News
Tesla Showdown: We got a Model 3 and compared it to a Model S [Video]
We’ve seen a handful of Tesla Model 3 review videos floating around — including an excellent hour-long, deep-dive into the car’s features by our friends at Model 3 Owners Club. That said, we just got a chance to conduct an in-depth evaluation of Model 3 for ourselves. It’s a fascinating car and in our view, will come to dominate the mid-sized sedan segment over the next few years.
 |
Above: Considering the differences between the two Tesla sedans (Photo: EVANNEX)
In some ways, Model 3 demonstrates how Tesla has elevated its interior design capabilities and improved the integration of features, functionality, and storage as the company moves forward. In other ways, Model 3 reinforces the contention that Model S remains Tesla’s flagship sedan. We think it’s worth comparing and contrasting the two Tesla sedans to better understand the differences between the cars.
Above: Examining a few of the subtle, and not-so-subtle similarities and differences between Tesla’s Model 3 and Model S (Youtube: EVANNEX)
We spent two full days with the Model 3, reviewing the interior and exterior in granular detail. We examined the car through the lens of five years (since 2012!) of Model S ownership. Sure, some Tesla owners (like us) are wondering how these siblings stack up against one another. But there are many others pondering the possibility of owning their first Tesla. The big question is… if you’re considering the purchase of a Tesla Model 3 or Tesla Model S, which one should you buy?
Interior
Let’s compare and contrast some of the interior features of Model 3 and Model S with particular emphasis on driving and vehicle control displays, HVAC capabilities, interior volume and storage, the front driver’s compartment, and the little things that add functionality to the interior.
 |
Above: A look inside the Tesla Model 3 interior (Photo: EVANNEX)
Driving and vehicle control displays. The Model S boasts two digital displays instead of one in the Model 3. The Model 3’s horizontal, center display is also smaller (15-inch) vs. a vertical, center display which is larger (17-inch) in the Model S. Because Model S retains an information display immediately in front of the driver, it provides somewhat more comprehensive information content. As an aside, the 15-inch landscape display in Model 3 appears to be larger than it is and provides a full range of driving and vehicle information at a glance.
HVAC. Model 3’s HVAC approach demonstrates a significant step forward for Tesla. Both the Model S and Model 3 HVAC approaches are functional and capable, but the Model 3 has a definite advantage in terms of directional control and aesthetics. In addition, its novel design is impressive.
Interior volume and storage. Because Model 3 is a mid-size sedan, it can’t compete with Model S in interior volume—an important factor for many owners. Overall, interior volume in the Model S is far superior to Model 3. You get 30 cubic feet in Model S vs. 15 cubic feet in Model 3. As important in our view, the Model S hatchback design has significant advantages over the Model 3 conventional trunk opening. The hatchback opening provides very easy placement of large objects. It should be noted that the Model 3 trunk, when coupled with second row fold-down seats, does offer the ability to carry long objects with relative ease. The Model S also has a power lift gate instead of the Model 3’s manual trunk. In addition, Model S has a larger frunk than Model 3.
Seating. Model S has seating for 5 adults + 2 children (with rear facing “jump” seats). Model 3 only has seating for 5 adults. That said, Model 3’s seat quality, design, and overall spaciousness of the cabin were comparable to Model S.
Driver visibility. The interior design of Model 3 is striking in the sense that it eliminates the binnacle that normally sits directly in front of the driver, replacing it with a 15-inch landscape center display. With the binnacle removed, the Model 3 dash is lowered, allowing a more complete view of the road immediately in front of the vehicle. The large expanse of glass above the driver provides the feeling of an aircraft cockpit.
Center console. Sitting in the driver side cockpit of Model 3, it becomes obvious that Tesla has improved its interior design chops. The center console for Model 3 (available with the premium option package) is well-designed and functional. It offers easy mobile device charging, dual USB ports along with a 12V port, and elegant storage, complemented by storage compartments in the doors.
Lack of buttons. For Model 3, just about everything except window and door opening is controlled via the landscape display. This level of software control is impressive, but we felt that there might be times when it would be easier to use an analog alternative for, say, the control of the side mirrors or glove box.
The little things. There are little things you’ll find in a Model 3 that are absent from the Model S — coats hooks, built-in rear seat armrest, small storage compartments, back-of-seat kangaroo pockets, etc. To be a bit self-serving for a moment, most of these items can be had (in the aftermarket) for Model S from EVANNEX.
