Connect with us

News

Tesla Model S Plaid sets new record at the Nürburgring in final run for the year

A Tesla Model S prototype on the Nurburgring. (Photo: Auto Motor Uund Sport)

Published

on

Recent reports from German motoring publication Auto Motor und Sport have revealed that the blue Tesla Model S Plaid prototype has broken the company’s previous unofficial record on the Nurburgring, with the vehicle completing a lap around the track in 7:13. The Model S was able to accomplish this feat not just once, but twice. 

What is even more impressive was that Tesla accomplished this feat with a unit that previously completed a 7:40 lap around the Nurburgring in September. During that time, Tesla was able to finish a reported hand-stopped lap of 7:23, though it used its red Model S Plaid prototype, a vehicle that unfortunately crashed during a hot lap in recent weeks. Fortunately, the red Model S’ driver, Andreas Simonsen, was unharmed during the accident.  

As noted by the publication, the blue Model S Plaid prototype was driven around the Nurburgring by Nordschleife expert and racing driver Thomas Mutsch. For its record-setting runs, the Model S was equipped with its large rear diffuser and a small rear spoiler. A large spoiler spotted by photographers previously had reportedly been removed by Tesla after a short session around the track. The vehicle was equipped with Michelin Pilot Sport Cup 2 Cup R sports tires for its record-setting runs as well. 

Blue Tesla Model S with Plaid Powertrain returns to the Nurburgring. (Credit: Teslarati)

That being said, the blue Plaid Tesla Model S’ two 7:13 records are still unofficial lap times for the vehicle. Thus, for now at least, the electric car maker simply has the knowledge that its upgraded Tesla Model S is capable of beating the already-stellar 7:23 record it set for itself during its first excursion into the track over a month ago. Nevertheless, the blue Plaid Model S’ recent unofficial record is still 8 seconds shy of the 7:05 estimate that Tesla announced on Twitter when it left the Nurburgring for the first time in late September. 

Auto Motor und Sport noted that the Tesla team has departed the iconic German racetrack for now, with the team likely not coming back this year. The two vehicles used for the test — the red Model S Plaid that crashed, as well as the blue Plaid unit that set the 7:13 record — are reportedly being sent home to the United States. With this in mind, it appears that Tesla might be preparing to return to the Nurburgring with new Model S Plaid units next year, perhaps finally ready to set its own official lap record. 

Advertisement
A blue Tesla Model S Plaid unit with new aeros attacks the Nurburgring. (Photo: Stefan Baldauf/Auto Motor Uund Sport)

What is particularly interesting is that Tesla’s new unofficial lap time around the Nurburgring is already 29 seconds faster than the Porsche Taycan Turbo prototype that set an unofficial 7:42 record of its own around the German racetrack prior to the all-electric sports car’s official release. Considering that the blue Model S Plaid reportedly left the track last September with a 7:40 lap, the vehicle’s current 7:13 time is quite a notable improvement. 

After all, it appears that Tesla was testing two Plaid Model S variants in the Nurburgring this time around. Based on the initial track times of the two prototypes, it appears that Tesla was actually benchmarking the red and blue Model S against each other. And between the two vehicles, it almost seemed like the blue Plaid Model S was the more conservatively-specced vehicle. Either way, Tesla’s return next year would likely be incredibly exciting, as the company would likely come back with a vehicle that will be very close to the actual production Plaid Model S that’s set for release next year. 

At 7:13, Tesla’s Model S Plaid prototype has already exceeded the lap time of the 2018 Jaguar XE SV Project 8, which completed the Nurburgring in a blazing-fast 7:21. That’s the fastest four-door vehicle around the Nurburgring to date, not counting the prototype monster that Porsche brought over to the track recently, the Panamera “Lion” project, which reportedly completed a 7:11 lap. Quite interestingly, it appears that no laps have been done by Porsche with the Taycan Turbo S as of yet.

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

Elon Musk

SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke

Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.

Published

on

By

SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.

Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.

SpaceX comes with a slew of changes for Starship Flight 13

 

The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.

Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.

SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.

Continue Reading

News

Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future

Published

on

Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0 , via Wikimedia Commons

Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.

Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.

Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.

APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.

Elon Musk admits he was ‘clearly wrong’ about Anthropic

APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.

The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.

The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.

Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says

Published

on

tesla model 3 first generation headlight
Credit: Tesla Asia/Twitter

Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.

The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.

The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.

Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:

“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”

The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:

“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”

Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.

Continue Reading