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.
Elon Musk
Tesla shows what Roadster drivers will see on screen before thruster activation
Tesla’s Roadster video reveals a fighter jet inspired cockpit with a 5,500 PSI thruster gauge.
Tesla has given future owners their clearest look yet at the cockpit of its next generation Roadster. In a 34 second video posted to X on Friday afternoon, the company walked through the car’s touchscreen with a caption: “Inspired by fighter jet cockpits, Roadster’s interface was designed around the pilot.”
The clip opens on a black screen with red graphics and a 3D wireframe of the car, which sits beside the Roadster’s squared off yoke. Tapping parts of the model brings up controls for the rear wing, including low drag and high downforce positions, along with a charging page with a charge limit bar and a small music player. A row of tabs along the bottom reads Home, Vehicle, Listen, Climate and Navigate.
Most of the video is spent in Track Mode. The dashboard shows a live circuit map, a list of session lap times, brake and motor temperatures, and pressure and temperature readouts for each tire. A setup page lets the driver pick Auto, Low Drag, High Downforce or Custom aero modes, adjust aero balance and brake balance, and switch stability and traction control off. Along the bottom, a status bar reads “Thruster · 5,500 PSI” next to a “Boost Ready” indicator.
That gauge ties the software to the hardware Tesla showed off near Waco, Texas on October 15. The Thrust and Rocket versions use cold gas thrusters fed by carbon overwrapped pressure vessels, and Tesla lists 0 to 60 mph times of under 0.9 seconds and under 0.59 seconds for them, as Teslarati detailed in its breakdown of the three Roadster configurations. The base Performance car relies on a fan and ground sealing system for grip, and the aero settings on screen match the active wings and suction setup covered in our look at how the Roadster generates downforce.
The Roadster layout is a departure from the rest of Tesla’s lineup. Instead of a map centered screen, the Roadster puts the car itself at the center of the home page, and Tesla’s Roadster page lists two smaller forward displays alongside the main touchscreen. Tesla has not said whether any of the Track Mode telemetry will make its way to the Model 3 Performance or other vehicles.
The interface could still change before deliveries. Elon Musk said at the event that Roadster production will begin in 2028, and Tesla says the flagship Rocket version is not approved for public road use. Reservations are open with a $50,000 payment, while Thrust is listed as a limited release and Rocket is invite only.
Those who want to see the car in person will get their first chance this weekend. The Roadster goes on display in the lobby of the Petersen Automotive Museum in Los Angeles from October 24 to 27, according to Sawyer Merritt, the first time the public will be able to view it up close.
Elon Musk
Tesla reveals Optimus Academy, where robots teach themselves
Tesla has begun building production quality Optimus robots in Fremont and revealed its training plan.
Tesla has started building Optimus on the high volume line it set up inside its Fremont factory, and the company says the robots coming off it are the first that meet the bar for a real product. “The bots coming off this line are the first production-quality bots that we have manufactured,” Tesla wrote in its third quarter shareholder letter, adding that it has “proven that the current manufacturing process for Optimus is suitable for a commercial product.”
The line sits in space that built the Model S and Model X until this spring. Tesla cleared the old vehicle line in 46 days, as Teslarati reported in July, to make room for robot production sized for one million units a year. On Wednesday’s earnings call, Elon Musk said most of the equipment for that capacity is already in Fremont, with output set to climb toward roughly 20,000 robots a week as the line ramps.
Musk described the ramp as a classic S curve. “The growth of Optimus is an S curve, but the initial curve is a shallow slope,” he said. The team is now refining the robot’s AI, electromechanical design, reliability and service life, and Musk expects that work to be finished by the end of next year, when Tesla plans to start delivering Optimus to outside companies for dangerous, repetitive and around the clock jobs.
