Connect with us

News

Tesla Model 3 had no chance in this tug-of war-bout for so many reasons

Credit: YouTube/lowlifeduramax

Published

on

An owner of both a Tesla Model 3 Standard Range+ and a Chevrolet Duramax pickup truck pitted the two vehicles against each other in a tug-of-war to see what car would come out victorious.

YouTuber Michael of the lowlifeduramax YouTube channel decided to continue a string of tests with his Standard Range Plus Model 3. In the past, the YouTube host has used the electric sedan in a burnout competition and race against a Dodge Hellcat. He has also modified the Model 3, allowing the RWD vehicle to become a serious drift machine.

Tug-of-war tests have been popular with other Tesla vehicles like the Model X and the newly unveiled Tesla Cybertruck. However, this time around, Michael chose to have the Model 3 battle the mammoth Chevy pickup to see “how much torque the electric motor can put out.”

His RWD Model 3 Standard Range+ was purchased in early December, according to the Instagram page he runs under the same name as the YouTube channel. Michael decided to add a tow hitch to the vehicle as he states he would like to do other tests in the future with the recently-purchased electric car.

Advertisement
https://www.instagram.com/p/B50zYCqBHRZ/

The Duramax outweighs the Model 3 by nearly 4,000 pounds. The truck came in at 7,500 pounds, according to Michael. That’s a far cry compared to the Tesla Model 3 SR Plus’ listed weight of 3,627 pounds. Needless to say, the tug-of-war battle between the two vehicles was short, with the Model 3 outmatched due to its serious weight disadvantage and several flaws in the tug-of-war test itself.

Initially, Michael chose to perform this test with the least expensive and least powerful version of the Model 3 apart from the off-menu Model 3 Standard Range. While it is understandable that this is the vehicle he chose for the test since it’s his personal car, it is not technically fair to peg this test as an accurate assessment of the Model 3’s power because it is the variant of the vehicle that is designed primarily as an excellent entry-level car, not peak performance.

On top of this, the angle of the hitch gave the Chevrolet pickup truck an unfair advantage. To perform a fair and accurate representation of this test, it would be more preferable to have the two vehicles’ tow hitch heights be the same. The car with the higher hitch will pull the other vehicle off the ground if he begins to gain an advantage, causing the vehicle to lose traction and never have a legitimate chance at regaining a lead.

Following the conclusion of the test, Michael stated that “it was bound to happen” because of weight differences. However, he also quipped that the tug-of-war results between the F-150 vs. Cybertruck may simply be because the Ford lacks “Chevy Power.”

Advertisement

Perhaps in another test, Michael could obtain a Model X from a friend or fan. The Model X is a pretty heavy car, and though it would not match the Chevy pickup in sheer weight, it should prove to be a more formidable opponent for the huge, diesel-powered Duramax truck.

Watch lowlifeduramax‘s video of the Tesla Model 3 Standard Range+ taking on a Chevrolet Duramax in a tug-of-war test below.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Energy

Tesla Megapack Megafactory in Texas advances with major property sale

Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla’s planned Megapack factory in Brookshire, Texas has taken a significant step forward, as two massive industrial buildings fully leased to the company were sold to an institutional investor.

In a press release, Stream Realty Partners announced the sale of Buildings 9 and 10 at the Empire West industrial park, which total 1,655,523 square feet. The properties are 100% leased to Tesla under a long-term agreement and were acquired by BGO on behalf of an institutional investor.

The two facilities, located at 100 Empire Boulevard in Brookshire, Texas, will serve as Tesla’s new Megafactory dedicated to manufacturing Megapack battery systems.

According to local filings previously reported, Tesla plans to invest nearly $200 million into the site. The investment includes approximately $44 million in facility upgrades such as electrical, utility, and HVAC improvements, along with roughly $150 million in manufacturing equipment.

Advertisement

Building 9, spanning roughly 1 million square feet, will function as the primary manufacturing floor where Megapacks are assembled. Building 10, covering approximately 600,000 square feet, will be dedicated to warehousing and logistics operations, supporting storage and distribution of completed battery systems.

Waller County Commissioners have approved a 10-year tax abatement agreement with Tesla, offering up to a 60% property-tax reduction if the company meets hiring and investment targets. Tesla has committed to employing at least 375 people by the end of 2026, increasing to 1,500 by the end of 2028, as noted in an Austin County News Online report.

