News
Porsche Taycan Turbo first ride teases production specs and price, Turbo S and RWD GTS variant
Porsche recently granted Automobile Magazine a rare test ride in the Taycan Turbo, the top-tier variant of the company’s first modern all-electric car. The test drive provided what could only be described as the closest look yet at the upcoming vehicle, and based on the impressions of the magazine; it appears that the Taycan Turbo could very well become one of Porsche’s most iconic cars yet.
Porsche designed the Taycan with the same principles as its other vehicles. It’s luxurious inside and out, it handles like a sports car, and it is quick — very, very quick. The motoring magazine highlighted this in its test ride, stating that the vehicle has a habit of pushing drivers and passengers back into their seats when it accelerates from 0-60 mph in just over 3 seconds. The publication also noted that the Taycan is more reminiscent of the Porsche 911 than Porsche’s four-door flagship, the Panamera, based on the way the car handled itself despite its weight.
While the Taycan is undeniably impressive, the test ride did raise a particular concern for the vehicle: it’s charging infrastructure, which remains a work in progress. The Taycan could be charged with up to 250 kW at an 800V charge point, but there are only a few charging stations with that output today. Even 400V stations, which can charge the Taycan at around 150 kW, are still relatively few. One can only hope that Porsche can secure the Taycan’s charging infrastructure by the time the vehicle’s production version is unveiled this coming September.
Perhaps most notable from the publication’s test drive were the details of the electric car that were revealed by the carmaker. For one, all Taycans, regardless of trim, are equipped with coated PSCB brakes, though carbon ceramic options are available. Similar to other electric vehicles, the Taycan is capable of regenerative braking as well, though the vehicle’s maximum regeneration is an impressive 250 kW. Higher-tier models also boast features like air suspension and rear-wheel steering.
Porsche is yet to fully announce the final specs of the Taycan, though a brand ambassador has confirmed the contents of a document obtained by the Automobile listing the features and specs of each Taycan version. According to the document, the base Taycan will be Rear Wheel Drive only, and it will be equipped with an 80 kWh battery pack. The base Taycan will be powered by a choice of 240-kW (322-hp) and 280-kW (375-hp) motors, and it will command a price in the low ~$90,000 range.
The vehicle’s mid-range variant, the Taycan 4S, will reportedly be equipped with a 96 kW battery pack and 320-kW (429-hp) or 360-kW (483-hp) electric motors. Pricing for the Taycan 4S will reportedly start in the high ~$90,000 range. The Taycan Turbo, which will be the vehicle’s top-of-the-line version upon its release, will reportedly feature a 96 kWh battery, a 160-kW (215-hp)/221-lb-ft motor up front, and a 300-kW (402-hp)/405-lb-ft motor at the rear. Pricing for the Taycan Turbo is expected to start at ~$140,000.
The Porsche Taycan is expected to be unveiled sometime this coming September, with the company offering the base, 4S, and Turbo versions to customers. At least two other variants of the Taycan will reportedly be unveiled later, one of which is a pretty insane 540-kW (724-hp) Turbo S version and a lighter RWD GTS trim that will most likely be incredibly fun to drive on the track. Porsche is also planning on improving its charging infrastructure in the near future, with peak charging rates for the vehicle increasing from 250 kW to 350 kW by 2021 at the latest.
The Porsche Taycan is arguably one of the most anticipated vehicles in the electric car market this year, particularly as it is one that has the potential to directly challenge the Tesla Model S in the premium EV segment. Porsche is moving full throttle to prepare for the Taycan’s production and ramp, with the company drastically upgrading its Zuffenhausen site to accommodate the manufacturing of the vehicle.
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.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
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.
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.
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.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
Tesla has to fix a big problem with its old headlights, NHTSA says
