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.

Advertisement
-

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.

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!

Advertisement
-

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

News

NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way

NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.

Published

on

By

Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.

The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.

Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.

The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.

Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.

Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:

“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”

The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.

Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.

His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.

Advertisement
-

Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.

That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.

Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading

Elon Musk

SpaceX’s next Starship launch is about to attempt its biggest leap yet

SpaceX targets September 22 for Starship Flight 14, its first attempt to reach real orbit.

Published

on

By

SpaceX has set September 22 as the target date for Starship’s 14th test flight, and this one carries a different goal than any of the 13 that came before it. Every previous Starship mission has intentionally flown a suborbital arc, reentering the atmosphere within the same hour it launched. Flight 14 is designed to send the craft into a genuine orbit around Earth for the first time.

The launch window opens at 7:15 a.m. Central time at Starbase in South Texas and runs for 75 minutes, pending regulatory approval, according to SpaceX’s mission description published Tuesday. If the flight goes as planned, Starship will circle the planet roughly six times at an altitude near 275 kilometers over about ten hours before a deorbit burn sends it toward a splashdown in the Pacific Ocean west of Chile, a departure from the Indian Ocean recoveries used on the last several flights.

The mission also marks the first attempt to put a working batch of Starlink V3 satellites into actual service. Flight 13 carried 20 of the new satellites in July, but because that mission never left a suborbital trajectory, the payload reentered along with the ship instead of separating into orbit.

SpaceX tells the FCC that Starship Flight 14 is going to orbit

Each V3 satellite is rated for roughly one terabit per second of downlink capacity, so a successful deployment on Flight 14 would be SpaceX’s largest single jump in network bandwidth since Starlink began flying on Falcon 9.

Flight 13 still did the heavier lifting on the technical side. That July mission flew a deliberately more stressful reentry profile to test Starship’s heat shield, and the ship survived its softest splashdown yet, intact enough for drone inspections shortly after landing. Elon Musk said the flight delivered “all the heat shield data we needed and then some,” a result Teslarati covered in detail when he later said SpaceX had solved the vehicle’s biggest reusability challenge. Flight 14 is where SpaceX starts spending that confidence on an actual orbital insertion rather than another controlled fall back to Earth.

Advertisement
-

One thing Flight 14 will not attempt is a tower catch of the ship. Musk floated the idea right after Flight 13, but walked the timeline back in August, saying a catch attempt was more likely “in a few months.” The Super Heavy booster will still aim for its own recovery, targeting an offshore landing point in the Gulf of America, the same approach used on recent flights.

September 22 is SpaceX’s own target, not a locked date. Starship’s schedule has slipped before over hardware readiness and FAA sign off, and the company has said as much in its own mission notes. But the plan itself represents the clearest marker yet that Starship is moving from a suborbital test program into something meant to carry paying payloads and, eventually, people.

Continue Reading