News
Tesla Model S vs. Lucid Air: comparison of range, performance and price
Silicon Valley-based electric car startup Lucid Motors continues to make a name for itself as a real contender to Tesla, having recently debuted its long range Lucid Air ultra-luxury sedan across a series of meet-and-greet and test ride events in Southern California. Renowned tech reviewer MKBHD billed the Air as possibly being the Future of Luxury. But how does Lucid’s “private jet on wheels” stack up against Tesla’s Model S?
Ben Sullins of YouTube channel Telsanomics takes a deep dive into known published stats for each vehicle, and compares the two on range, performance, price, technology, and interior trim.
First, a disclaimer. Ben’s video was made before Tesla announced that the Model S 60 would no longer be available after April 17. Ben notes in the video description “In this video, I look at how this new base model Lucid Air stacks up against a Tesla Model S 60. Of course, since recording this Tesla has announced they no longer will be offering the 60 but the comparison is still relevant considering the primary variable is the range of the Model S.”
Range, Performance and Price
The base Lucid Air will offer 240 miles of range, rear wheel drive and have 400 horsepower through a single electric motor. Tesla’s base Model S 60 is rated at 210 miles of range with 320 horsepower, and also rear wheel drive.
Both vehicles will also be comparable in price. Lucid says its base model will start at $52,500 after deducting the $7,500 federal tax credit. By comparison, Tesla’s Model S 60 will be priced at $53,700 before incentives. If we are to factor in Tesla’s soon-to-be base Model S 75 into the equation, the price difference increases to a more dramatic $14,500.
Technology
The Lucid Air has 3 touch screens within the driver’s line of sight. The one located in the center of the car that displays less critical information can retracted into the dashboard when not in use. The other two flank the central instrument panel. There is another touchscreen available for rear seat passengers to adjust heating and cooling as well as sound system settings.
Both the Model S and the Lucid Air will be equipped with hardware that can facilitate fully autonomous driving. Feature updates will come via over-the-air software updates.
Interior
As pointed out by MKBHD in his review video of Lucid Air, the interior appointments of Lucid’s vehicle appear to be aimed more toward the luxury car buyer than those in the Model S. Some Tesla buyers who have purchased a Model S have critiqued Tesla for not matching their expectations when it comes to the quality of the interior materials used. MKBHD commented that the Lucid Air interior seems to have higher quality interior appointments, at least to his eye.
One thing that has impressed those who have ridden in the Lucid Air is the expansive front windshield. Like the Model X, it flows back over the heads of front seat passengers in one unbroken sweep of glass. In fact, the Air name was suggested by the light, airy feel created by all that glass. But that enormous front windshield will not be available on the entry level Air. The company says it will have an aluminum roof, 19″ wheels, and a 10-speaker audio system.
Availability
Tesla Model S and Lucid Air match up quite closely in terms of power, performance, and technology. Tesla CEO Elon Musk is always encouraging other manufacturers to build “compelling electric cars” and Lucid Motors is poised to be that manufacturer that has truly stepped up to the challenge.
Lucid, for the moment, has big plans. The company has identified a site for its factory in Casa Grande, Arizona and aiming for production beginning in late 2018 to early 2019.
Though Tesla has a 5-year head start on the buildout of its factory, distribution channel and charging network, is that enough to hold back Lucid from becoming a major force in the premium electric vehicle market? One that’s had time to learn, adapt and move arguably more efficiently than Tesla?
Lucid is a serious contender.
Here’s Teslanomics’ comparison of the Tesla Model S vs. Lucid Air. What are your thoughts?
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
