Connect with us

News

Tesla’s Model 3 and the death of plug-in hybrids: ‘Full electric is a much more elegant solution’

[Credit: Harbles/Twitter]

Published

on

Tesla took a big bet when it decided to launch the Model 3. Being a vehicle designed for the mass market, the sheer scale of the sedan’s production was something that Tesla has not dealt with before. It took more time than expected and a trip through “production hell,” but the Model 3 has now been ramped, with Elon Musk noting that producing 5,000 of the vehicles per week is currently no big deal for Tesla.

The market’s reception to the Model 3 has been encouraging. The vehicle has been performing well in the United States, ranking among America’s best-selling passenger cars. In September alone, the Model 3 became the 4th best-selling car in the US based on sales volume. Based on revenue, the Model 3 was even more impressive, ranking first among passenger cars sold in the country. Tesla does not seem to be planning on pulling back from its Model 3 push either, as the electric carmaker has started rolling out exhibits of the vehicle to Europe and Asia this month.

Amidst the evident success of the Model 3 and Elon Musk’s high-stakes bet on the electric sedan, another class of vehicles has begun to show notable signs of a decline — the plug-in hybrids. Plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEV) are equipped with both an electric motor and an internal combustion engine. Popular cars in this class include the Chevy Volt, with its all-electric range of up to 53 miles, and a total range of 420 miles with a full battery and a full tank of gas.

A Tesla Model 3 Performance with Track Mode rips through a closed circuit. [Credit: Motor Trend]

PHEVs have mostly served as the “gateway” vehicles for customers looking to make the jump to electric transportation. Being equipped with a gasoline engine, owners need not worry about any of the initial drawbacks of pure EVs, such as limited range. Plug-in Hybrid and Electric Vehicle Research Center director Gil Tal noted to Bloomberg that in a way, PHEVs are like the “training wheels” of the electric car movement. That said, Tal noted that as practical, capable EVs like the Model 3 emerge, consumers might simply skip PHEVs and adopt all-electric cars instead.

“A full electric (car) is a much more elegant solution. It’s very simple to build and very low maintenance. It’s just a much more simple story. Plug-in hybrids are just the training wheels in the industry’s preparation for electric cars,” Tal said.

Advertisement

The death of plug-in hybrid electric vehicles became more real recently, with GM announcing that it was closing several of its plants across the United States and Canada. Among these plants was GM’s oldest factory at Detroit-Hamtramck, which produces the Volt. In a later statement, GM confirmed that it would be discontinuing the production of the Volt, with the company focusing on developing all-electric cars like the Bolt EV instead.

GM has announced that it is discontinuing the production of the Chevy Volt. [Credit: Chevrolet]

In a way, the apparent death of the PHEV seemed to have been predicted by Elon Musk eight years ago. In a statement to the media during the opening ceremony of the Fremont factory, Musk likened PHEVs to amphibians during the process of evolution. And just like amphibians, Musk noted that the number of PHEVs would likely decrease as the market moves into the full-electric era.

“(PHEVs are) similar to an amphibian. In the transition from the oceans to land, initially, there were a lot of amphibians. Now there’s not that many amphibians. So the only reason you’d ever need that gasoline engine is if the battery pack does not have enough range, if the recharge times are really slow, and all those things will get solved. So there’s a medium-term role for a plug-in hybrid, but in our view, not a long-term role. I think there’s a role for plug-in hybrids today and there’s a role for electrics, but I think long-term, it all goes electric.”

The seemingly impending death of the plug-in hybrid is not just the result of electric cars like Tesla’s Model S, 3, and X. Earlier this year, a Forbes report earlier this year noted that the efforts (or lack thereof) of manufacturers such as GM are partly to blame for the decline of PHEVs. Inasmuch as the Volt was warmly received by owners and well-reviewed by critics, for example, the vehicle remained a rare sight among GM’s dealerships across the United States. GM’s TV advertising campaigns have not featured the Volt, or its all-electric sibling, the Bolt EV, either.

That said, GM appears to be taking its EV initiative seriously this time around. Earlier this month, for one, VP of global strategy Mike Ableson boldly declared during a press conference that GM is looking to “lead the industry in EVs sometime in the next decade or so.” The next years will determine if these words will be true.

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

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

Investor's Corner

Lucid CEO dispels any rumors of bankruptcy: ‘So far from the facts’

Published

on

Credit: Lucid

Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.

The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.

The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.

Lucid denies rumors of bankruptcy after over 40% stock drop

Advertisement

Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”

Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”

Napoli said:

“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.

Advertisement

As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.

We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.

My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.

I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”

Advertisement

It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.

Advertisement

Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.

Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla responds to strange Supercharging pricing error with classy move

Published

on

(Credit: Tesla)

Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.

The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.

One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.

These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.

To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.

At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.

Advertisement

Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line

By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.

The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.

Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.

Advertisement

It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.

The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.

In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.

Advertisement
Continue Reading