Doubts may still linger about the potential of battery electric vehicles for mainstream transportation, but EVs are getting progressively better. And if the data from the Tesla Model 3 and Model Y fleet is any indication, it appears that these improvements could result, at least to some degree, in an all-electric crossover being more efficient than the early production versions of an all-electric sedan.
In a recent conversation with Teslarati, David Hodge, the founder and CEO of Embark — a transportation app company that was sold to Apple in 2013 — explained that his work on a little passion project has shown something incredibly interesting about the Model 3 and Model Y’s efficiency. Hodge is currently working on the Nikola app, a service that he hopes will eventually grow to be the CarFax for EVs. So far, users of the app have driven about 7,000,000 miles, and over 2,000 Model 3s are registered in the fleet.
These Model 3s are comprised of vehicles that were produced from the beginning of Elon Musk’s first “alien dreadnought” attempt to cars that rolled off the line this quarter. Based on data that the Nikola app proprietor shared, it is evident that the Model 3 has gotten significantly more efficient over the years. Users of the app with vehicles produced in 2018, for example, showed a real-world average MPGe of 90.3, while cars that were produced in 2019 had a real-world average of 100.4.
These efficiency improvements continued in the first half of 2020, when Nikola app users who owned Model 3s showed a real-world average MPGe of 105.2. Interestingly enough, Tesla appears to have rolled out a major improvement to the Model 3’s efficiency in the second half of the year, as vehicles produced after June 2020 have shown a real-world average MPGe of 125.7. That’s the biggest improvement in the Model 3’s efficiency yet, at least as reflected in data from the Nikola app’s users.
Inasmuch as the improvements in the Model 3’s MPGe are notable, the efficiency of the Model Y appears to be even more noteworthy. The Model Y is the newest vehicle in Tesla’s lineup today, having started deliveries earlier this year. But even with its early ramp, it is becoming quite evident that Tesla did something special with the all-electric crossover.
Nikola app users who owned Model Ys that were produced in the first half of 2020 showed a real-world average MPGe of 103.2, which was very close to the MPGe of Model 3s that were manufactured in the same period. And just like the Model 3s, Model Ys that were produced after June 2020 exhibited a significant improvement in efficiency, with the vehicles having a real-world average MPGe of 118.7. That’s higher than the MPGe of Model 3s that were produced just last year.
As noted by Hodge, such efficiency figures from the Model Y are extremely impressive, especially considering that it is larger and significantly heftier than the Model 3. This is also a pretty unique situation considering that the company’s flagship sedan, the Model S, has always been significantly more efficient than its SUV counterpart, the Model X.
“This is pretty impressive considering the obvious aerodynamic differences in the Y and the fact that the S has always outperformed the X by about 15. If you just look at cars made since June, the Model Y MPGe climbed to 119 on average, but it looks like some of the tech improvements made it over to the 3, which is seeing 125.6 MPGe average in that period,” Hodge noted.
Tesla has a habit of rolling out improvements to its vehicles as soon as they are available. The latest Teslas are therefore expected to have the best tech that the company has to offer at the time of their production. With this in mind, and as per the findings of auto teardown expert Sandy Munro, the Model Y is indeed equipped with Tesla’s best, both in tech and in design. And considering that the all-electric crossover is expected to share components with its sedan sibling, it is not very surprising to see the Model 3 experience efficiency gains as soon as the Model Y started ramping up. Such is simply the nature of Tesla.
News
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
SpaceX pushed Starship Flight 13 to Friday, blaming weather instead of the previous engine issues.
SpaceX called off Thursday’s launch attempt of Starship Flight 13, pushing the mission to Friday because of weather tied to Tropical Storm Bertha. The company confirmed the delay on X, noting “Now targeting Friday, July 24 for Starship’s thirteenth flight test, due to weather. A key objective for the flight test is to get clear imagery from the ground of Starship’s heatshield as it flies at a higher dynamic pressure during ascent, which won’t be possible with today’s weather conditions.”
This is the second delay for Flight 13 in two weeks. SpaceX first tried to launch the mission on July 16, but the countdown ended in an automated abort at T-0 when four of Super Heavy Booster 20’s 33 Raptor engines failed to ignite. Musk said at the time that two Raptors would need to be removed and replaced, as Teslarati reported. The company spent the following week destacking Ship 40 and Booster 20, swapping engines, and running leak checks before restacking the vehicle on Pad 2 Wednesday night, according to Spaceflight Now’s live coverage.
Unlike the engine problem, Thursday’s delay has nothing to do with the hardware. SpaceX wants clean footage of Starship’s heat shield captured from the ground as the vehicle flies through max dynamic pressure, something the storm’s cloud cover over South Texas would not allow. The company said visibility should improve for Friday’s attempt, with the same 90 minute window opening at 5:45 p.m. CT.
Flight 13 will be the second outing for the V3 versions of Starship and Super Heavy, following their debut on Flight 12 in May. The mission carries 20 production Starlink V3 satellites, the first time SpaceX has flown operational satellites rather than mass simulators on Starship. Six of those satellites are fitted with cameras to inspect the heat shield from a different angle during ascent, giving engineers a second data source beyond the ground imagery the weather is currently blocking.
