News
Tesla Model S, 3, X takes on Audi e-tron in Autobahn range and efficiency test
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.
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.
-
- (Photo: nextmove.de)
-
- (Photo: nextmove.de)
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.
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.
-
- (Photo: nextmove.de)
-
- (Photo: nextmove.de)
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.
Tesla just raised Model Y prices for the first time in two years, with the largest increase being $1,000.
The move signals shifting dynamics in the competitive electric vehicle market as the company continues to work on balancing demand, profitability, and accessibility.
The new pricing affects premium trims while leaving entry-level options unchanged. The Model Y Premium Rear-Wheel Drive (RWD) now starts at $45,990, a $1,000 increase.
The Model Y Premium All-Wheel Drive (AWD)—previously referred to in the post as simply “Model Y AWD”—rises to $49,990, also up $1,000. The top-tier Model Y Performance sees a more modest $500 bump, bringing its starting price to $57,990.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up:
New prices:
🚗 Model Y Premium RWD: $45,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y AWD: $49,990 – up $1,000
🚗 Model Y Performance: $57,990 – up $500 https://t.co/e4GhQ0tj4H pic.twitter.com/TCWqr3oqiV— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) May 16, 2026
Base models remain untouched to preserve affordability. The entry-level Model Y RWD holds steady at $39,990, and the base Model Y AWD stays at $41,990. This selective approach keeps the crossover accessible for budget-conscious buyers while extracting more revenue from higher-margin configurations.
After years of aggressive price cuts to stimulate volume amid slowing EV adoption and rising competition from rivals like BYD, Ford, and GM, Tesla appears confident in underlying demand. Recent lineup refreshes for the 2026 Model Y, including refreshed styling and efficiency gains, have helped maintain its status as America’s best-selling EV.
By protecting base prices, Tesla avoids alienating price-sensitive customers while improving margins on the more popular variants.
Tesla Model Y ownership review after six months: What I love and what I don’t
For consumers, the changes are relatively modest—under 3% on affected trims—and still position the Model Y competitively against gas-powered SUVs in the same class. Federal tax credits and potential state incentives may further offset costs for eligible buyers.
This marks a subtle but notable shift from the deep discounting era that defined much of 2024 and 2025. As the EV market matures into 2026, Tesla’s pricing strategy will be closely watched for clues about production ramps, new variants like the rumored longer-wheelbase Model Y, and broader profitability goals.
In short, today’s adjustment reflects a company that remains dominant yet pragmatic—willing to test higher pricing where demand supports it. It is unlikely to deter consumers from choosing other options.
Elon Musk cannot be fired from SpaceX, and there’s a reason for that.
In a blunt post on X on Friday, Elon Musk confirmed plans to structurally shield his leadership at SpaceX, ensuring he cannot be fired while tying a potential trillion-dollar compensation package to the company’s long-term goal of establishing a self-sustaining colony on Mars.
Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!
Obviously, IF SpaceX succeeds in this absurdly difficult goal, it will be worth many orders of…
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) May 15, 2026
The revelation stems from a Financial Times report detailing SpaceX’s intention to restructure its governance and compensation framework. The moves are designed to protect Musk’s control and align his incentives with the company’s founding mission rather than short-term financial pressures. Musk’s reply left no ambiguity:
“Yes, I need to make sure SpaceX stays focused on making life multiplanetary and extending consciousness to the stars, not pandering to someone’s bullshit quarterly earnings bonus!”
He added that success in this “absurdly difficult goal” would generate value “many orders of magnitude more than the economy of Earth,” though he cautioned that the journey will not be smooth. “Don’t expect entirely smooth sailing along the way,” Musk wrote.
The strategy reflects Musk’s deep concerns about how public-market expectations could derail SpaceX’s core objective. Founded in 2002, SpaceX has repeatedly stated its purpose is to reduce the cost of space travel and ultimately make humanity a multiplanetary species.
Unlike Tesla, which went public in 2010 and has faced repeated battles over Musk’s compensation and board influence, SpaceX remains privately held. Musk has long resisted taking the rocket company public precisely to avoid the quarterly earnings treadmill that forces most CEOs to prioritize short-term stock performance over ambitious, high-risk projects.
