Connect with us

News

Tesla’s next-gen Roadster will have a rival when it enters production, and it’s German-bred

Published

on

Just like the Model S and the Model 3, Tesla’s next-generation Roadster has the potential to disrupt an industry. In the case of the Roadster, this would be the supercar market — a segment dominated mainly by premium, high-performance vehicles from Europe. With its specs and its price, the Roadster would likely start making waves among supercar enthusiasts once it enters production sometime in 2020.

If recent reports from Germany are any indication, though, a legitimate rival to Tesla’s “hardcore smackdown” to gasoline cars would be waiting for it when it starts rolling off the production floor. In an announcement earlier this month, German automaker Audi noted that it would be bringing its next-generation PB18 e-tron all-electric supercar to low-volume production. With just around 50 units of the vehicle expected to be built, the PB18 e-tron would likely arrive at the market just in time, or even ahead, of the next-gen Tesla Roadster.

The Audi PB18 e-tron is expected to enter low-volume production. (Photo: Audi)

Audi’s PB18 e-tron supercar was unveiled last summer, with the German carmaker hyping the vehicle as a car equipped with the best technologies available today, such as an 800-volt charging system and solid-state batteries that can be fully charged in 15 minutes. At the recently-held Mission Zero Event in Amsterdam, Audi boss Bram Schot announced that the supercar, which was initially speculated to be a one-off prototype, would actually be entering low-volume production.

In a press release for the PB18 e-tron, Audi noted that the supercar would be equipped with three electric motors that deliver a power output of 150 kW to the front axle and 350 kW to the rear. Maximum output for the vehicle is 500 kW, though drivers can boost this to 570 kW during operation. Thanks to the electric motors’ combined torque of up to 830-newton meters (612.2 lb-ft), the German-bred electric supercar can accelerate from 0-60 mph in “scarcely more than 2 seconds.”

While certainly impressive, though, Audi’s upcoming all-electric supercar does fall short when compared to some of the next-generation Tesla Roadster’s specs. The Audi PB18 e-tron, for one, comes with a 95 kWh battery pack, which the company states will give the vehicle 500 km (310 miles) of range per charge. The next-generation Tesla Roadster, on the other hand, is equipped with a 200 kWh battery pack that gives the vehicle a range of 1000 km (620 miles) per charge. That said, Audi’s upcoming all-electric supercar is also capable of 350 kW charging, which should make up for the vehicle’s otherwise average range.

Tesla’s next-generation Roadster. (Photo: Tesla)

Performance figures aside, the Audi PB18 e-tron would likely be priced higher than the Tesla Roadster. With a limited production of just 50 vehicles, Audi could charge top dollar for its all-electric supercar. Thus, it would not be surprising if the PB18 e-tron ends up commanding a price closer to the Rimac C_Two (also a low-volume all-electric supercar priced at $2.1 million) than its Silicon Valley-bred rival. In this sense, the next-generation Tesla Roadster would still be far more attainable than the PB18 e-tron, considering the vehicle’s starting price of $200,000 for the base variant.

Elon Musk notes that the next-generation Tesla Roadster is a supercar designed to take away the halo effect that gas cars have in the performance segment. In classic Elon Musk form, though, the Tesla CEO has announced some pretty crazy ideas for the upcoming vehicle, including a “SpaceX package” that would allow the Roadster to have “hovering” abilities. The base version of the next-gen Tesla Roadster already boasts a 0-60 mph time of 1.9 seconds and a top speed above 250 mph. With the SpaceX package, the vehicle’s specs would likely look, quite literally, out of this world.

Watch Audi’s teaser for the PB18 e-tron supercar in the video below. 

Advertisement
-

https://youtu.be/el-4dupoIWg

Simon is an experienced automotive reporter with a passion for electric cars and clean energy. Fascinated by the world envisioned by Elon Musk, he hopes to make it to Mars (at least as a tourist) someday. For stories or tips--or even to just say a simple hello--send a message to his email, simon@teslarati.com or his handle on X, @ResidentSponge.

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Advertisement
-

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading

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