarily disconnected in April last year for electrical safety reasons. A temporary construction power cabinet supplying the station had fallen over, described by Tesla as occurring “under unclear circumstances.” The power was then cut at the request of Tesla’s installation contractor to allow safe repair work.
While the safety issue was resolved, the station has not been brought back online. Stefan Sedin, CEO of Jämtkraft elnät, told Dagens Arbete (DA) that power will not be restored to the existing Supercharger station as long as the electric vehicle maker’s union issues are ongoing.
“One of our installers noticed that the construction power had been backed up and was on the ground. We asked Tesla to fix the system, and their installation company in turn asked us to cut the power so that they could do the work safely.
“When everything was restored, the question arose: ‘Wait a minute, can we reconnect the station to the electricity grid? Or what does the notice actually say?’ We consulted with our employer organization, who were clear that as long as sympathy measures are in place, we cannot reconnect this facility,” Sedin said.
The union’s sympathy actions, which began in March 2024, apply to work involving “planning, preparation, new connections, grid expansion, service, maintenance and repairs” of Tesla’s charging infrastructure in Sweden.
Tesla Sweden has argued that reconnecting an existing facility is not equivalent to establishing a new grid connection. In a filing to the Swedish Energy Market Inspectorate, the company stated that reconnecting the installation “is therefore not covered by the sympathy measures and cannot therefore constitute a reason for not reconnecting the facility to the electricity grid.”
Sedin, for his part, noted that Tesla’s issue with the Supercharger is quite unique. And while Jämtkraft elnät itself has no issue with Tesla, its actions are based on the unions’ sympathy measures against the electric vehicle maker.
“This is absolutely the first time that I have been involved in matters relating to union conflicts or sympathy measures. That is why we have relied entirely on the assessment of our employer organization. This is not something that we have made any decisions about ourselves at all.
“It is not that Jämtkraft elnät has a conflict with Tesla, but our actions are based on these sympathy measures. Should it turn out that we have made an incorrect assessment, we will correct ourselves. It is no more difficult than that for us,” the executive said.


