News
Tesla Model 3 vs 2018 Nissan Leaf – A side by side comparison
Tesla’s mission is simple and includes getting other automakers to join in the party. The Chevy Bolt, quirky as it may look, technically beat Tesla to market with a 200+ mile range EV that can be had for the $35,000 ballpark. Nissan, who I humbly believe to be the only other automaker currently taking full EVs seriously, has just announced their all new 2018 Leaf. The party is undoubtedly slow, but other automakers such as Volvo have at least talked about “electrification” (clever marketing shorthand for hybrids) but we can no longer deny that electric vehicles are here and their growth will not be able to be stopped.
Just as every concept EV talked about before 2016 was touted as a “Tesla killer,” it is now impossible not to compare every new electric offering with the much anticipated Tesla Model 3. So let’s do just that. The table below highlights some key specs for each.
| NISSAN LEAF | TESLA MODEL 3 | |
| Base price, before tax credits | $29,990 | $35,000 |
| Price with options | SL – $36,200 | Premium + EAP – $45,000 |
| Range (miles) | 150 (higher coming 2019) | 220 (310 for $9,000 upgrade) |
| Battery | 40 kWh/ (higher coming 2019) | Undisclosed |
| Charge time – Level 2 | Up to 22 miles per hour | Up to 30 miles per hour (std batt) |
| Charge time – Level 3 | Up to 88 miles per ½ hour | Up to 130 miles per ½ hour (std) |
| Charging network | No dedicated network | Tesla Supercharger, pay per use |
| Overall Length/Width | 176.4” / 70.5” | 184.8” / 82.2” |
| Cargo space | 23.6 cf | 15 cf |
| Body style | 4-door hatchback | 4-door sedan |
| Infotainment | Apple CarPlay, Android Auto | Tesla’s own |
| Main display | 7” | 15” |
| 0-60 mph time | 8 seconds (Motor Trend est.) | 5.6 seconds |
| Driver’s Assist Suite | ProPILOT ($2,200) | Autopilot ($5,000) |
| Automatic Emergency Braking | Standard | Standard |
If you want to get into a relatively long range EV (150 miles or greater) for the lowest possible price, the base 2018 Nissan Leaf wins out. I will also assume that you will be able to get your hands on a Leaf much sooner than a Model 3. Finally, if you absolutely insist on a hatchback, the Leaf has it.
Outside of those three things, and possibly the still large size of a Model 3, I can’t personally find any reason to choose a Leaf over a Model 3. To be clear I’m proud of Nissan for upping their game a bit. The 2018 version is in my very humble opinion, far superior in the looks department to the frog-like 2017 it is replacing. Nissan’s V-Motion grille is sharp, and hopefully takes your attention off the obvious charge port cover above it. The lines of the car itself are much more closely aligned with Nissan’s other offerings, which I find to have adequate design. Similarly, the rear tail lights are modern and edgy. If you can excuse all the buttons, the interior looks sharp. The Apple and Android faithful alike will appreciate the available car play integration. The bottom line for me is that every EV is a step in the right direction, even if this car won’t compel families to ditch the gasoline completely. In the absence of a reliable and dedicated fast charging network for long distance travel, the Leaf is still primarily a commuter car. 150 miles of range will simply allow a few after work activities without much thought.
I am excited to see the range and price that Nissan makes available in 2019 because for now, the base cost per mile of $199.93 falls far short of Tesla’s $159.09. I’d also like to see them re-think their battery management system, which I am to understand leaves something to be desired. One owner described his experience with a 2014 Leaf as losing 20% capacity thus far.
When looking at what we know about the Model 3 however, I can’t really compare the Leaf in any serious manner. I’m trying to be reasonable, to give Nissan a fair shake, but there are several things that make me a Tesla fanatic that are sorely missing from the Leaf – and any other current EV for that matter – that may or may not ever come close.
Supercharging. EVs will remain a commuter or secondary car until you can load up the kids and head to Disney with the reasonable assurance that there are plenty of chargers along the way that will a) be working, and b) charge quickly. Tesla has made a huge commitment in this front because they know that’s what it takes.
Over the air updates. I have not yet heard of Nissan taking this approach, but I suspect if they do, it would be limited to maps and small changes. I don’t foresee the Leaf being able to give your car the sudden ability to automatically open your garage four years after you’ve purchased it. Some current automakers do have software updates for their vehicles, but my understanding is that you have to bring it in to the dealership to have it done. This totally defeats the purpose.
