Connect with us

News

Tesla Model S, 3, X takes on Audi e-tron in Autobahn range and efficiency test

(Photo: nextmove.de)

Published

on

German electric vehicle rental company nextmove recently conducted what could only be described as the ultimate Autobahn efficiency and range test, pitting the Tesla Model S, 3, and X against the upstart Audi e-tron and the bang-for-your-buck Hyundai Kona Electric. Following the EV rental firm’s test, it was evident that veteran automakers such as Audi still have a long way to go before they catch up to Tesla’s experience in electric cars.

Eight vehicles were used for nextmove’s test: a Model S 100D (equipped with 19” winter tires), two Tesla Model X 100D (one fitted with 19” winter tires and the other fitted with 20” summer tires), one Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor AWD (equipped with 19” summer tires), two Audi e-tron (one with digital side mirrors and another with classic mirrors; both equipped with 21” summer tires), and two Hyundai Kona Electric (one fitted with 17” summer tires and the other fitted with 17” winter tires). Each vehicle’s tire pressure was set according to manufacturer specifications, and each was driven by an experienced electric car driver.

(Photo: nextmove.de)

Several rules were observed to keep the Autobahn test as controlled as possible. Cruise control was only utilized once the target cruising speed of 130 kph (81 mph) and 150 kph (93 mph) was reached. Features such as Regenerative Braking were also avoided, and heating was largely disabled. Thet route was 85 km (52.8 miles) long, with the vehicles traveling 130 kph one way and 150 kph in the other.

The results of both the 130 kph (81 mph) and 150 kph (93 mph) tests revealed that the Tesla Model 3 was the most efficient vehicle among the eight that the EV rental company evaluated. Following the Model 3 was the Hyundai Kona Electric in summer tires, which is, in turn, followed by the Tesla Model S 100D. The largest vehicle in the group, the Tesla Model X, proved less efficient than the Model 3, Model S, and Kona Electric, but it proved notably more efficient than the Audi e-tron.  

The Audi e-tron and the Tesla Model X had already gone head-to-head in a nextmove test in the past. During the previous test, the EV rental company utilized a pre-production version of the Audi e-tron, and it proved to be the electric equivalent of a gas-guzzler, being 23% less efficient than the larger, heavier Tesla Model X.

While the Audi e-tron performed much better against the Tesla Model X than its pre-production counterpart in the recent test, the all-electric SUV still proved less efficient than the Silicon Valley-made crossover. Quite interestingly, the difference in energy consumption between the Tesla Model X and Audi e-tron was more prominent at lower speeds than at higher speeds.

(Photo: nextmove.de)

Tesla’s Model S, 3, and X cleared the house in terms of range. During the 130 kph test, the Model S 100D showed a range of 480 km (298 miles), the Model X 100D showed a range of 409 km (254 miles), and the Model 3 managed a range of 406 km (252 miles). The Hyundai Kona Electric turned in a respectable 322 km (200 miles), and the Audi e-tron, in last place, managed 301 km (187 miles).

The results of the 150 kph test were quite similar. The Model S, X and 3 proved superior once more with a range of 428 km (265 miles), 359 km (223 miles), and 358 km (222 miles). The Hyundai Kona Electric managed 283 km (176 miles), while the Audi e-tron achieved a range of 275 km (171 miles). With these results in mind, it appears that veteran automakers such as Audi still have their work cut out for them in terms of designing electric vehicles that offer a balance of power, efficiency, and range.

Advertisement
-

It should be noted that the Tesla Model X utilized by nextmove in its Autobahn efficiency test was a 100D unit, and thus, the vehicle was not yet equipped with the company’s updated high-efficiency drive units. With a “Raven” Model S and Model X in the equation, the German EV rental company’s test could very well have ended in a far more lopsided manner.

The full results of nextmove‘s eight-way comparative test could be accessed here.

Watch nextmove’s Autobahn efficiency test in the video below. English subtitles are available. 

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

News

SpaceX’s Starfall just went from secret to storefront

SpaceX now pitches Starfall missions with 1,000 kg payloads, weeks of microgravity, and Starlink connectivity.

Published

on

By

An artist’s illustration of a SpaceX Starfall capsule reentering Earth’s atmosphere. (Image: SpaceX)

SpaceX has put up a dedicated commercial page for Starfall, its disk shaped reentry capsule, laying out for the first time what customers actually get when they book a flight. The page, live at spacex.com/starfall, pitches “affordable, routine access to microgravity” and invites companies to get in touch about flying manufacturing, research or testing payloads.

