News
The Tesla Model Y is sized just right, and this will help it stand tall against rivals
Tesla’s much-awaited Model Y has piqued the curiosity of green car aficionados but it has always been described as the chunkier sibling of the Model 3 sedan or the smaller next of kin of the Model X SUV. Recently, another prototype of the electric crossover was spotted in California and while it was covered, someone measured the height of the Model Y. It’s 65 inches tall, placing it right in the middle of its rivals in the premium crossover segment.
Redditor u/gamerlike took the initiative to inform Tesla fans asking about the dimensions of the Tesla Model Y he saw in Mountain View. If his measurements are accurate, the Model Y will just be an inch shorter than the Model X, which stands 66 inches. Meanwhile, the Model 3 electric sedan’s height is pegged at 56.8 inches.
Recently, there have been more and more sightings of Tesla Model Y release candidates across the United States. A white Model Y Performance variant sporting a seemingly production-ready exterior was seen in San Luis Obispo, CA. There was also a black Model Y with red brake calipers that was spotted cruising along the I-5 in Washington State.
As the market awaits the Tesla Model Y release date, one cannot help but be more excited and compare the all-electric crossover to its possible competitors.
The Tesla Model Y electric crossover will be offered in three variants. The Rear-Wheel Drive Long Range version will sell for $48,000 while a Dual Motor All-Wheel Drive Long Range will go for $52,000. The Performance version, meanwhile, will set customers back by $61,000. The electric carmaker has moved the production up from Fall 2020 to Summer 2020, or if speculations from the community are any indication, maybe even sooner.
Tesla positions the Model Y luxury crossover against other premium vehicles in its class such as the BMW X3, Audi Q5, or the Jaguar I-PACE. Likewise, it can be compared to more affordable competitors in the segment such as the Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4.
Tesla Model Y’s competitors are almost the same height. For example, the BMW X3 is 66 inches high while the Audi Q5 is 65 inches and the Jaguar I-PACE is a bit shorter at 61 inches. Meanwhile, the more affordable Honda CR-V stands at 66-67 inches and the RAV4 is a bit taller at 67-68 inches.

Price-wise, the Model Y is comparable to its premium rivals as well. The X3 will go for almost $42,000, the Audi Q5 will sell for around $43,000, and the Jaguar I-PACE will be at the higher end of the spectrum at almost $70,000. The Honda CR-V, meanwhile, will set back customers by $25,000 and the RAV4 will sell for around $26,000.
If the height of the vehicle will be a basis, we can fairly say that the Model Y will be comfortable with ample headroom and enough legroom just like other vehicles in its class. However, the Model Y might have an X-factor — it has a seven-seat option. The X3, Q5, I-PACE, and the more affordable CR-V and RAV4 do not.
The EV world is awaiting a glimpse of the Model Y interior and a test drive to determine if the Model Y’s extra seats at the back really work. Nevertheless, the presence of more seats can convince some customers that it’s the vehicle that fits their needs. Ask every mom or dad who has to deal with World War III when traveling with kids who are sharing the passenger seats. Extra seats mean world peace.
As of October 2019, crossovers consist 40.4% of light vehicle sales in the US followed by pickup trucks (17.6%) and small cars (11.6%) based on data compiled by Statista. The market has been shifting from sedans to compact SUVs for their good dose of comparable fuel efficiency with mid-sized cars and their higher seating positions.
One must take note that according to Tesla CEO Elon Musk, the Model Y will be sharing around 75% of the parts used for the Model 3. Expected demand for the Model Y is around 50 to 100% higher than the annual demand for the Model 3 as well. With the Model Y sharing the DNA of the Model 3, this might mean a more efficient production ramp.
Earlier this year, Forbes analyzed the potential of the Model Y for Tesla. Aside from the high demand stateside, one can only imagine how the Chinese and European markets would react to the electric crossover. In China, the Model 3 has created a loud buzz in the market, and it will likely serve as a catalyst to the country’s slumping automotive industry.
In Europe, the Gigafactory 4 in Brandenburg will play a crucial role in bringing Teslas to the region. Forbes predicts that Tesla will be able to deliver about 250,000 units of Model Y by 2022. According to the same analysis, the Model Y has the potential to bring in revenues amounting to $12 billion in the next 3 years.