Exterior
Moving to the exterior, it’s apparent that Model 3 has the same vehicle DNA as Model S, but like all siblings, there are visual (as well as characteristic) differences.
 |
Above: Tesla’s sleek design of its new Model 3 (Photo: EVANNEX)
Looks. The most obvious (in-person) differences are the shorter hood for Model 3, the noticeably narrower width of the vehicle, and smaller wheels. Because it is shorter and narrower, Model 3 has a less striking stance than Model S. Overall, the larger size of the Model S is more visually impressive. We think it’s fair to state that many Model 3 owners will remedy some of these issues in the aftermarket, but in the case of Tesla’s sedan siblings, size matters.
Sensor suite. Autopilot (and ultimately, autonomous driving capability) will be available for both Model S and Model 3. It appears that functionality and capabilities in this domain will be identical.
Door handles. We did have a few small quibbles with Model 3. The push-rotate-grab door handles of Model 3 achieve the required aerodynamic advantages for an electric vehicle, but they pale in comparison to the auto-present and retract door-handles for Model S. We felt that Model 3 handles weren’t as ergonomic, particularly if you’re carrying something as you get into the vehicle.
Wheels. The 18-inch Model 3 aero covers are a matter of personal taste, but the underlying wheel (rim) is a bit conventional in our view and doesn’t offer an aesthetic that Model 3 deserves. The 19-inch wheels (available as an option) are more interesting, but still a bit less luxe than Model S (19-inch and 21-inch) wheel options.
Driving
Performance. Before going any further, it’s important to note that we weren’t able to test drive the Model 3 during our recent evaluation. Last year, we did enjoy a test ride in the Model 3 prototype at Tesla’s launch event. At that time the ride of Model 3 felt like a Model S, but it didn’t have the explosive torque and power that Model S owners are accustomed to. If you’re looking for ludicrous 0-60 mph times (gulp, 2.28 seconds), the Model S is your car. On the other hand, the published findings of a number of different test drives indicate that drivability and overall performance of Model 3 are quite impressive for a car at its price point. To that end, Model 3 can race a respectable 0-60 mph in 5.1 – 5.6 seconds.
Range. Both Model S and Model 3 have plenty of range for road trips and access to Tesla’s vast Supercharger network. On the whole, depending on which variant you look at, Model S will provide more range (259 – 335 miles of range) than Model 3 (220 – 310 miles of range). Also, many Model S owners will be able to take advantage of free supercharging (with a referral) whereas Model 3 owners will not have access to that particular perk.
The Verdict
In reality, the Model 3 and Model S are different vehicles for different demographics. Both have the same vehicle DNA, both will turn heads, and both are the epitome of current automotive technology. It’s clear — you definitely want a Tesla. Which Tesla is right for you?
 |
Foreground: A new “refresh” Tesla Model S (left) across from a used “signature” Tesla Model S (right); Background: Tesla Model 3 (Photo: EVANNEX)
Although we were extremely impressed with the Model 3, if you’re considering a Tesla (and can afford it), we recommend going with Model S. On performance and premium feel, Model S wins going away. On exterior aesthetics, Model S provides a head-turning design that Model 3 can’t match. On (a few) interior design cues, it’s Model 3 by a nose. On interior space, seating, and storage volume, Model S triumphs. And if you consider availability, you can get your hands on a new or used Model S in a matter of weeks. Model 3 availability? That’s an entirely different discussion.
===
Note: Article originally published on evannex.com, by Matt Pressman
Tesla deliveries got a big boost in expectations from Wall Street firm Goldman Sachs, who believes the company will report some stronger-than-expected numbers when the second quarter comes to an end in the coming weeks.
Goldman Sachs has raised its vehicle delivery forecast for Tesla (NASDAQ: TSLA) in the second quarter of 2026, signaling growing confidence in the electric vehicle leader’s near-term momentum despite mixed market signals. Analyst Mark Delaney lifted the bank’s Q2 estimate to 420,000 units from a previous 405,000, surpassing the Visible Alpha consensus estimate of 400,000.
The upward revision stems from stronger-than-expected sales data across key regions. Europe stands out with projected year-over-year growth of 85-90 percent, driven by robust demand for Tesla’s Model Y and refreshed offerings. China posted high single-digit gains, while markets like South Korea and Australia also contributed positive momentum. These gains help offset mid-teens declines in U.S. deliveries through May, where broader EV market headwinds and competition persist.