The specs are short and specific. Each Starfall mission carries up to 1,000 kg of payload, supplies 1 kW of power and connects through an Ethernet interface. Mission length is tailored to the customer, and the payload stays online the entire time through Starlink, which means researchers can pull data from an experiment while it is still in orbit instead of waiting for splashdown.

SpaceX is launching a secret spacecraft that could change how things are made in space

SpaceX is aiming the service at three markets. Biomedical customers are told they can grow stem cell organoids, replacement tissue and layered biomaterials. Pharmaceutical companies are pitched on protein and small molecule drug crystals, which form smaller and more uniform shapes without gravity driven convection. Materials science rounds out the list, with semiconductors and other next generation materials grown in vacuum and microgravity.

The page also makes clear which rocket SpaceX is counting on. “By launching on Starship, Starfall brings a reliable and scalable cadence previously unavailable to the market,” the company wrote, contrasting weeks of continuous microgravity with the seconds offered by drop towers and parabolic flights. No price or first operational flight date is listed.

The commercial push is a sharp turn from how Starfall started. SpaceX said almost nothing about the capsule ahead of its first flight in June, and nearly everything known came from FAA and FCC filings describing a disk about 10.2 feet wide and 2.5 feet tall that can return 2,200 pounds of cargo. By its second flight on the Bandwagon-5 rideshare in October, Starfall was listed by name on the mission page, though SpaceX still did not say what it carried.

Advertisement
-

Customers appear to be lining up. SpaceX said in its third quarter results that it signed three commercial Starfall missions during the quarter. On the earnings call, President Gwynne Shotwell described the capsule as providing “routine relatively low cost access to microgravity environments for scientific research, including improving our understanding of diseases like cancer and diabetes,” and said the three new missions would fly on Starship.

The branding effort extends past the website. SpaceX added a Starfall T-shirt to its online store on Monday as part of a batch of new merchandise, giving the program a place next to Starship, Starlink and Starshield in the company’s lineup.

The move also puts SpaceX in more direct competition with companies it launches. Varda Space Industries, which has built much of the in-space manufacturing market so far, flew its W-Series 7 capsule on the same Bandwagon-5 mission as Starfall in October. Varda’s capsules are roughly three times smaller than Starfall, and SpaceX controls the ride to orbit for both.

Starfall’s near term cadence depends on Starship. SpaceX is preparing for Flight 15 after completing static fires of Ship 42 and its Super Heavy booster in late October, and is aiming to catch both stages with the launch tower on that flight.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Grok Bot users hit with weekly limits early, Elon Musk explains what happened

Published

on

Credit: Grok Bot

Elon Musk said weeks ago during SpaceX’s third-quarter earnings call that the company’s Grok Bot, its autonomous AI Agent platform, was showing “the fastest growth of a product” that he’d ever seen in his life.

Now, SpaceXSI is scaling back Grok Bot users’ weekly limits, much to the surprise of those who have relied on it to take away monotonous tasks in their lives.

Elon Musk’s terse November 1 reply on X captured a sharp tension in the early days of agentic AI. Responding to a user who asked for a Grok Bot usage reset after hitting 100 percent with four days still left on the weekly cycle, Musk wrote: “The cost of serving Grok Bot was unsustainably high relative to revenue.”

The post arrived amid a wave of similar complaints from paying subscribers whose meters had jumped unexpectedly toward or to the limit, sometimes overnight and with little corresponding activity. It also stood in clear contrast to statements Musk had made only days and weeks earlier.

Advertisement
-

On the SpaceX third-quarter earnings call in mid-to-late October, Musk had described Grok Bot in almost the opposite terms. He called it “the fastest growth of a product that I’ve ever seen in my life” and said he had “never seen anything grow this fast.”

Company figures put paid weekly users at roughly 800,000 earlier in the month, more than doubling over the prior period. Daily active users had climbed from under 100,000 in early September to over 600,000 by late October.

Musk emphasized that the product has no free tier and that users appear to be getting real value beyond what they pay. In other remarks, he noted that usage per user was rising rather than declining, the opposite of the usual decay pattern for new software.

Grok Bot, launched around August, functions as an always-available agent with its own persistent cloud computer; it can schedule, research, shop, browse, and execute multi-step workflows even after the user steps away. Access is bundled into X subscription tiers (roughly $30, $100, and $200 per month) and certain Cursor plans, drawing from shared weekly usage pools whose exact sizes have not been publicly detailed.