Dealerships. You’d be hard pressed to find a harsher critic of dealerships than I. Whether discussing the 2011 Jeep Wrangler that took me 3 hours to get for the exact price I walked in and demanded, or that time I spoke on behalf of a recently widowed neighbor with an actual cash budget who could not, no matter how you pitch it, afford that extended dealer’s warranty package, I can go on and on and about how much I dislike the experience. It always takes hours. You always get passed around from salesperson to manager to finance person. You may even get your credit run 10 times simultaneously (I’m talking to you, Hyundai dealership!) No thank you. I will order my car online, know the exact price and meet you there with a pre-printed check for the exact amount owed.
Looks. I get it, I really do, people love hatchbacks. My Model S is a hatch and has accommodated many a Home Depot trip. My once beloved Scion tC was a hatch, and once hauled 27 boxes of Pergo brand laminate floor planks. Even the Jeep with the horrible dealership experience picked up a washing machine. A washing machine! But I simply cannot wrap my head around the idea that you could conceivably compare the gorgeous, timeless and sleek looks of the Model 3 with the quirky, if a bit modern and sharp, Nissan Leaf.
Performance. There’s a reason I never considered a hybrid or EV before. Now that I’m a bit older and have the budget to pick a car I actually like, I’m not going to voluntarily drive something that takes 8 seconds to get to 60. I want tight steering, good handling, and the ability to make my passengers squeal with delight when I punch it.
Interior. This is a personal preference and I’m with you if you think the minimalistic interior of the Model 3 is crazy. It is. But I can just about promise you that you will not miss all those buttons. I sat in a Porsche Macan at the auto show and while I expected to feel great inside a new offering from a brand with as much clout as Porsche, I was too busy wondering what in the world all those buttons did. It’s almost a joke how many.
Confession: I started this post excited about the new Leaf. I tweeted about it first thing this morning; the more the merrier in EV world if you ask me. But when getting right down to the specifications, it’s hard not to see that everyone else still has a long way to go. They’re taking baby steps while Tesla is competing in the long jump.
What do you think? Do the two cars compare? Tell us in the comments!
Tesla executive Lars Moravy appeared today in front of the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to highlight the importance of modernizing autonomy standards by establishing a federal framework that would reward innovation and keep the country on pace with foreign rivals.
Moravy, who is Tesla’s Vice President of Vehicle Engineering, strongly advocated for Congress to enact a national framework for autonomous vehicle development and deployment, replacing the current patchwork of state-by-state rules.
These rules have slowed progress and kept companies fighting tooth-and-nail with local legislators to operate self-driving projects in controlled areas.
Tesla already has a complete Robotaxi model, and it doesn’t depend on passenger count
Moravy said the new federal framework was essential for the U.S. to “maintain its position in global technological development and grow its advanced manufacturing capabilities.
He also said in a warning to the committee that outdated regulations and approval processes would “inhibit the industry’s ability to innovate,” which could potentially lead to falling behind China.
Being part of the company leading the charge in terms of autonomous vehicle development in the U.S., Moravy highlighted Tesla’s prowess through the development of the Full Self-Driving platform. Tesla vehicles with FSD engaged average 5.1 million miles before a major collision, which outpaces that of the human driver average of roughly 699,000 miles.
Moravy also highlighted the widely cited NHTSA statistic that states that roughly 94 percent of crashes stem from human error, positioning autonomous vehicles as a path to dramatically reduce fatalities and injuries.
🚨 Tesla VP of Vehicle Engineering, Lars Moravy, appeared today before the U.S. Senate Commerce Committee to discuss the importance of outlining an efficient framework for autonomous vehicles:
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) February 4, 2026
Skeptics sometimes point to cybersecurity concerns within self-driving vehicles, which was something that was highlighted during the Senate Commerce Committee hearing, but Moravy said, “No one has ever been able to take over control of our vehicles.”
This level of security is thanks to a core-embedded central layer, which is inaccessible from external connections. Additionally, Tesla utilizes a dual cryptographic signature from two separate individuals, keeping security high.
Moravy also dove into Tesla’s commitment to inclusive mobility by stating, “We are committed with our future products and Robotaxis to provide accessible transportation to everyone.” This has been a major point of optimism for AVs because it could help the disabled, physically incapable, the elderly, and the blind have consistent transportation.
Overall, Moravy’s testimony blended urgency about geopolitical competition, especially China, with concrete safety statistics and a vision of the advantages autonomy could bring for everyone, not only in the U.S., but around the world, as well.
Tesla launched a new configuration of the Model Y this week, bringing more complexity to its lineup of the vehicle and adding a new, lower entry point for those who require an All-Wheel-Drive car.
However, the broadening of the Model Y lineup in the United States could signal a somewhat uncomfortable reality for Tesla fans and car buyers, who have been vocal about their desire for a larger, full-size SUV.
Tesla has essentially moved in the opposite direction through its closure of the Model X and its continuing expansion of a vehicle that fits the bill for many, but not all.
Tesla brings closure to Model Y moniker with launch of new trim level
While CEO Elon Musk has said that there is the potential for the Model Y L, a longer wheelbase configuration of the vehicle, to enter the U.S. market late this year, it is not a guarantee.
Instead, Tesla has prioritized the need to develop vehicles and trim levels that cater to the future rollout of the Robotaxi ride-hailing service and a fully autonomous future.
But the company could be missing out on a massive opportunity, as SUVs are a widely popular body style in the U.S., especially for families, as the tighter confines of compact SUVs do not support the needs of a large family.
Although there are other companies out there that manufacture this body style, many are interested in sticking with Tesla because of the excellent self-driving platform, expansive charging infrastructure, and software performance the vehicles offer.
Additionally, the lack of variety from an aesthetic and feature standpoint has caused a bit of monotony throughout the Model Y lineup. Although Premium options are available, those three configurations only differ in terms of range and performance, at least for the most part, and the differences are not substantial.
Minor Expansions of the Model Y Fail to Address Family Needs for Space
Offering similar trim levels with slight differences to cater to each consumer’s needs is important. However, these vehicles keep a constant: cargo space and seating capacity.
Larger families need something that would compete with vehicles like the Chevrolet Tahoe, Ford Expedition, or Cadillac Escalade, and while the Model X was its largest offering, that is going away.
Tesla could fix this issue partially with the rollout of the Model Y L in the U.S., but only if it plans to continue offering various Model Y vehicles and expanding on its offerings with that car specifically. There have been hints toward a Cyber-inspired SUV in the past, but those hints do not seem to be a drastic focus of the company, given its autonomy mission.
Model Y Expansion Doesn’t Boost Performance, Value, or Space
You can throw all the different badges, powertrains, and range ratings on the same vehicle, it does not mean it’s going to sell better. The Model Y was already the best-selling vehicle in the world on several occasions. Adding more configurations seems to be milking it.
The true need of people, especially now that the Model X is going away, is going to be space. What vehicle fits the bill of a growing family, or one that has already outgrown the Model Y?
Not Expanding the Lineup with a New Vehicle Could Be a Missed Opportunity
The U.S. is the world’s largest market for three-row SUVs, yet Tesla’s focus on tweaking the existing Model Y ignores this. This could potentially result in the Osborne Effect, as sales of current models without capturing new customers who need more seating and versatility.
Expansions of the current Model Y offerings risk adding production complexity without addressing core demands, and given that the Model Y L is already being produced in China, it seems like it would be a reasonable decision to build a similar line in Texas.
Listening to consumers means introducing either the Model Y L here, or bringing a new, modern design to the lineup in the form of a full-size SUV.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk reiterates Tesla Optimus’ most sci-fi potential yet
Musk shared his comments in a series of posts on social media platform X.
Elon Musk recently reiterated one of the most ambitious forecasts for Tesla’s humanoid robot, Optimus, stating it could become the first real-world example of a Von Neumann machine. He also noted once more that Optimus would be Tesla’s biggest product.
Musk shared his comments in a series of posts on social media platform X.
Optimus as a von Neumann machine
In response to a post on X that pondered on sci-fi timelines becoming real, Musk wrote that “Optimus will be the first Von Neumann machine, capable of building civilization by itself on any viable planet.” In a separate post, Musk wrote that Optimus will be Tesla’s “biggest product ever,” a phrase he has used in the past to describe the humanoid robot’s importance to the electric vehicle maker.
A Von Neumann machine is a class of theoretical self-replicating systems originally proposed in the mid-20th century by the mathematician John von Neumann. In his concept, von Neumann described machines that could travel to other worlds, use local materials to create copies of themselves, and carry out large-scale tasks without outside intervention.
Elon Musk’s broader plans
Considering Musk’s comments, it appears that Optimus would eventually be capable of performing complex work autonomously in environments beyond Earth. If Optimus could achieve such a feat, it could very well unlock humanity’s capability to explore locations beyond Earth. The idea of space exploration becomes more than feasible.
Elon Musk has discussed space-based AI compute, large-scale robotic production, and the role of SpaceX’s Starship in transporting hardware and materials to other planets. While Musk did not detail how Optimus would fit with SpaceX’s exploration activities, his Von Neumann machine comments suggest he is looking at Tesla’s robotics as part of a potential interplanetary ecosystem.
Tesla exec pleads for federal framework of autonomy to U.S. Senate Committee
Tesla Model Y lineup expansion signals an uncomfortable reality for consumers
