News
Tesla’s Standard Range strategy for Model S, X puts pressure on Lucid
Tesla’s Standard Range strategy with its flagship Model S and Model X is going to put pressure on the automakers that are emphasizing performance with their vehicles, especially Lucid Group, which has targeted Tesla’s two luxury vehicles with its lineup of Air sedan configurations.
Last night, Tesla officially added Standard Range versions of the S and X to its Design Studio, offering its luxury, high-performance vehicles to customers for a hefty discount. The performance metrics remained the same, the only difference was a reduction in range — 310 miles for the Model S, and 269 miles for the Model X.
Tesla Model S and Model X now more affordable with Standard Range variants
These two new configuration options from Tesla will have those on the ropes between Elon Musk’s company and Lucid, run by former Model S team member Peter Rawlinson, at a crossroads. However, the decision may be easier than ever before.
But the consequences Lucid might feel from Tesla’s new, cheaper configurations are more explicit than ever before. Tesla’s Long Range and Plaid configurations of the S and X were priced relatively similar to Lucid’s top-of-the-line offerings in the Air sedan.
The Model S Plaid comes in at $108,490 before options, and the Lucid Air Grand Touring, the most comparable to the Model S Plaid (within the same price range), is $125,600.
The Model S Plaid has a 1.99-second 0-60 MPH rate, while Lucid’s Air GT will get you there in 2.6 seconds. It trumps the Model S in range, offering 516 miles, while Tesla’s option is still nothing to bat an eye at, with 396 miles.
But now, pricing comes into focus, and undercutting the Air’s Pure configuration that starts at $82,400 by pricing a new Model S at $78,490 may make things a little easier for consumers and a little more difficult for Lucid.
Lucid missed consensus estimates on vehicle deliveries in Q2, as 1,404 cars made their way to customers. FactSet expected 2,000 cars, and struggling with demand, the last thing it needed was an automaker like Tesla to undercut its products with something superior for less money.
In terms of range, the Air is the best that you can get. But it is about more than that, including the vehicle’s ability to function as a daily driver. Lucid customers have reported issues with software in their vehicles, and as it has been a pain point for many automakers in the early development of EVs, it is something people just don’t want to deal with.
Tesla has its own issues, of course. People have recently come forth with claims that their cars get significantly lower range than they are rated for, and, depending on the person, Elon Musk is a touchy subject.
However, some people don’t give a damn about what the CEO does, they just want a car that works well and is priced reasonably. Lucid may have taken a drastic step back with Tesla’s new Model S and Model X trims. Pressure is being applied to rivals of Tesla through the company’s various price cuts in nearly every market.
In the U.S., Tesla put everyone in the hot seat early this year with massive price cuts, and it was up to the manufacturers to play ball or take their chances. Ford followed with price cuts of its own, and Lucid did, too.
Lucid introduces new $7,500 discount as EV price war heats up
However, their strategy did not translate to an overwhelming number of sales, and Lucid cut its delivery expectations to just 10,000 units in Q1, despite having over 28,000 reservations for its cars.
Tesla’s new rollout could be a true gut punch to Lucid as its Model S and Model X Standard Range offerings will give consumers one more reason to pick the unequivocal leader in EVs.
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.
Elon Musk
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Four Raptor engines failed to ignite at T-zero, forcing SpaceX to scrub Starship Flight 13 Thursday.
SpaceX scrubbed the Starship Flight 13 launch attempt Thursday evening at the last possible moment, after four of the Super Heavy booster’s 33 Raptor 3 engines failed to ignite during the startup sequence. The 90-minute window had opened at 6:45 p.m. EDT from Starbase in Boca Chica, Texas, and the countdown had proceeded without issue all day, with more than 11.5 million pounds of liquid methane and liquid oxygen being fully loaded into the rocket before the automated abort triggered. SpaceX’s launch directors posted on X, “Standing down from today’s flight test attempt,” and shut down the livestream shortly after.
Musk confirmed the root cause within hours. “Some of the engines didn’t start, triggering an automatic launch abort,” he wrote on X. “To be confident of a good flight, 2 Raptors will be removed and replaced. Most probable launch timing is early next week.” SpaceX engineers began draining propellant tanks immediately and Booster 20 was rolled back to its hangar for inspection.
The timing adds a layer of significance that did not exist during any of the previous 12 Starship flights. This is the first time SpaceX has attempted to launch Starship since the company made its stock market debut in June, listing under ticker SPCX at $135 per share. Public investors are now watching every Starship outcome in real time, and a last-second abort carries more visibility than it would have six months ago.
Flight 13 was designed to be one of the most consequential tests in the program’s history. It was set to carry 20 Starlink V3 satellites, the first operational payload Starship has ever attempted to deploy. Six of those satellites carried external cameras to photograph Starship’s heat shield from the outside during flight, which would act as a self-inspection approach SpaceX has never attempted before. The mission also needed to complete a Raptor engine relight in space, a step SpaceX skipped on Flight 12 in May after losing an engine during ascent. That Flight 12 booster also flipped 90 degrees off course during its boostback burn when five engines failed to reignite.