Booster 20 will attempt a boostback burn and a splashdown landing burn in the Gulf of America, while Ship 40 follows a suborbital trajectory toward a landing in the Indian Ocean. The flight plan largely mirrors Flight 12, though the booster will run a more aggressive ascent burn after max Q this time, and the ship’s heat shield includes load sensing tiles meant to measure stress at the higher dynamic pressure SpaceX is targeting.
If Friday’s attempt succeeds, Flight 13 could be the last suborbital test in the program. SpaceX is already looking to push for an orbital flight on Flight 14.
Tesla stock (NASDAQ: TSLA) endured one of its sharpest single-day declines in years on July 23, tumbling approximately 14.5 percent and closing near $320 after opening the session around $374. The drop erased more than $140 billion in market value amid heavy trading volume and left the shares at multi-week lows.
The sell-off followed the company’s second-quarter 2026 results, released the previous evening. Tesla reported record revenue of $28.2 billion, up 26 percent year over year, driven by a Q2-record 480,126 vehicle deliveries. Energy storage deployments also rose strongly.
Tesla (TSLA) Q2 2026 earnings results: miss on EPS, beat on revenue
Yet profitability disappointed sharply. Operating income fell 57 percent to $398 million, compressing the operating margin to just 1.4 percent. Non-GAAP earnings per share came in at $0.33, well below the roughly $0.53 analysts had expected. Free cash flow turned negative by $1.1 billion as capital expenditures surged 142 percent to $5.8 billion, largely tied to accelerated spending on artificial intelligence, robotics, and autonomous systems.
The losses on capex were expected, as Tesla said it would be spending heavily in 2026.
Investors also reacted to lingering uncertainty surrounding key product timelines. During the Earnings Call, management reiterated ambitions for Robotaxi deployment and the Optimus humanoid robot, but offered limited new concrete milestones, renewing questions about execution pace that have long accompanied Tesla’s ambitious roadmap.
The magnitude of the decline places it among Tesla’s more severe one-day percentage losses since its 2010 initial public offering. Historically, the two largest single-day drops (split-adjusted) remain September 8, 2020, when shares fell 21.1 percent amid broader market volatility and valuation concerns, and January 13, 2012, with a 19.3 percent plunge during the company’s early growth struggles.
Other notable declines include an 18.6 percent drop on March 16, 2020, at the onset of pandemic-related market turmoil. Thursday’s move ranks roughly ninth on the all-time list but stands out as the steepest in more than a year.
Despite the short-term pain, Tesla’s long-term trajectory has repeatedly recovered from such volatility. The latest results underscore both the strength of its core automotive and energy businesses and the near-term costs of heavy investment in next-generation technologies.
Elon Musk clapped back at France’s decision to withhold the approval for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) Supervised system, projecting a clear and blunt message to French Transport Minister Phillippe Tabarot, after he publicly rejected the technology in its current form.
Tabarot outlines several concerns with Tesla Full Self-Driving in a detailed video statement, where he said, “The safety trade-offs are not yet sufficient to authorize it as it currently stands,” he said. He emphasized that FSD is not a true self-driving system and that the driver remains fully responsible.
Key issues Tabarot also brought up included allowing speeding when surrounding traffic exceeds limits and what he believes are insufficient guarantees of driver attention during complex urban maneuvers such as lane changes, intersections, and roundabouts.
Delaying the approval of FSD in France will cost lives
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) July 22, 2026
While acknowledging technological progress and France’s support for autonomous innovation, Tabarot stressed that deployment must prioritize road safety. He noted ongoing technical discussions with Tesla, the Netherlands, and other European partners, with further ecosystem meetings planned for the fall.
Musk’s rebuke highlights the human cost of regulatory caution. Tesla’s latest safety reports provide compelling data supporting accelerated adoption. In the most recent 12-month period, vehicles using FSD (Supervised) recorded one major collision per approximately 5.1 million miles driven, dramatically better than the U.S. national average of one crash per 698,000 miles.
Even Tesla vehicles driven manually with active safety features outperform the average by a wide margin. These figures come from billions of real-world miles of telemetry, showing FSD vehicles involved in far fewer incidents than both manual Teslas and the broader U.S. fleet.
Critics argue Tesla’s comparisons require careful scrutiny regarding reporting thresholds and fleet demographics, yet the data consistently positions FSD as a potential lifesaver. With road fatalities remaining a leading cause of death worldwide, Musk contends that proven safer technology should not face prolonged bureaucratic hurdles.
France’s measured approach reflects the broader European regulatory caution, which many, especially Musk, have been critical of in the past. However, as autonomous systems from Tesla and competitors like Waymo demonstrate superior safety in independent studies, pressure is mounting for harmonized approvals.
Musk’s warning carries the belief that every month of delay may equate to avoidable tragedies on European roads.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 faces wrath of the Texas skies
Tesla stock tumbles after earnings, one of its sharpest single-day declines
