Connect with us

News

Tesla Model 3 dominates as qualifying leader in historic Pikes Peak run

(Credit: Unplugged Performance)

Published

on

The Unplugged Performance team and veteran racer Randy Pobst had planned to adopt a pretty conservative strategy for their modified Tesla Model 3 Performance’s first Pikes Peak run. The vehicle, after all, just had its suspension settings adjusted, and both team and driver wanted to validate how well the changes performed on the course. For the Model 3’s first run up Pikes Peak, the plan was to lift off on the straights to conserve battery for the second run, which would be flat out.

Needless to say, this plan did not end up being followed. At all.

Randy Pobst and Unplugged’s Model 3 Performance Ascension-R launched off into the Pikes Peak course for their first climb, and soon, it became evident to the racing veteran that the car was already almost perfectly dialed in. It was then that Pobst decided to forgo the initial plan and just attack the course at full power. With the veteran racer unleashed, the Model 3 completed the run in 4:15, finishing first place in the Exhibition class. Two other Teslas, a heavily modded widebody Model 3 driven by Joshua Allan and a Model 3 Performance driven by Blake Fuller, finished second and third

Randy Pobst takes on Pikes Peak in the Tesla Model 3 Performance. (Credit: Unplugged Performance)

Advertisement

As noted by Unplugged Performance CEO Ben Schaffer, he and his team were astounded to see Randy’s 4:15 time for his first run. The team had been targeting a time of 4:30 considering their planned strategy, but ultimately, what mattered was that the veteran racecar driver had tons of fun in his first climb of the day. Pobst did suggest some tweaks to the Model 3’s settings after, asking the Unplugged team to add a bit more compression and rebound tuning. But when those changes were done, the father of Track Mode was off for his second hill climb attempt.

Randy Pobst pushed the Model 3 Performance as hard as he could on his second run, and the results, as could be seen in the video below, were simply astounding. With the veteran racer behind the wheel and Unplugged’s parts performing as designed, the Model 3 Performance Ascension-R was able to complete the Pikes Peak run in a stunning 4:12. In second place was Blake Fuller’s Model 3 Performance, which completed the climb in 4:39. Unfortunately, the widebody Model 3 driven by Joshua Fuller retired after it went off track.

Randy Pobst takes on Pikes Peak in the Tesla Model 3 Performance. (Credit: Unplugged Performance)

What was particularly astounding about Randy Pobst’s 4:12 Pikes Peak Hill Climb run was the fact that the Model 3’s time was only a few seconds off from the record set by the fastest Open Wheel car in the event, which completed the climb in 4:07. The category in hosts some of the craziest purpose-built Pikes Peak machines in the industry, so it was quite surprising to see the Model 3, which only had Unplugged Performance’s Ascension-R modifications, performing in the level of Open Wheel vehicles. In fact, had the Model 3 been competing in the Open Wheel category, it would have finished the day in 3rd place. That’s a pretty insane thought.

Advertisement

“What surprised us the most today (besides capturing 1st place in qualifying) was how we compared to the other group running our section of the mountain. We ran with the Open Wheel cars and that group has some huge power and very lightweight cars. The fastest Open Wheel car was Clint Vahsholtz who ran a 4:07. If we were racing in the Open Wheel division, we would have qualified 3rd place which is pretty insane given how extreme those purpose-built cars are for this event,” Ben Schaffer said.

After dominating the Exhibition class in the event’s first day, Randy Pobst noted that the Tesla Model 3 is arguably the best car he has driven at Pikes Peak to date. This is no small statement, seeing as the legendary driver had climbed the challenging, dangerous course multiple times in the past behind the wheel of the industry’s most aggressive vehicles. “It was quite an honor to hear that from such a legendary driver that we respect so dearly,” the Unplugged CEO said.

Watch Randy Pobst’s stunning Pikes Peak run in the Tesla Model 3 in the video below.

Advertisement

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

News

Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

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.

Advertisement

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.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

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.

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.”

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

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.

Published

on

By

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.

Advertisement

Continue Reading