While critics say the Tesla Model Y is just the chunkier version of the Model 3, it is clear that it has a ton of potential. It’s not a Cybertruck or a Roadster but it presents a good balance between form and function that really matters to car buyers, electric or otherwise.
Energy
Tesla’s newest “Folding V4 Superchargers” are key to its most aggressive expansion yet
Tesla’s folding V4 Supercharger ships 33% more per truck, cuts deployment time and cost significantly.
Tesla is rolling out a folding V4 Supercharger design, an engineering change that allows 33% more units to fit on a single delivery truck, cuts deployment time in half, and reduces overall installation cost by roughly 20%.
The folding mechanism addresses one of the least glamorous but most consequential bottlenecks in charging infrastructure: getting hardware from factory floor to job site efficiently. By collapsing the form factor for transit and unfolding into an operational configuration on arrival, the new design dramatically reduces the logistics overhead that has historically slowed Supercharger rollouts, particularly at large or remote sites where multiple units are needed simultaneously.
The timing aligns with a broader acceleration in Tesla’s network strategy. In March 2026, Tesla’s Gigafactory New York produced its final V3 Supercharger cabinet after more than seven years and 15,000 units, pivoting entirely to V4 cabinet production. The V4 cabinet itself is already a generational leap, delivering up to 500 kW per stall for passenger vehicles and up to 1.2 MW for the Tesla Semi, while supporting twice the stalls per cabinet at three times the power density of its predecessor. The folding transport innovation layers logistical efficiency on top of that technical foundation.
Tesla launches first ‘true’ East Coast V4 Supercharger: here’s what that means
Tesla Charging’s Director Max de Zegher, commenting on the V4 cabinet when it launched, captured the operational philosophy behind these changes: “Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.” The design philosophy has always been about maximizing real-world throughput, not just peak specs, and the folding transport upgrade extends that thinking into the supply chain itself.
Posts can peak up to 500kW for cars, but we need less than 1MW across 8 posts to deliver maximum power to cars 99% of the time.
No more DC busbar between cabinets. Power comes from a single V4 cabinet to 8 stalls. Easier to install, cheaper, more reliable.
Introducing Folding Unit Superchargers
– V4 cabinet with 500kW charging
– 8 posts per unit
– 2 units per truck
– 2 configurations: folded, unfoldedFaster. Cheaper. Better. pic.twitter.com/YyALz0U5cA
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) March 25, 2026
The network is expanding rapidly on multiple fronts. The first true 500 kW V4 Supercharger on the East Coast opened in Kissimmee, Florida in March 2026, followed closely by a new site in Nashville, Tennessee. A public Megacharger for the Tesla Semi launched in Ontario, California in early March, with 37 additional Megacharger sites targeted for completion by end of year. Meanwhile, more than 27,500 Supercharger stalls are now accessible to non-Tesla EVs from brands including Ford, GM, Rivian, Hyundai, and most recently Stellantis, whose Dodge, Jeep, Ram, Fiat, and Maserati BEV customers gained access in March 2026.
As Tesla pushes toward a denser, faster, and more open charging network, innovations like the folding V4 Supercharger reflect the company’s growing focus on deployment velocity, not just hardware performance. Getting chargers to the ground faster, cheaper, and in greater volume per shipment may ultimately matter as much as the kilowatts they deliver.
Elon Musk
The Boring Company clears final Nashville hurdle: Music City loop is full speed ahead
The Boring Company has cleared its final Nashville hurdles, putting the Music City Loop on track for 2026.
The Boring Company has cleared one of its most significant regulatory milestones yet, securing a key easement from the Music City Center in Nashville just days ago, the latest in a series of approvals that have pushed the Music City Loop project firmly into construction reality.
On March 24, 2026, the Convention Center Authority voted to grant The Boring Company access to an easement along the west side of the Music City Center property, allowing tunneling beneath the privately owned venue. The move follows a unanimous 7-0 vote by the Metro Nashville Airport Authority on February 18, and a joint state and federal approval from the Tennessee Department of Transportation and the Federal Highway Administration on February 25. Together, these green lights have cleared the path for a roughly 10-mile underground tunnel connecting downtown Nashville to Nashville International Airport, with potential extensions into midtown along West End Avenue.
