Connect with us
tesla tesla

News

Tesla range exaggeration lawsuit: a breakdown

Credit: Tesla

Published

on

Three Tesla owners have sued the automaker in a class action lawsuit that was filed on August 2, 2023, after a report from Reuters last week claims the company “exaggerates” its range ratings.

Teslarati examined the complaint, and we are here to give you a breakdown of what the suit says and what the three plaintiffs are suing Tesla for.

The Plaintiffs

Tesla is being sued by James Porter, Bryan Perez, and Dro Esraeili Estepanian, who state in their complaint against the automaker that their action “arises out of Tesla’s false advertising of its electric vehicles’ range, which Tesla grossly overvalued when selling the vehicles to consumers.”

According to the complaint, Porter owns a Model Y Performance and noticed a discrepancy in his vehicle’s range was compared to what it told him:

Advertisement

“After taking delivery of his Tesla vehicle in June 2022, Plaintiff Porter fully charged his vehicle to 100% battery charge and took a 2-hour trip to visit family, approximately 92 miles away. When he arrived at his destination, Plaintiff Porter noticed that the vehicle was left with approximately 40% charge.”

Perez owns a Model 3 Long Range, and the complaint states he had the same issue:

“After receiving his Tesla vehicle, Plaintiff Perez fully charged his vehicle to 100% battery charge and took an approximately 90-mile trip to visit his parents. After returning home from the approximately 180-mile round trip, he noticed that his vehicle showed that it had roughly 10-15% charge remaining.”

Estepanian also has a Model 3 Long Range, and the complaint describes a similar situation:

Advertisement

“Plaintiff Estepanian travels 140 to 150 miles round trip for his daily commute, and he routinely charges his vehicle to 90% battery charge (which equates to approximately 299 miles), per Tesla’s recommendation. Based on a 90% battery charge (and 299-mile starting range), he typically returns from his approximately 150-mile round trip each day and his Tesla vehicle’s screen displays that approximately 100 to 110 miles of range remain, which equates to roughly 33% battery charge remaining. Thus, Plaintiff Estepanian’s electric vehicle consistently loses approximately 189 miles of range during his daily commute—despite only driving approximately 140 to 150 miles round trip each day.”

The Plaintiffs’ Claims

The plaintiffs state that range is a key feature of electric vehicles and is “one of the most important features that consumers generally consider when purchasing an EV, because it correlates to the distance they can travel before needing to recharge the vehicle.”

Throughout the suit, the complaint shows images of Tesla’s website, highlighting range ratings and other “key features,” including top speed and acceleration.

They also include other pieces of evidence that seem to indicate Tesla has exaggerated range estimates.

Advertisement

One part of the complaint states:

“Tesla’s tactics to inflate the range estimates for its vehicles has continued. Recently, South Korean regulators fined Tesla for false advertising the ranges of its vehicles. Specifically, the Korea Fair Trade Commission found that Tesla exaggerated the “driving ranges of its cars on a single charge, their fuel cost-effectiveness compared to gasoline vehicles as well as the performance of its Superchargers.”

They also stated that other car companies to do not exaggerate range ratings, citing Recurrent’s testing of the Ford Mustang Mach-E, Chevrolet Bolt, and Hyundai Kona:

“Other electric vehicle manufacturers do not overestimate the range of their vehicles to the same extent. For example, Recurrent tested the Ford Mustang Mach-E, the Chevrolet Bolt, and the Hyundai Kona—all electric vehicles and direct competitors to Tesla model vehicles—and found their estimated ranges to be more accurate. In fact, the Hyundai Kona generally underestimated the range the vehicle could travel before requiring a recharge.”

Advertisement

Allegations in the Class Action Suit

The plaintiffs seek to represent anyone in California who purchased any Tesla vehicle and hope to solve questions including:

  • a. Whether Tesla model vehicles fail to deliver the advertised estimated vehicle range in normal driving conditions;
  • b. Whether Tesla exaggerated its advertised estimated vehicle ranges;
  • c. Whether Tesla knew that its advertised estimated vehicle ranges were exaggerated and could not be met under normal driving conditions;
  • d. When Tesla gained such knowledge;
  • e. Whether Tesla designed, manufacture, marketed, advertised, sold, or otherwise placed its model vehicles into the stream of commerce with such knowledge;
  • f. Whether Tesla intentionally concealed the fact that its advertised estimated vehicle ranges were exaggerated or otherwise could not be met under normal driving conditions;
  • g. Whether Tesla’s conduct to divert complaints from Class Members who voiced concerns over their Tesla model vehicle’s range violated the terms of Tesla’s warranties;
  • h. Whether Plaintiffs and Class Members were harmed by the fraud and deceptive practices alleged herein;
  • i. Whether Tesla was unjustly enriched by its deceptive practices; and
  • j. Whether Plaintiffs and the Class are entitled to equitable or injunctive relief

The case is 3:2023cv03878, Porter et al v. Tesla, Inc., and has been assigned to Judge Laurel Beeler.

I’d love to hear from you! If you have any comments, concerns, or questions, please email me at joey@teslarati.com. You can also reach me on Twitter @KlenderJoey, or if you have news tips, you can email us at tips@teslarati.com.

Joey has been a journalist covering electric mobility at TESLARATI since August 2019. In his spare time, Joey is playing golf, watching MMA, or cheering on any of his favorite sports teams, including the Baltimore Ravens and Orioles, Miami Heat, Washington Capitals, and Penn State Nittany Lions. You can get in touch with joey at joey@teslarati.com. He is also on X @KlenderJoey. If you're looking for great Tesla accessories, check out shop.teslarati.com

Advertisement
Comments

Elon Musk

Elon Musk’s xAI celebrates nearly 3,000 headcount at Memphis site

The update came in a post from the xAI Memphis account on social media platform X.

