Ford’s recent decision to abandon production of the all-electric Ford F-150 Lightning after the 2025 model year should yield some advantages for Tesla.

The Detroit-based automaker’s pivot away from large EVs and toward hybrids and extended-range EVs that come with a gas generator is proof that sustainable powertrains are easy on paper, but hard in reality.

Tesla is perhaps the biggest beneficiary of Ford’s decision, especially as it will no longer have to deal with the sole pure EV pickup that outsold it from time to time: the F-150 Lightning.

Here’s why:

Reduced Competition in the Electric Pickup Segment

The F-150 Lightning was the Tesla Cybertruck’s primary and direct rival in the full-size electric pickup market in the United States. With Ford’s decision to end pure EV production of its best-selling truck’s electric version and shifting to hybrids/EREVs, the Cybertruck faces significantly less competition.

Credit: Tesla

This could drive more fleet and retail buyers toward the Cybertruck, especially those committed to fully electric vehicles without a gas generator backup.

Strengthened Market Leadership and Brand Perception in Pure EVs

Ford’s pullback from large EVs–citing unprofitability and lack of demand for EVs of that size–highlights the challenges legacy automakers face in scaling profitable battery-electric vehicles.

Tesla, as the established leader with efficient production and vertical integration, benefits from reinforced perception as the most viable and committed pure EV manufacturer.

Credit: Tesla

This can boost consumer confidence in Tesla’s long-term ecosystem over competitors retreating to hybrids. With Ford making this move, it is totally reasonable that some car buyers could be reluctant to buy from other legacy automakers.

Profitability is a key reason companies build cars; they’re businesses, and they’re there to make money.

However, Ford’s new strategy could plant a seed in the head of some who plan to buy from companies like General Motors, Stellantis, or others, who could have second thoughts. With this backtrack in EVs, other things, like less education on these specific vehicles to technicians, could make repairs more costly and tougher to schedule.

Potential Increases in Market Share for Large EVs

Interestingly, this could play right into the hands of Tesla fans who have been asking for the company to make a larger EV, specifically a full-size SUV.

Customers seeking large, high-capability electric trucks or SUVs could now look to Tesla for its Cybertruck or potentially a future vehicle release, which the company has hinted at on several occasions this year.

With Ford reallocating resources away from large pure EVs and taking a $19.5 billion charge, Tesla stands to capture a larger slice of the remaining demand in this segment without a major U.S. competitor aggressively pursuing it.

The Tesla Model Y Standard stunned in a new range test performed by automotive media outlet Edmunds, besting all of its Premium siblings that are more expensive and more luxurious in terms of features.

Testing showed the Model Y Standard exceeded its EPA-estimated range rating of 321 miles, as Edmunds said it is the “longest-range Model Y that we’ve ever put on our loop.” In the past, some vehicles have come up short in comparison with EPA ranges; for example, the Model Y’s previous generation vehicle had an EPA-estimated range of 330 miles, but only drove 310.

Additionally, the Launch Series Model Y, the first configuration to be built in the “Juniper” program, landed perfectly on the EPA’s range estimates at 327 miles.

It was also more efficient than Premium offerings, as it utilized just 22.8 kWh to go 100 miles. The Launch Series used 26.8 kWh to travel the same distance.

It is tested using Edmunds’ traditional EV range testing procedure, which follows a strict route of 60 percent city and 40 percent highway driving. The average speed throughout the trip is 40 MPH, and the car is required to stay within 5 MPH of all posted speed limits.

Each car is also put in its most efficient drive setting, and the climate is kept on auto at 72 degrees.

“All of this most accurately represents the real-world driving that owners do day to day,” the publication says.

With this procedure, testing is as consistent as it can get. Of course, there are other factors, like temperature and traffic density. However, one thing is important to note: Tesla’s newer vehicles have continued to meet or exceed their EPA estimates. This is a drastic change, as every 2018-2023 model year Tesla that Edmunds assessed did not meet its range estimates.

Tesla Model Y Standard vs. Tesla Model Y Premium

Tesla’s two Model Y levels both offer a great option for whichever fits your budget. However, when you sit in both cars, you will notice distinct differences between them.

The Premium definitely has a more luxurious feel, while the Standard is stripped of many of the more premium features, like Vegan Leather Interior, acoustic-lined glass, and a better sound system.

You can read our full review of the Model Y Standard below:

Tesla Model Y Standard Full Review: Is it worth the lower price?

Xpeng CEO He Xiaopeng has offered fresh praise for Tesla’s Full Self-Driving (FSD) system after revisiting Silicon Valley more than a year after his first hands-on experience. 

Following extended test drives of Tesla vehicles running the latest FSD software, He stated that the system has made major strides, reinforcing his view that Tesla’s approach to autonomy is indeed the proper path towards autonomy.

Tesla FSD closing in on Level 4 driving

During his visit, He test-drove a Tesla equipped with FSD V14.2. He also rode in a Tesla Robotaxi. Over roughly five hours of driving across Silicon Valley and San Francisco, He said both vehicles delivered consistent and reassuring performance, a notable improvement from his experience a year earlier.

According to He, Tesla’s FSD has evolved from a smooth Level 2 advanced driver assistance system into what he described as a “near-Level 4” experience in terms of capabilities. While acknowledging that imperfections remain, the Xpeng CEO said FSD’s current iteration significantly surpasses last year’s capabilities. He also reiterated his belief that Tesla’s strategy of using the same autonomous software and hardware architecture across private vehicles and robotaxis is the right long-term approach, allowing users to bypass intermediate autonomy stages and move closer to Level 4 functionality.

He previously tested Tesla’s FSD V12.3.6 and Waymo vehicles in California in mid-2024, noting at the time that Waymo performed better in dense urban environments like San Francisco, while Tesla excelled in Silicon Valley and on highways.

Xpeng’s ambitious autonomy roadmap and internal challenge

The Silicon Valley visit also served as a benchmark for Xpeng’s own autonomy ambitions. He stated that Xpeng is looking to improve its VLA autonomous driving system to match the performance of Tesla’s FSD V14.2 within China by August 30, 2026. Xpeng is poised to release its VLA 2.0 smart driving software next quarter, though He cautioned that the initial version will not be able to match FSD V14.2’s capabilities, as noted in a CNEV Post report.

He also added a personal twist to the goal, publicly challenging Xpeng’s autonomous driving team. If the performance target is met by the 2026 deadline, the CEO stated that he will approve the creation of a Chinese-style cafeteria for Xpeng’s Silicon Valley team. If not, Liu Xianming, head of Xpeng’s autonomous driving unit, has pledged to run naked across the Golden Gate Bridge, He noted.