Goldman extended its optimism to the full year, increasing its 2026 delivery projection to 1.73 million vehicles from 1.72 million. Longer-term forecasts remain unchanged, with 1.88 million units expected in 2027 and 1.96 million in 2028. The bank also nudged its 2026 earnings-per-share estimate higher to $1.35 from $1.30, reflecting anticipated margin benefits from higher volumes and operational efficiencies.
Despite these positive adjustments, Goldman maintained its Neutral rating and $375 price target on Tesla shares. At current trading levels near $411, the stock sits about 8-9 percent above the target, highlighting ongoing valuation concerns even as delivery momentum builds. Tesla’s Q1 2026 deliveries totaled 358,023 units, setting a baseline for recovery expectations in the current period.
This update arrives as Tesla prepares to report official Q2 figures shortly after June 30. Investors and analysts will closely watch not only headline delivery numbers but also regional breakdowns, average selling prices, and progress on energy storage deployments and autonomous technology initiatives.
The move by Goldman Sachs underscores a broader narrative for Tesla: while legacy auto markets face softening demand and tariff uncertainties, Tesla’s global footprint and product pipeline provide resilience. Europe’s surge reflects pent-up demand and policy support for EVs, while China’s steady growth highlights Tesla’s competitive positioning against local rivals.
Tesla still has its work cut out for it, including U.S. price sensitivity and intensifying competition. Yet Goldman’s revision adds to a series of analyst notes suggesting Q2 could mark a turning point. As Tesla pushes toward higher production rates at facilities in Fremont, Shanghai, and Berlin, sustained execution will be key to validating these higher forecasts.
We have said numerous times that deliveries are becoming a less important metric in the grand scheme of things, as AI truly takes precedence in the company’s thesis.
For Tesla bulls, the Goldman note reinforces faith in underlying demand trends. For skeptics, the unchanged rating serves as a reminder that delivery beats alone may not immediately resolve valuation debates in a high-interest-rate environment. Tesla’s stock reaction will likely hinge on the official numbers and management commentary in the coming weeks.
SpaceX has exercised its option to acquire Cursor, the innovative AI coding company, in an all-stock transaction valued at $60 billion. The deal, announced on June 16, marks a significant step in SpaceX’s expansion into advanced artificial intelligence, building on months of close collaboration between the companies.
Cursor, officially operated by Anysphere, Inc., is an AI-native code editor and coding agent designed to transform software development. Founded in 2022 by a group of MIT graduates in San Francisco, Cursor builds on the familiar foundation of Visual Studio Code but integrates powerful AI capabilities directly into the core experience.
Unlike traditional code editors or simple extensions, Cursor functions as a full “coding agent” that turns natural-language instructions into actionable code.
SpaceX has exercised the option to acquire @cursor_ai in an all-stock transaction with the goal of building the world’s most useful AI models.
For the past few months, SpaceXAI has been jointly training a model with Cursor, which will be released in Cursor and Grok Build soon.… https://t.co/X5mepgXgjJ
— SpaceX (@SpaceX) June 16, 2026
Developers interact with Cursor through features like its Composer agent, which can search entire codebases, edit multiple files, run terminal commands, debug issues, and complete complex multi-step programming tasks autonomously.
Users describe high-level goals, such as “build a scalable API endpoint with authentication,” and the AI plans, implements, tests, and refines the solution while the human oversees decisions. Additional tools include advanced autocomplete (Tab), context-aware chat, and infrastructure for handling billions of daily requests.
The platform has gained considerable traction, surpassing $3 billion in annual recurring revenue by early 2026 and earning adoption by over half of the Fortune 500 companies. Its agentic approach accelerates development dramatically, allowing engineers to focus on architecture and creativity rather than repetitive coding.
The acquisition integrates Cursor’s leading product, expert team of roughly 300 engineers, and distribution network among top software developers with SpaceX’s unparalleled computational resources. SpaceX’s Colossus supercomputer, equivalent to a million H100 GPUs, has already powered joint training of next-generation models. These models are expected to launch soon within Cursor and SpaceX’s Grok Build environment.