Music City Loop could highlight The Boring Company’s real disruption
Nashville was selected by The Boring Company largely because of its rapid population growth and the strain that growth has placed on surface infrastructure. Traffic has become a persistent problem for residents, convention visitors, and airport travelers alike. The Music City Loop promises an approximately 8-minute underground transit time between downtown and the Nashville International Airport (BNA), removing thousands of vehicles from surface roads daily while operating as a fully electric, zero-emissions system at no cost to taxpayers.
The project fits squarely within a broader vision Musk has championed for years. In responding to a breakdown of the Loop’s construction costs, Musk posted on X: “Tunnels are so underrated.” The comment reflected a longstanding belief that underground transit represents one of the most cost-effective and scalable infrastructure solutions available. The Boring Company has claimed it can build 13 miles of twin tunnels in Nashville for between $240 million and $300 million total, a fraction of what comparable projects cost elsewhere in the country.

Image Credit: The Boring Company/Twitter
The Las Vegas Loop, The Boring Company’s first operational system, has served as a proof of concept. During the CONEXPO trade show in March 2026, the Vegas Loop transported approximately 82,000 passengers over five days at the Las Vegas Convention Center, demonstrating the system’s capacity during large-scale events. Nashville draws millions of convention visitors and tourists each year, and local business leaders have pointed to that same capacity as a major draw for supporting the project.
The Music City Loop was first announced in July 2025. Construction began within hours of the February 25 state approval, with The Boring Company’s Prufrock tunneling machine already in the ground the same evening. The first operational segment is targeted for late 2026, with the full route expected to be complete by 2029. The project represents one of the largest privately funded infrastructure efforts currently underway in the United States.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk demands Delaware Judge recuse herself after ‘support’ post celebrating $2B court loss
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has filed a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit.
The filing, submitted March 25, cites an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.
The move escalates long-simmering tensions between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary, where McCormick previously presided over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package.
Delaware Supreme Court reinstates Elon Musk’s 2018 Tesla CEO pay package
The LinkedIn post was written by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant who assisted the plaintiffs who sued Musk over 2022 tweets about his Twitter acquisition. Plotkin praised the trial team for “standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”
The New York Post initially reported the story.
A banner on the post read “Katie McCormick supports this,” using LinkedIn’s heart-in-hand “support” icon, an endorsement stronger than a simple “like.” Musk’s lawyers argue the action creates “a perception of bias against Mr. Musk,” warranting immediate recusal to preserve judicial impartiality.
This appears to be unequivocal proof she denied the pay package because of her own personal beliefs and not the law.
Corruption. https://t.co/8dvgcfYuvh
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) March 25, 2026
McCormick swiftly denied intentional endorsement. In a letter to attorneys, she stated she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She wrote:
“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally.”
The chancellor maintains the reaction was inadvertent, but critics, including Musk allies, call the explanation implausible given the platform’s deliberate interface.
McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation underscores the stakes. In Tornetta v. Musk, in January 2024, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time and now valued far higher, was invalid.
The package consisted of 12 tranches of options, each vesting only after Tesla achieved ambitious market-cap and operational milestones. McCormick found Musk exercised “transaction-specific control” over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked sufficient independence, and proxy disclosures to shareholders were materially deficient.
Applying the entire-fairness standard, she concluded defendants failed to prove the deal was fair in process or price and ordered full rescission, an “unfathomable” remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.
After the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time in June 2024. McCormick rejected that ratification in December 2024, holding that post-trial votes could not cure defects.
Tesla appealed. On December 19 of last year, the Delaware Supreme Court unanimously reversed the rescission remedy while largely leaving McCormick’s liability findings intact. The high court deemed total unwinding inequitable and impractical, restoring the package but awarding the plaintiff only nominal $1 damages plus reduced attorneys’ fees. Musk ultimately received the full award.
The current recusal motion arises in yet another Tesla derivative suit before McCormick. Legal observers say granting it could signal heightened scrutiny of judicial social-media activity; denial might reinforce perceptions of an insular Delaware bench.
Broader fallout includes accelerated corporate migration out of Delaware, Musk himself moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the first ruling, and renewed debate over whether the state’s specialized courts remain the gold standard for corporate governance disputes.
A decision is expected soon; whichever way it lands, the episode highlights the fragile balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.