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?
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
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