The economics of that model are what Musk’s November 1 post put in the spotlight. Agentic systems burn far more compute than ordinary chatbot exchanges. Each task can trigger repeated model calls, tool use, web actions, and sustained background work.

When growth is as rapid as Musk celebrated, the absolute compute bill scales quickly even if average revenue per user stays fixed under flat monthly subscriptions. Industry observers noted the opportunity cost as well: the same GPUs can be rented to other AI labs at higher rates.

Advertisement
-

A simple back-of-the-envelope comparison circulating after the post illustrated the gap: if every reported daily user paid the top tier, annualized subscription revenue would still be modest relative to the scale of compute infrastructure SpaceX is building and leasing to companies like Anthropic.

Some users also reported possible dashboard anomalies around the same period, though Musk’s framing treated the underlying cost-revenue imbalance as the core issue rather than a pure metering glitch.

The juxtaposition is the core of this exchange. Within roughly two weeks of publicly framing Grok Bot as an unprecedented success with strong unit economics and no free tier, Musk acknowledged that serving the same product had become unsustainable relative to the revenue it generates.

For the broader industry, the episode underscores a structural challenge of the agent era: demand is real and growing faster than many expected, yet the cost of fulfilling that demand through always-on, multi-step agents can outrun subscription pricing before companies can adjust limits, introduce metered billing, or raise prices.

Musk’s reply did not promise an immediate reset or higher allowances; it simply stated the constraint. In doing so, it supplied a rare, explicit public data point on the unit economics of a high-profile AI agent just as adoption numbers were still being celebrated as the fastest in Musk’s experience.

The tension between rapid, paid growth and the compute required to deliver it is now on the record.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading

News

Tesla owners who tap Emergency Drive Away for fun are in for a surprise

Tapping Activate on Tesla’s Emergency Drive Away reportedly triggers a $539 service bill without moving.

Published

on

By

Tesla owners who press Activate on Emergency Drive Away may be on the hook for a service bill even if their car never leaves the Supercharger stall.

Yaro, who posts about Tesla service cases on X as @Tutrifour, said a customer called after tapping Activate while still plugged into a Supercharger. The owner was about to pull away, remembered the cable was still connected and stopped. The car never moved, but the touchscreen showed a red alert reading “Emergency Drive Away has been activated” with “Service is required” underneath. A Service Mode screenshot showed the active alert BMS_a228_EmergencyDriveAwayServiceRequired, which Yaro said only Tesla Service can clear.


The cost of clearing it was the bigger surprise. “Don’t press Activate on the new Emergency Drive Away feature on your Tesla because service charges $539 to inspect the charge port and to clear the alert. Yes, even if you didn’t move the car an inch,” Yaro wrote.  The $539 figure comes from that single case, and Tesla has not published a set price for the inspection or commented on the post. Yaro also noted that the car would still charge with the alert on screen.

Tesla launched Emergency Drive Away on October 1 with software update 2026.38.3, letting drivers pull away from a U.S. Supercharger with the cable still attached, as Teslarati reported. To use it, a driver shifts into Drive while connected, holds the brake and taps Activate. The prompt warns that driving with the cable connected will damage the vehicle and the Supercharger, and that short camera recordings will be shared with Tesla.

Tesla Charging has been clear about what follows a real activation. Repairs to a Supercharger stall can run up to $25,000 depending on the site, a service visit for the car’s charge port is mandatory, and deliberate misuse “will invoke additional penalties.” What the company had not spelled out is that the service requirement is triggered the moment Activate is pressed, not the moment the cable breaks away.

Advertisement
-

From an engineering standpoint, that is the cautious choice. Once Activate is pressed, the car cannot be sure the charge port latch was not stressed, so flagging it for inspection removes the guesswork. It also means the button carries a price on its own, which is a stronger deterrent against casual use than any warning screen.


The report follows the feature’s first known real world use, when a driver in Austin during F1 weekend appeared to trigger it by accident and dragged the Supercharger cable along with the car. The Reddit user who filmed it said the driver seemed to have only half read the prompts.

For owners, the takeaway is to treat the red prompt as a stop sign. If it appears after shifting out of Park by mistake, shift back and unplug the normal way from the touchscreen, the Tesla app or the button on the charge handle. Activate is meant for moments when staying at the stall is the bigger risk, and Tesla is now pricing it that way.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading