Connect with us
Tesla Model Y Tesla Model Y

News

Updated: Tesla Model Y specification discrepancy has experts scratching their heads

Credit: Tesla Europe, Twitter

Published

on

Update: 5/3 12:40 pm est: Tesla has updated the specifications of the Model Y RWD in North America. See para. 3

A discrepancy in the Tesla Model Y’s specifications leaves experts and fans confused and wondering what will come to the United States.

Tesla has always been at least a little tight-lipped about its engineering and design, and this pseudo-secrecy certainly isn’t aided by its lack of a communications team. However, this has come to a head recently as fans have discovered a discrepancy in the specifications of Tesla’s newest offering, the rear-wheel-drive single-motor Model Y, which currently is only sold in select markets.

The Tesla Model Y spec discrepancy was first identified by Mathias Føns on Twitter, who pointed out that the Model Y RWD sold in North America is significantly heavier and charges substantially faster than its counterpart abroad.

Since its discovery, Tesla has updated its website, decreasing the weight listed in North America to match the global model. However, the Model Y RWD outside of North America still charges at 170kW, while its North American counterpart charges at 250kW. Tesla has not publically addressed this disparity.

Looking at the spec sheets posted on Tesla websites worldwide, the heavier and faster charging Model Y RWD is only being sold in North America, including both Canada and Mexico, though the vehicle is not yet available in the States. In contrast, models sold in Australia, Europe, and Asia are lighter and charge significantly slower. Specifically, the North American model is 389kg (857.6 lbs) heavier than its global counterpart and charges almost twice as fast, 250kW vs. 170kW. The listed weight of the model sold in China is 2kg heavier than the one sold in Europe, but it has the same recorded charging speed.

The two models also seem to differ slightly in estimated range, though they aren’t precisely comparable considering they use entirely different testing schedules; EPA in North America, WLTP in Europe and Australia, and CLTC in China.

Strangely, this discrepancy continues when comparing the Model Y RWD with the Model Y Long-Range AWD sold in the same market. According to the Tesla Canada website, the RWD is 319kg (703.3 lbs) heavier than the LR AWD, though they charge at the same speed, 250kW.

While some have hypothesized that this weight difference has to do with how the weight is measured in each country, the more likely difference, which could also explain the dramatic difference in charging speed, is battery chemistry. Tesla does not list this difference on its website. Still, using lithium iron phosphate (LFP) batteries in North America would explain the incredible weight difference and the charging speed increase, that is, if the global model is using a lithium nickel manganese cobalt (NMC) battery.

Advertisement
-
-

Tesla CEO Elon Musk has previously noted that the automaker plans to switch all of its lower-priced offerings to the cheaper-to-produce LFP battery, further adding credence to the battery chemistry hypothesis.

With Tesla expected to continue to grow the reach of each of its product lines, many anticipate it will only be a matter of time before the RWD variant of the Model Y makes its way to Tesla’s home market, the United States. And with the rest of North America already using the heavier, faster charging model, Americans should expect access to this variant instead of the global version.

Along with the charging speed bump, the LFP battery would provide significantly improved durability and battery lifespan compared to those sold in Europe, Asia, and Australia.

What do you think of the article? Do you have any comments, questions, or concerns? Shoot me an email at william@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @WilliamWritin. If you have news tips, email us at tips@teslarati.com!

Will is an auto enthusiast, a gear head, and an EV enthusiast above all. From racing, to industry data, to the most advanced EV tech on earth, he now covers it at Teslarati.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

SpaceX AI investment gamble will make it a big winner, firm says

Published

on

Credit: SpaceX

SpaceX’s massive investment in AI will make it a big winner, Argus Research said after the company’s successful earnings call last week.

The firm also upgraded shares to a Buy from Hold and set a $160 price target.

SpaceX (NASDAQ: SPCX) is currently recovering from its heavy AI infrastructure investments, as it spent nearly $16 billion in Q2 alone. The company did this primarily by monetizing high-demand GPU compute capacity at a much faster pace than traditional data center economics would suggest.

Company CFO Bret Johnsen said that SpaceX would be able to pay back anything on new deployments within a year.

There are plenty of ways the company can do this:

Leasing excess compute capacity through contracts

SpaceX has already built Colossus and Colossus II, largely for its own model training. However, much of that capacity is already rented out to third parties. It already has major deals with Anthropic, Google, and Reflection AI. These partnerships are adding billions per month to SpaceX’s spreadsheet.

SpaceX is charging Anthropic massive money for its compute

Advertisement
-
-

High utilization driven by industry-wide scarcity

The demand for advanced AI training and inference capacity continues to exceed what is available for use. SpaceX can fill new racks quickly after they come online, so the capital deployed converts into revenue with minimal idle time.

Additionally, management and outside observers have described the new compute capital as behaving more like a cost-of-goods-sold than traditional multi-year capex, especially because of this rapid monetization pattern.

Capacity has already scaled from ~0.4 GW a year to 1.4 GW annually by the end of Q2. There are targets of more than 2 GW by year-end.

