News
Tesla patent reveals Solar module aimed at faster, more attractive installations
Tesla Solar may have taken a step back from the limelight in recent years due to the electric car maker’s efforts to ramp the Model 3 sedan, but recent signs from the company indicate that it is now ready to start aggressively pushing its Energy business. Apart from high-profile projects such as the 50% expansion of the Hornsdale Power Reserve, Tesla also appears to be working on notable improvements to its residential solar system installation processes.
One such improvement was outlined in a recent patent application titled Method and apparatus for mounting photovoltaic modules. The patent describes a novel mounting system for photovoltaic modules that make them easier to install, maintain, and even remove if necessary. Tesla notes that its patent allows solar panel installations to be more aesthetically pleasing than traditional PV setups as well.
In its discussion, Tesla explained that solar panel installations are usually hit by a number of challenges, particularly in terms of alignment, grounding, wiring, rafter connections, and several other factors related to the mounting of the PV system itself. With this in mind, Tesla stated that there is a clear need for a PV module mounting system that is simple, cost-effective, and widely adaptable.
To address these challenges, Tesla has come up with an invention that utilizes an interlocking photovoltaic module mounting system. This design provides a “one piece, integrated photovoltaic module frame portion that is directly mountable to a support structure and interlocks with separate adjoining photovoltaic module frame portions.”
“A preferred embodiment of the invention includes an interlocking mechanism comprising at least one C-shaped channel portion on the outside surface of the PV module frame member with the opening oriented parallel to the plane of the substantially flat top solar cell covering, and which interlocks with an identical adjoining C-shaped channel portion of an adjoining PV module frame member through the use of a separate male coupling member which is inserted into the C-shaped portions of the two adjoining modules. The adjacent C-shaped channel portions do not overlap each other. The male coupling member may also serve as a means for providing electric ground continuity between PV modules,” Tesla wrote.
Such a system would offer a variety of benefits for Tesla and homeowners. Among these benefits include potentially faster installation processes, easier maintenance, and even simpler removal, to name a few. Utilizing the design outlined in Tesla’s patent, the electric car maker further explained that solar installations would look better, since the mounting systems provide no gaps between modules. Such a system will likely not make regular solar panel installations as attractive as, say, a Tesla Solar Roof installation, but it does allow for a very sleek overall look.
-->“The inventive system thus provides an interlocking, self-grounding, and self-aligning framing structure for each module, which provides three-dimensional adjustability, allows simple connection to the rafters, minimizes penetrations in the roof, allows access to wiring interconnects without removing modules, does not require expensive strut hardware, utilizes a non-overlapping, interlocking mechanism which allows for all PV modules in an array to rest in the same plane instead of having consecutive modules at slightly different angles due to the overlapping nature of an interleaved connection, and which in some embodiments allows removal of single PV modules from the middle of the array.
“The inventive system also provides an attractive appearance by having a low profile, with no gaps between modules, and no visible hold-downs or hardware, plus optional cosmetic flashings for screening visible edges of the array and optional cosmetic caps for covering the small gaps that may occur, or in one embodiment, for bridging between two adjacent PV modules to cover the wiring. Additional benefits are further described herein,” Tesla noted.
Promoting solar installations to homeowners is a key component of Tesla Energy’s business. And to gain an advantage in the residential solar market, Tesla would need to ensure that its PV installations are worthy of its premium brand while being cost-effective overall. Tesla’s electric cars are a cut above the rest of the market and thus, the expectations for its energy business are high. With such ideas as presented in this recently published patent application, it would appear that Tesla is actively exploring ways to improve its residential solar initiatives, even down to their mounting system.
Read the full discussion on Tesla’s innovative PV mounting solution patent here.
-->
Tesla recently released Full Self-Driving (FSD) v14.2.1, its latest version, but the tinkering with Speed Profiles has perhaps gone too far.
We try to keep it as real as possible with Full Self-Driving operation, and we are well aware that with the new versions, some things get better, but others get worse. It is all part of the process with FSD, and refinements are usually available within a week or so.
However, the latest v14.2.1 update has brought out some major complaints with Speed Profiles, at least on my end. It seems the adjustments have gone a tad too far, and there is a sizeable gap between Profiles that are next to one another.
Tesla FSD v14.2.1 first impressions:
✅ Smooth, stress-free highway operation
✅ Speed Profiles are refined — Hurry seems to be limited to 10 MPH over on highways. Switching from Mad Max to Hurry results in an abrupt braking pattern. Nothing of concern but do feel as if Speed…— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) November 29, 2025
The gap is so large that changing between them presents a bit of an unwelcome and drastic reduction in speed, which is perhaps a tad too fast for my liking. Additionally, Speed Profiles seem to have a set Speed Limit offset, which makes it less functional in live traffic situations.
Before I go any further, I’d like to remind everyone reading this that what I am about to write is purely my opinion; it is not right or wrong, or how everyone might feel. I am well aware that driving behaviors are widely subjective; what is acceptable to one might be unacceptable to another.
Speed Profiles are ‘Set’ to a Speed
From what I’ve experienced on v14.2.1, Tesla has chosen to go with somewhat of a preset max speed for each Speed Profile. With ‘Hurry,’ it appears to be 10 MPH over the speed limit, and it will not go even a single MPH faster than that. In a 55 MPH zone, it will only travel 65 MPH. Meanwhile, ‘Standard’ seems to be fixed at between 4-5 MPH over.
This is sort of a tough thing to have fixed, in my opinion. The speed at which the car travels should not be fixed; it should be more dependent on how traffic around it is traveling.