The Brookshire Megafactory will complement Tesla’s Lathrop Megafactory in California and expand U.S. production capacity for the utility-scale energy storage unit. Megapacks are designed to support grid stabilization and renewable-energy integration, a segment that has become one of Tesla’s fastest-growing businesses.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla Sweden strikers see tax issues over IF Metall union error

To address the issue, IF Metall is encouraging Tesla strikers to return the refunded tax amounts to the union.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla Europe

A tax correction is set to return two years of income tax payments to Tesla strikers in Sweden, after authorities determined that conflict compensation during a labor dispute should not have been taxed.

The issue is caused by a decision by IF Metall to treat strike compensation for Tesla workers as taxable income during the ongoing labor dispute with Tesla Sweden. That approach has now been reversed following guidance from the Swedish Tax Agency.

Strike compensation is typically tax-free under Sweden’s Income Tax Act, as noted in a report from Dagens Arbete (DA). However, two years ago, IF Metall’s board decided to classify payments to Tesla strikers as taxable.

“We did it to secure SGI, unemployment insurance and public pension. Those were the risks we saw when the strike had already dragged on,” Kent Bursjöö, financial manager at IF Metall, stated.

Advertisement

According to Bursjöö, the union wanted to ensure that members continued to register earned income with the tax agency, protecting benefits tied to income history. At the end of January, however, the Swedish Tax Agency informed the union that compensation during a labor dispute must be tax-free.

“Of course, we knew that it could be tax-free. But we clearly didn’t know that it couldn’t be taxable,” Bursjöö said.

Following discussions with auditors and tax authorities, IF Metall began correcting the payments. As a result, two years of paid income tax will now be credited back to the affected strikers’ tax accounts. The union will also recover previously paid employer contributions.

However, the correction creates secondary effects. Since the payments will now be treated as tax-free, pension contributions tied to those earnings will be withdrawn, potentially affecting state pension accrual and income-based benefits such as parental or sickness benefits.

Advertisement

To address this, IF Metall is encouraging members to return the refunded tax amounts to the union. In exchange, the union plans to pay 18.5% into occupational pensions on their behalf. “Otherwise, it will be a form of overcompensation when they get the tax paid back,” Bursjöö said.

That being said, the IF Metall officer acknowledged that the union’s legal ability to reclaim the funds from its improperly paid Tesla Sweden strikers is limited. “The legal possibilities are probably limited, from what we can see. But we assume that most people see the value of securing their pension,” Bursjöö said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Tesla sues California DMV over Autopilot and FSD advertising ruling

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla falsely promoted the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has filed a lawsuit against the California Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) in an effort to overturn a prior ruling that found the automaker engaged in false advertising related to its driver-assistance systems. 

The complaint seeks to remove the agency’s conclusion that Tesla misled customers about the capabilities of Autopilot and Full Self-Driving.

Tesla’s legal action follows a decision by California’s Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), which concluded that Tesla’s earlier marketing of “Autopilot” and “Full Self-Driving” violated state law, as noted in a CNBC report. 

While the DMV opted not to suspend Tesla’s license after determining the company had updated its marketing language for its advanced driver-assistance systems, Tesla is asking the court to go further and reverse the agency’s conclusion.

Advertisement

In its Feb. 13 complaint, Tesla’s attorneys argued that the DMV “wrongfully and baselessly” labeled the company a “false advertiser” for its Autopilot and FSD systems. The filing argued that regulators failed to demonstrate that consumers were actually misled about the capabilities of Tesla’s systems.

According to Tesla’s complaint, the DMV “never proved consumers in the state had been confused about whether its cars were safe to drive without a human at the wheel.”

Tesla’s legal team further stated: “It was impossible to buy a Tesla equipped with either Autopilot or Full Self-Driving Capability, or to use any of their associated features, without seeing clear and repeated statements that they do not make the vehicle autonomous.”

Tesla now promotes its driver-assistance system as “Full Self-Driving (Supervised),” a name that overemphasizes the need for active driver attention.

Advertisement

Tesla’s autonomous driving program is a pivotal part of the company’s future, with CEO Elon Musk stating that self-driving technology will truly be the solution that will push Tesla into its full potential. The company is currently operating a Robotaxi pilot in Austin and the Bay Area, and the company recently announced that it has produced the first Cybercab from Giga Texas’ production line. 

Continue Reading