Connect with us

News

Tesla Showdown: We got a Model 3 and compared it to a Model S [Video]

Published

on

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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.

Advertisement

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

Advertisement

EVANNEX carries aftermarket accessories, parts, and gear for Tesla owners. Its blog is updated daily with Tesla news.

Advertisement
Comments

News

SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies

SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.

Published

on

By

SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”

This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.

Elon Musk debunks $52 billion SpaceX-NVIDIA GPU deal

 

Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.

Advertisement

Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.

Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.

If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.

The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.

Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue

Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.

The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.

Advertisement

Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.

The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.

Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.

Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Elon Musk is not happy about this Tesla Full Self-Driving approval delay

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.

Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.

Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.

Advertisement

While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.

Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.

Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.

Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.

France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.

Advertisement

Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.

Continue Reading