SpaceX has not announced an official next launch date. Musk’s “early next week” window points to July 21 or 22 at the earliest, pending the engine swap and a return to the pad.
Elon Musk flew under the radar with his recent purchase of a $1 billion energy company, according to Federal Trade Commission (FTC) documents.
Transaction number 202612350 listed Tesla and SpaceX frontman Elon Musk as the acquiring party and CF APR Super Holdings LLC as the seller, with New APR Energy, LLC as the acquired entity. The deal, which closed without public announcement, came to light on May 14.
BREAKING: Elon Musk acquires Jacksonville power company APR Energy in a deal valued at more than $1,000,000,000.00.
— Polymarket Money (@PolymarketMoney) July 15, 2026
Analysts inferred the deal’s scale from minority stakeholder disclosures, including one report of a 5 percent interest sold for approximately $50.4 million. Fortress Investment Group had purchased APR’s assets in late 2024, rebranded the operation as New APR Energy, and subsequently transferred ownership to Musk.
APR Energy specializes in rapidly deployable power infrastructure. The company maintains one of the world’s largest fleets of mobile gas and diesel turbines, with more than 1.1 gigawatts of generation capacity. Its modular units, which are often trailer-mounted, enable turnkey installations ranging from 20 MW to over 500 MW.
APR provides full engineering, procurement, construction, operation, and maintenance services for behind-the-meter power plants, serving everything from data centers, utilities, and industrial clients.
The firm has expanded aggressively to meet surging demand, recently adding turbines and deploying over 100 MW for a major AI hyperscaler. Its solutions bridge critical gaps where grid interconnections face delays of two to five years, according to Yahoo.
The acquisition means something more for Musk. As he continues to expand projects in artificial intelligence, especially xAI, his AI venture, there is a greater need to supply energy-intensive supercomputing clusters, including the Colossus project, with what they need: reliable and high-capacity power.
Ownership of APR provides immediate access to flexible generation assets that can be deployed adjacent to data centers, reducing dependence on a strained infrastructure. It also complements Tesla’s energy storage business, so Musk will be able to pull from his own entities to address the rapid scaling demands of AI training and compute.
Tesla had a petition protesting a recall to fix a potential issue with 2017-2023 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles’ headlights was denied, as the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) disagreed with the company’s opinion of things.
The recall covers approximately 19,917 Model Y and Model 3 vehicles built from 2017 to 2023. Tesla initially submitted a noncompliance report for the headlights on these vehicles on March 15, 2024. Tesla then petitioned for an exemption from the fix, which violated FMVSS No. 108 (40 CFR 571.108), arguing that the “noncompliance is inconsequential as it relates to motor vehicle safety.
🚨 Tesla was denied a petition by the NHTSA to avoid a recall of 19,900 2017-2023 Model 3 and Model Y vehicles.
The NHTSA found that the vehicles’ headlights may exceed maximum lighting levels. Tesla argued it was inconsequential and did not require a recall. pic.twitter.com/m8Jmm1teLL
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 16, 2026
The NHTSA disagreed, stating that Tesla’s conclusion that the headlights do not increase any risk was not an opinion it shared. The agency said it disagreed with Tesla’s assumption that glare is not increased to surrounding traffic. This issue could be highlighted even more in certain weather conditions.
Tesla will be required to remedy the issue, the NHTSA ruled:
“In consideration of the foregoing, NHTSA has decided that Tesla has not met its burden of persuasion that the subject FMVSS No. 108 noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety. Accordingly, Tesla’s petition is hereby denied, and Tesla is consequently obligated to provide notification of and free remedy for that noncompliance under 49 U.S.C. 30118 and 30120.”
The issue here appears to be the angle of the headlights and the brightness they emit during operation. The NHTSA report states that:
“Tesla’s headlamp supplier, Marelli Automotive Lighting, tested 25 right-hand and 25 left-hand lamps, and for this sample, found the maximum photometric intensity measured in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone was between 136.2 cd and 230.1 cd for the right-hand lamps and between 117.5 cd and 160.3 cd for the left-hand lamps. According to Tesla, these tests revealed that the photometric intensity of the right-hand and left-hand headlamp lower beam on the subject vehicles may measure as much as 230.1 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone, exceeding the maximum photometric intensity by 105.1 cd. Additionally, Tesla states that a left-hand lamp tested by a Transport Canada recognized laboratory measured a maximum of 171.27 cd in the 10°U to 90°U and 90°L to 90°R zone. Despite these measurements exceeding the allowed photometric maximum of 125 cd, Tesla believes that the subject noncompliance is inconsequential to motor vehicle safety.”
Tesla also argued at some points that the headlights had not been deemed responsible for any complaints, accidents, or injuries related to the noncompliance.
SpaceX Starship Flight 13 aborted at Zero and Musk just told us what broke
Elon Musk secretly acquires $1B energy company to power the AI future