The most interesting part of the call was how Tesla plans to teach the robots. Its cars send real driving data back to the AI team from millions of vehicles, but Optimus has no fleet like that yet. “A big difference with Optimus versus the cars is we don’t have this vast fleet of cars from which we can gather training data,” Musk said. Tesla’s answer is an Optimus Academy, where 10,000 to 20,000 robots will practice a wide range of tasks and feed what they learn into the next version of the model. Every unit off the Fremont line becomes a source of that training data.
Smarter hardware is on the way too. Tesla plans to put its AI5 chip into Optimus next year, and Musk said a new Optimus video should arrive within one or two months showing the robot completing tasks driven by AI rather than preprogrammed motions. He took aim at rival humanoid demos that only run scripted routines, saying those would not hold up in the real world.
The supply chain is lining up behind the program. In September, Tesla certified Tuopu, Joyson and Sanhua as mass production partners for Optimus components. A far larger Optimus factory is also rising at Giga Texas, where drone footage from Joe Tegtmeyer showed the steel frame nearing completion, and Musk has pegged that plant’s long term target at 10 million robots a year.
Tesla executives also said Optimus production costs are trending toward the expected manufacturing cost of Cybercab, a sign the robot is being engineered for volume from the start. The hands remain the toughest piece of the design, a point Musk also made at the X Takeover event earlier this month, as Teslarati covered at the time, and that is where much of the current engineering effort is focused.
Elon Musk
The Starship moon landing number NASA and Elon Musk can’t agree on
Musk disputes NASA estimate of 22 Starship launches for Moon landing, predicting 6 to 8.
Elon Musk is disputing a new NASA safety panel estimate of how many Starship launches it will take to put astronauts on the Moon, saying the real number will be less than half the panel’s figure.
On Thursday, NASA’s Aerospace Safety Advisory Panel held its quarterly public meeting. Panel member Charlie Precourt, a former NASA astronaut, flagged the fueling process for SpaceX’s lunar lander as a major risk for Artemis IV, the mission planned to land a crew on the Moon in 2028. “We need to keep our eyes on numerous required fuelings for the lander,” Precourt said, according to Ars Technica. “I think the last estimate is around 22 flights.”
Ars Technica’s Eric Berger posted the comment on X, and Musk replied. “That’s way too high,” Musk wrote. “Actual number will be more like 6 to 8.”
The disagreement comes down to a basic problem with sending a ship as large as Starship to the Moon. Starship burns nearly all of its propellant just reaching Earth orbit, so it cannot continue on to the Moon without stopping for a refill. SpaceX’s answer is a gas station in space. First, a Starship that works as a storage tank, called a depot, is launched into orbit. Then a series of tanker Starships launch one at a time, dock with the depot and pump their leftover propellant into it. Once the depot is full, the lunar lander version of Starship launches, docks, fills up and heads for the Moon.
Every tanker trip is its own full rocket launch, which is why the count matters. More launches mean more time, more cost and more chances for something to go wrong before astronauts ever leave Earth. Berger estimated that even if SpaceX reaches twice weekly Starship launches by the end of 2027, filling a depot at the panel’s number would still take roughly three months.
How many tankers are needed depends mostly on how much propellant each one can carry to orbit and how much is lost along the way. Starship’s fuel and oxygen are stored at extremely cold temperatures, and some of it slowly boils off while waiting in orbit. More is lost in each transfer. NASA appears to be working from what Starship can lift today, while Musk’s range assumes a more capable rocket.
Musk has pushed back on higher counts before. In 2021, after a government document suggested 16 launches, he called that “extremely unlikely” and said eight tankers would be the most required.
Much of the answer depends on hardware SpaceX has not finished flying. As Teslarati noted earlier this year, the company plans to carry out the refueling process with its upgraded V3 Starship, and Precourt described Artemis IV as carrying “a large number of firsts.” He also praised NASA Administrator Jared Isaacman’s team for working to clear obstacles for both SpaceX and Blue Origin, whose Blue Moon lander does not rely on orbital refueling for its first mission.