-->It almost seems as if the Speed Profile chosen should be more of a Behavior Profile. Standard should perform passes only to traffic that is slower than the traffic. If traffic is traveling at 75 MPH in a 65 MPH zone, the car should travel at 75 MPH. It should pass traffic that travels slower than this.
Hurry should be more willing to overtake cars, travel more than 10 MPH over the limit, and act as if someone is in a hurry to get somewhere, hence the name. Setting strict limits on how fast it will travel seems to be a real damper on its capabilities. It did much better in previous versions.
Some Speed Profiles are Too Distant from Others
This is specifically about Hurry and Mad Max, which are neighbors in the Speed Profiles menu. Hurry will only go 10 MPH over the limit, but Mad Max will travel similarly to traffic around it. I’ve seen some people say Mad Max is too slow, but I have not had that opinion when using it.
In a 55 MPH zone during Black Friday and Small Business Saturday, it is not unusual for traffic around me to travel in the low to mid-80s. Mad Max was very suitable for some traffic situations yesterday, especially as cars were traveling very fast. However, sometimes it required me to “gear down” into Hurry, especially as, at times, it would try to pass slower traffic in the right lane, a move I’m not super fond of.
We had some readers also mention this to us:
-->The abrupt speed reduction when switching to a slower speed profile is definitely an issue that should be improved upon.
— David Klem (@daklem) November 29, 2025
After switching from Mad Max to Hurry, there is a very abrupt drop in speed. It is not violent by any means, but it does shift your body forward, and it seems as if it is a tad drastic and could be refined further.
-->News
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
Tesla is preparing to introduce the Model 3 Standard to the Netherlands this December, as per information obtained by AutoWeek. The trim is expected to launch at €36,990, making it the most affordable Model 3 the Dutch market has seen in years.
While Tesla has not formally confirmed the vehicle’s arrival, pricing reportedly comes from a reliable source, the publication noted.
Model 3 Standard lands in NL
The U.S. version of the Model 3 Standard provides a clear preview of what Dutch buyers can expect, such as a no-frills configuration that maintains the recognizable Model 3 look without stripping the car down to a bare interior. The panoramic glass roof is still there, the exterior design is unchanged, and Tesla’s central touchscreen-driven cabin layout stays intact.
Cost reductions come from targeted equipment cuts. The American variant uses fewer speakers, lacks ventilated front seats and heated rear seats, and swaps premium materials for cloth and textile-heavy surfaces. Performance is modest compared with the Premium models, with a 0–100 km/h sprint of about six seconds and an estimated WLTP range near 550 kilometers.
Despite the smaller battery and simpler suspension, the Standard maintains the long-distance capability drivers have come to expect in a Tesla.
-->Pricing strategy aligns with Dutch EV demand and taxation shifts
At €36,990, the Model 3 Standard fits neatly into Tesla’s ongoing lineup reshuffle. The current Model 3 RWD has crept toward €42,000, creating space for a more competitive entry-level option, and positioning the new Model 3 Standard comfortably below the €39,990 Model Y Standard.
The timing aligns with rising Dutch demand for affordable EVs as subsidies like SEPP fade and tax advantages for electric cars continue to wind down, EVUpdate noted. Buyers seeking a no-frills EV with solid range are then likely to see the new trim as a compelling alternative.
With the U.S. variant long established and the Model Y Standard already available in the Netherlands, the appearance of an entry-level Model 3 in the Dutch configurator seems like a logical next step.
News
Tesla Model Y is still China’s best-selling premium EV through October
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Tesla Model Y led China’s top-selling pure electric vehicles in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment through October 2025, as per Yiche data compiled from China Passenger Car Association (CPCA) figures.
The premium-priced SUV outpaced rivals despite a competitive field, while the Model 3 also secured an impressive position.
The Model Y is still unrivaled
The Model Y’s dominance shines in Yiche’s October report, topping the chart for vehicles priced between 200,000 and 300,000 RMB. With 312,331 units retailed from January through October, the all-electric crossover was China’s best-selling EV in the 200,000–300,000 RMB segment.
The Xiaomi SU7 is a strong challenger at No. 2 with 234,521 units, followed by the Tesla Model 3, which achieved 146,379 retail sales through October. The Model Y’s potentially biggest rival, the Xiaomi YU7, is currently at No. 4 with 80,855 retail units sold.
Efficiency kings
The Model 3 and Model Y recently claimed the top two spots in Autohome’s latest real-world energy-consumption test, outperforming a broad field of Chinese-market EVs under identical 120 km/h cruising conditions with 375 kg payload and fixed 24 °C cabin temperature. The Model 3 achieved 20.8 kWh/100 km while the Model Y recorded 21.8 kWh/100 km, reaffirming Tesla’s efficiency lead.
The results drew immediate attention from Xiaomi CEO Lei Jun, who publicly recognized Tesla’s advantage while pledging continued refinement for his brand’s lineup.
-->“The Xiaomi SU7’s energy consumption performance is also very good; you can take a closer look. The fact that its test results are weaker than Tesla’s is partly due to objective reasons: the Xiaomi SU7 is a C-segment car, larger and with higher specifications, making it heavier and naturally increasing energy consumption. Of course, we will continue to learn from Tesla and further optimize its energy consumption performance!” Lei Jun wrote in a post on Weibo.
Tesla tinkering with Speed Profiles on FSD v14.2.1 has gone too far
Tesla’s most affordable car is coming to the Netherlands