This combination positions SpaceX to develop the world’s most capable AI systems for coding and knowledge work. Access to Cursor’s real-world usage data from millions of professional developers provides unparalleled feedback loops for model improvement. Training on Colossus enables rapid iteration on massive datasets, potentially creating AI that outperforms current leaders in reliability, context handling, and complex reasoning.
For SpaceX, the benefits extend far beyond software tools. Rocket engineering, satellite constellation management, autonomous flight systems, and Starship development involve millions of lines of highly specialized, safety-critical code.
Cursor’s AI agents, supercharged by proprietary models trained on SpaceX’s domain expertise, could slash development timelines, reduce errors, and enable faster innovation cycles. This vertical integration of AI tooling strengthens SpaceX’s competitive edge in both aerospace and the broader AI race, complementing its xAI initiatives.
The deal reflects the exploding value of AI-native developer platforms. By owning Cursor outright, SpaceX secures a strategic talent pool and product pipeline that will accelerate internal projects while potentially offering enhanced tools to the wider engineering community. As AI continues reshaping software creation, this acquisition underscores SpaceX’s commitment to leveraging cutting-edge technology for ambitious goals, from Mars colonization to global connectivity.
Tesla’s Cybercab has taken a significant step toward production with new technical details emerging from 2026 EPA certification documents.
The filings, which include a Certificate of Conformity issued in late May, provide the most comprehensive public look yet at the purpose-built autonomous vehicle designed for high-volume, low-cost ride-hailing operations.
At its core, the Cybercab is a front-wheel-drive electric vehicle powered by a single 163 kW (219 horsepower) AC permanent magnet motor. Despite its modest output, prioritizing efficiency and cost over neck-snapping acceleration, the vehicle boasts a strong power-to-weight ratio thanks to its lightweight curb weight of 3,113 pounds and a GVWR of 3,730 pounds.
It operates on a 326-volt electrical architecture with a compact ~48 kWh lithium-ion battery pack. The standout revelation is the vehicle’s exceptional efficiency, which Tesla has routinely flexed in the past.
EPA lab tests list an equivalent all-electric range of 418 miles combined and 375 miles on the highway. Tesla has previously targeted around 300 miles of real-world range, and analysts expect the final EPA-rated figure to land near 280-300 miles after adjustment factors.
At a certified 165 Wh/mi in earlier testing, the Cybercab is reportedly the most efficient EV ever produced, significantly outperforming vehicles like the Lucid Air Pure.
New information about @Tesla‘s Cybercab has been revealed in public EPA documents.
• Front-wheel drive
• Battery capacity: ~48 kWh
• 219 horsepower
• Curb weight: 3,113 lbs
• GVWR: 3,730 lbs
• Motor power: 163kW
• Voltage: 326vEquivalent All Electric Range is listed at… pic.twitter.com/D4gkJJTj25
— Sawyer Merritt (@SawyerMerritt) June 15, 2026
This efficiency stems from deliberate design choices tailored for robotaxi duty. The two-seater features a highly aerodynamic shape, minimal weight, which is aided by structural battery integration of what are likely 4680 cells, and no steering wheel or pedals in its fully autonomous configuration.
For ride-hailing fleets, where average trips are short, and can be just five or ten miles, the smaller battery enables faster charging cycles, lower material costs, and reduced vehicle price, a key to Tesla’s goal of a ~$30,000 production cost.
Implications for Autonomous Mobility
These specs underscore Tesla’s strategy: maximize utilization and minimize operating expenses. A ~48 kWh pack could support dozens of short rides per charge, with energy costs potentially dropping below 20 cents per mile at scale. Front-wheel drive simplifies manufacturing and maintenance compared to dual-motor AWD setups in passenger Teslas.
The 219 hp motor provides ample performance for urban and highway speeds without excess, addressing questions about why such power is needed in a “slow” autonomous vehicle. Quick merges and hill climbing still matter for safety and passenger comfort.
Production has already begun at Giga Texas, with EPA certification clearing the path for U.S. deployment. While unsupervised Full Self-Driving remains the critical hurdle, these details paint a compelling picture of a vehicle engineered from the ground up for the robotaxi future: affordable to build, cheap to run, and capable of delivering strong range on a fraction of the battery capacity found in today’s EVs.
As Tesla ramps toward volume output, the Cybercab could reshape urban transportation economics.
Tesla deliveries get a big boost in expectations from Wall Street
SpaceX makes first acquisition post-IPO with coding leader Cursor