By embedding protections against his removal and linking any outsized pay package to verifiable milestones—such as a functioning Mars colony—SpaceX aims to insulate its leadership from activist investors or board members who might demand faster profits or safer bets.
Musk has referenced past experiences, including his ouster from OpenAI and shareholder lawsuits at Tesla, as cautionary tales. In those cases, he argued, external pressures risked diluting the original vision.
Critics may view the arrangement as excessive, especially given Musk’s already substantial voting power and wealth. Supporters, however, argue it is a necessary safeguard for a company pursuing goals measured in decades rather than quarters. Achieving a Mars colony would require sustained investment in Starship development, orbital refueling, life-support systems, and in-situ resource utilization—technologies that may deliver no immediate financial return.
Musk’s post underscores a broader philosophical point: true breakthrough innovation often demands tolerance for volatility and a willingness to ignore conventional business wisdom. As SpaceX prepares for increasingly ambitious Starship test flights and eventual crewed missions, the new governance structure signals that the company’s North Star remains unchanged—humanity’s expansion beyond Earth.
Whether the trillion-dollar package materializes depends on execution, but Musk’s message is clear: SpaceX exists to reach the stars, not to chase the next earnings beat. For investors or employees who share that vision, the protections are not a perk—they are a prerequisite for success.
News
Tesla discloses two Robotaxi crashes to NHTSA
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
Tesla has disclosed information on two low-speed crashes that occurred in Austin with its Robotaxi platform. These incidents occurred with teleoperators steering the vehicle, and there were no passengers in the car at the time they happened.
Newly unredacted data filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveals the two incidents.
The first crash took place in July 2025, shortly after Tesla launched its nascent Robotaxi network in Austin. The ADS reportedly struggled to move forward while stopped on a street. A teleoperator assumed control, gradually accelerating and turning left toward the roadside. The vehicle then mounted the curb and struck a metal fence.
In the second incident, in January 2026, the ADS was traveling straight when the safety monitor requested navigation support. The teleoperator took over from a stop, continued forward, and collided with a temporary construction barricade at approximately 9 mph, scraping the front-left fender and tire.
Tesla Robotaxi service in Austin achieves monumental new accomplishment
Tesla has previously told lawmakers that teleoperators are authorized to pilot vehicles remotely—but only at speeds below 10 mph, as the only maneuvers they were approved to perform were repositioning in awkward areas.
“This capability enables Tesla to promptly move a vehicle that may be in a compromising position, thereby mitigating the need to wait for a first responder or Tesla field representative to manually recover the vehicle,” the company stated in filings earlier this year.
Before this week, Tesla redacted the NHTSA reports, but they decided to reveal all 17 Robotaxi incidents recorded since the launch in Austin last Summer. Most of the other crashes involved the Tesla being struck by other road users and were not caused by the self-driving suite itself.
There were other incidents, including two additional self-caused accidents involving the ADS clipping side mirrors on parked cars. In September 2025, one Robotaxi struck a dog that darted into the roadway (the dog escaped unharmed), while another made an unprotected left turn into a parking lot and hit a metal chain.
Although Waymo and Zoox have reported more total crashes, Tesla operates at a far smaller scale. The cautious pace reflects the company’s broader safety concerns; it has been very slow with the Robotaxi rollout to ensure the suite is ready for operation.
Last month, CEO Elon Musk acknowledged that “making sure things are completely safe” remains the primary bottleneck to expanding the network, describing the company’s approach as “very cautious.”
The unredacted filings arrive amid heightened regulatory scrutiny of autonomous vehicles. NHTSA recently closed a separate probe into Tesla’s Full Self-Driving software repeatedly striking parking-lot obstacles such as bollards and chains—a problem that also prompted a recall at Waymo last year.
Tesla Robotaxi has been a widely successful program in its early days of operation, and the transparency Tesla brings here is greatly appreciated. Incidents will happen, of course, but the honesty gives customers and regulators a sense of where Tesla is in terms of developing its self-driving and fully autonomous ride-hailing suite.
Tesla Model Y prices just went up for the first time in two years
Elon Musk explains why he cannot be fired from SpaceX