High incremental margins on the rental business once capacity is online

GPU cloud providers often operate at strong gross margins. SpaceX can monetize capacity that was already partially built or can be added efficiently. This means that incremental EBITDA margins on the rental revenue are usually high. This accelerates cash recovery relative to the gross capital outlay.

Parallel monetization of its own AI software and applications

Beyond pure infrastructure rental, SpaceX also generates revenue from Grok through subscriptions and usage, from X through ads, data, and other related services, enterprise APIs, and the planned integration of the Cursor coding tools acquisition.

These application layers ride on the same compute infrastructure and provide additional high-margin streams that could offset build-out costs. AI-segment revenue overall rose sharply to about $2.6 billion in Q2, according to Motley Fool. This was driven primarily by the infrastructure contracts, but the software side is also partially responsible.

Efficient, large-scale deployment and vertical integration advantages

SpaceX has emphasized the rapid construction of power and cooling infrastructure and favorable cost-per-megawatt economics relative to industry benchmarks in some disclosures.

Advertisement
-
-

Combined with its ability to scale capacity aggressively and the fact that many contracts start generating revenue within months of capacity coming online, the effective payback compresses dramatically compared with more conventional multi-year data-center projects.

SpaceX’s dominant near-term recovery path will turn the AI clusters into a hyperscale-style compute rental business for other leading AI companies while still using a portion for internal models.

Continue Reading

News

Tesla headlights cause recall of over 20,000 Model 3 and Model Y

Published

on

Tesla headlights have caused a recall of over 20,000 of the company’s two most popular vehicles, the Model 3 and Model Y, due to the low-beam bulb exceeding the maximum allowed intensity according to federal standards.

Tesla initiated the recall with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) this morning, stating that the low-beam output “exceeds the maximum allowed intensity in the outer upper-right and outer upper-left areas of the 10U and 90U zone, as prescribed in FMVSS No. 108.”

Tesla sourced the impacted headlights from Marelli Automotive Lighting, a Mexico-based company. The recall impacts 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles and 2017-2023 Model 3 vehicles. It is estimated that every VIN in this recall is impacted by the defect.

Typically, Tesla would remedy recalls of this nature through an Over-the-Air software update, which has been a major focus of criticism by the company and its supporters because the NHTSA still refers to it as a “recall,” even though it requires no action by the vehicle owner. The fix is shipped over the internet and downloaded to the car.

Advertisement
-
-

However, there appears to be a potentially different solution for this problem. Tesla has not developed a remedy for this issue, so it could potentially be on the way. The big issue appears to be the fact that these recalled lamps are out of production, and this is an old body style for both vehicles. The headlights and front-end designs are completely different.

Tesla switched to another supplier when the affected headlight design was discontinued. It plans to begin notifying owners of their remedy options by September 15.

Tesla filed a petition protesting the recall to fix the vehicles’ headlight issue, but the NHTSA denied it. Now, Tesla will come up with a solution to fix it.

Continue Reading

Elon Musk

Another Tesla SpaceX merger prediction by ARK Invest has Elon Musk talking

Elon Musk again denies a Tesla China split as new SpaceX merger speculation resurfaces quickly.

Published

on

By

Elon Musk restated that Tesla has no plans to separate its China business from the rest of the company, responding to a new round of merger speculation from ARK Invest.

On the firm’s “Brainstorm” podcast, Cathie Wood’s team, including chief futurist Brett Winton and research director Nick Grous, argued a Tesla and SpaceX combination remains likely, with an announcement possible before the end of the year even if the deal itself would not close that quickly. Winton called Tesla’s Shanghai operations a “small ish wrinkle” for a merger rather than a real obstacle, since SpaceX’s national security work with the U.S. government sits uneasily next to Tesla’s manufacturing base in China.

Musk pushed back on the framing directly. “China is awesome. I strongly encourage people to visit,” he wrote on X. He also repeated language he first used in late July, when the Wall Street Journal reported that Tesla executives had been told to prepare for a possible spinoff, sale, or closure of the China business ahead of a SpaceX tie up. Musk called that report “absurdly fake news” at the time, adding that a separation had “never even come up in a discussion ever,” a line he echoed again this week.

The repeated denial has not settled the underlying question, because Shanghai’s role in Tesla’s business is exactly what makes a merger complicated. Gigafactory Shanghai still ships more than half of Tesla’s global deliveries and functions as the company’s main export hub for Europe and Asia. Teslarati previously reported on Musk’s initial denial, and the merger conversation itself has been building since SpaceX’s IPO gave it public shares to use as acquisition currency.

Wedbush’s Dan Ives has pegged the odds of a Tesla SpaceX merger at 80 to 90 percent by early 2027, and ARK’s prediction of a year end announcement adds another data point to that timeline, even as Musk keeps rejecting the specific mechanics reporters have described. Neither position rules out the other. Musk can deny a China spinoff was ever discussed while analysts still expect some form of combination to move forward, since ARK and Ives are both describing convergence at the corporate level, not necessarily the internal restructuring the Journal described in July.

For now, Tesla’s China business remains intact, and Musk’s comments this week make clear he has no interest in publicly walking that position back, no matter how often the merger question resurfaces.

Advertisement
-
-
Continue Reading