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
NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way
NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.
Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.
The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.
Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.
The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.
Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.
Investor's Corner
Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’
In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.
Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”
The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.
Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.
His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.
Ron Baron today in new interview on Tesla:
“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.” pic.twitter.com/Rv5PB0bVZ2
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) September 16, 2026
Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.
That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.
Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.
Elon Musk
SpaceX’s next Starship launch is about to attempt its biggest leap yet
SpaceX targets September 22 for Starship Flight 14, its first attempt to reach real orbit.
SpaceX has set September 22 as the target date for Starship’s 14th test flight, and this one carries a different goal than any of the 13 that came before it. Every previous Starship mission has intentionally flown a suborbital arc, reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launched. Flight 14 is designed to send the craft into a genuine orbit around Earth for the first time.
The launch window opens at 7:15 a.m. Central time at Starbase in South Texas and runs for 75 minutes, pending regulatory approval, according to SpaceX’s mission description published Tuesday. If the flight goes as planned, Starship will circle the planet roughly six times at an altitude near 275 kilometers over about ten hours before a deorbit burn sends it toward a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean west of Chile, a departure from the Indian Ocean recoveries used on the last several flights.
The mission also marks the first attempt to put a working batch of Starlink V3 satellites into actual service. Flight 13 carried 20 of the new satellites in July, but because that mission never left a suborbital trajectory, the payload reentered along with the ship instead of separating into orbit.
SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit
Each V3 satellite is rated for roughly one terabit per second of downlink capacity, so a successful deployment on Flight 14 would be SpaceX’s largest single jump in network bandwidth since Starlink began flying on Falcon 9.
Flight 13 still did the heavier lifting on the technical side. That July mission flew a deliberately more stressful reentry profile to test Starship’s heat shield, and the ship survived its softest splashdown yet, intact enough for drone inspections shortly after landing. Elon Musk said the flight delivered “all the heat shield data we needed and then some,” a result Teslarati covered in detail when he later said SpaceX had solved the vehicle’s biggest reusability challenge. Flight 14 is where SpaceX starts spending that confidence on an actual orbital insertion rather than another controlled fall back to Earth.
One thing Flight 14 will not attempt is a tower catch of the ship. Musk floated the idea right after Flight 13, but walked the timeline back in August, saying a catch attempt was more likely “in a few months.” The Super Heavy booster will still aim for its own recovery, targeting an offshore landing point in the Gulf of America, the same approach used on recent flights.
September 22 is SpaceX’s own target, not a locked date. Starship’s schedule has slipped before over hardware readiness and FAA sign off, and the company has said as much in its own mission notes. But the plan itself represents the clearest marker yet that Starship is moving from a suborbital test program into something meant to carry paying payloads and, eventually, people.