Published

on

Credit: xAI Memphis

xAI has announced that it now employs nearly 3,000 people in Memphis, marking more than two years of local presence in the city amid the company’s supercomputing efforts. 

The update came in a post from the xAI Memphis account on social media platform X.

In a post on X, xAI’s Memphis branch stated it has been part of the community for over two years and now employs “almost 3,000 locally to help power Grok.” The post was accompanied by a photo of the xAI Memphis team posing for a rather fun selfie. 

“xAI is proud to be a member of the Memphis community for over two years. We now employ almost 3,000 locally to help power @Grok. From electricians to engineers, cooks to construction — we’re grateful for everyone on our team!” the xAI Memphis’ official X account wrote. 

Advertisement

xAI’s Memphis facilities are home to Grok’s foundational supercomputing infrastructure, including Colossus, a large-scale AI training cluster designed to support the company’s advanced models. The site, located in South Memphis, was announced in 2024 as the home of one of the world’s largest AI compute facilities.

The first phase of Colossus was built out in record time, reaching its initial 100,000 GPU operational status in just 122 days. Industry experts such as Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang noted that this was significantly faster than the typical 2-to-4-year timeline for similar projects.

xAI chose Memphis for its supercomputing operations because of the city’s central location, skilled workforce, and existing industrial infrastructure, as per the company’s statements about its commitment to the region. The initiative aims to create hundreds of permanent jobs, partner with local businesses, and contribute to economic and educational efforts across the area.

Colossus is intended to support a full training pipeline for Grok and future models, with xAI planning to scale the site to millions of GPUs.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

News

Ford embraces Tesla-style gigacastings and Cybertruck’s 48V architecture

Ford Motor Company’s next-generation electric vehicles will adopt technologies that were first commercialized by the Tesla Cybertruck.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Ford Motor Company’s next-generation electric vehicles will adopt technologies that were first commercialized by the Tesla Cybertruck, such as the brutalist all-electric pickup’s 48-volt electrical architecture and its gigacastings. 

The shift is expected to start with a roughly $30,000 small electric pickup that is expected to be released in 2027, which is part of Ford’s $5 billion investment in its new Universal EV platform, as noted in a CNBC report.

Ford confirmed that its upcoming EV platform will move away from the traditional 12-volt system long used across the auto industry. Instead, it will implement a 48-volt electrical architecture that draws power directly from the vehicle’s high-voltage battery.

Tesla was the first automaker to bring a 48-volt system to U.S. consumers with the Cybertruck in 2023. The architecture reduces wiring bulk, lowers weight, and improves electrical efficiency. It also allows power to be stepped down to 12 volts through new electronic control units when needed.

Alan Clarke, Ford’s executive director of advanced EV development and a former Tesla engineer, called 48-volt systems “the future of automotive” due to their lower costs and smaller wiring requirements. Ford stated that the wiring harness in its new pickup will be more than 4,000 feet shorter and 22 pounds lighter than that of its first-generation electric SUV.

Advertisement

Apart from the Cybertruck’s 48-volt architecture, Ford is also embracing Tesla-style gigacastings for its next-generation EVs. Ford stated that its upcoming electric vehicle will use just two major structural front and rear castings, compared with 146 comparable components in the current gas-powered Maverick.

Ford CEO Jim Farley has described the effort as a “bet” and a “Model T moment” for the company, arguing that system-level innovation is necessary to lower costs and compete globally. “At Ford, we took on the challenge many others have stopped doing. We’re taking the fight to our competition, including the Chinese,” Farley previously stated.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Energy

Tesla meets Giga New York’s Buffalo job target amid political pressures

Giga New York reported more than 3,460 statewide jobs at the end of 2025, meeting the benchmark tied to its dollar-a-year lease.

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

Tesla has surpassed its job commitments at Giga New York in Buffalo, easing pressure from lawmakers who threatened the company with fines, subsidy clawbacks, and dealership license revocations last year. 

The company reported more than 3,460 statewide jobs at the end of 2025, meeting the benchmark tied to its dollar-a-year lease at the state-built facility.

As per an employment report reviewed by local media, Tesla employed 2,399 full-time workers at Gigafactory New York and 1,060 additional employees across the state at the end of 2025. Part-time roles pushed the total headcount of Tesla’s New York staff above the 3,460-job target.

The gains stemmed in part from a new Long Island service center, a Buffalo warehouse, and additional showrooms in White Plains and Staten Island. Tesla also said it has invested $350 million in supercomputing infrastructure at the site and has begun manufacturing solar panels.

Advertisement

Empire State Development CEO Hope Knight said the agency was “very happy” with Giga New York’s progress, as noted in a WXXI report. The current lease runs through 2029, and negotiations over updated terms have included potential adjustments to job requirements and future rent payments.

Some lawmakers remain skeptical, however. Assemblymember Pat Burke questioned whether the reported job figures have been fully verified. State Sen. Patricia Fahy has also continued to sponsor legislation that would revoke Tesla’s company-owned dealership licenses in New York. John Kaehny of Reinvent Albany has argued that the project has not delivered the manufacturing impact originally promised as well.

Knight, for her part, maintained that Empire State Development has been making the best of a difficult situation. 

“(Empire State Development) has tried to make the best of a very difficult situation. There hasn’t been another use that has come forward that would replace this one, and so to the extent that we’re in this place, the fact that 2,000 families at (Giga New York) are being supported through the activity of this employer. It’s the best that we can have happen,” the CEO noted. 

Advertisement
Continue Reading