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.
Lifestyle
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
The NTSB confirmed the driver, not Tesla’s FSD, caused the fatal Texas house crash.
The National Transportation Safety Board released preliminary findings Wednesday confirming that a Tesla driver, not the vehicle’s software, caused a fatal crash in Katy, Texas in June. The driver, 44-year-old Michael Butler, had engaged Full Self-Driving Supervised mode on Rose Hollow Lane, a residential street with a 30 mph speed limit, before manually overriding the system by pressing the accelerator pedal all the way to 100%. Data recovered from the 2025 Tesla Model 3 showed the vehicle was traveling over 70 miles per hour when it struck a home and killed 76-year-old Martha Avila, who was inside. Weather was clear, the road was dry, and it was daylight.
Texas man charged in fatal Tesla crash where he blamed Autopilot
Butler told authorities he had passed out at the wheel. But security camera footage obtained by the NTSB told a different story, and showed the car accelerating through an intersection before leaving the road entirely. Police also found that Butler’s phone had Google searches including the terms “Tesla FSD not aggressive enough 2026” and “Tesla FSD too timid,” raising serious questions about how he was using the system before the crash. Butler has since been charged with manslaughter. The victim’s family has filed a lawsuit against both Butler and Tesla, alleging negligence.
The NTSB findings aligned directly with what Tesla VP of AI Software Ashok Elluswamy had already stated publicly on X in the weeks after the crash, writing that “the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100%.” The data confirmed his account.
Yup. In this case, the driver manually overrode self-driving by pressing the accelerator all the way to 100% of the accel pedal in this residential area. They reached a speed of 73 mph during the crash, and had the accelerator pressed even after the crash.
— Ashok Elluswamy (@aelluswamy) June 22, 2026
Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli responded to rumors of an imminent bankruptcy that was reportedly being mulled after a report stated the automaker was working with the firm AlixPartners to iron out its next steps.
The company felt a massive loss on Wall Street yesterday, as the report essentially pushed the stock down as much as 55 percent on Tuesday.
The report, published initially by Eletric-Vehicles.com, claimed Lucid was essentially in dire straits and was told by AlixPartners, a commonly used restructuring advisor, to either take shares private or file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection.
Lucid’s head of Communications, Nick Twork, immediately challenged the report and stated the company “has sufficient liquidity to carry its operations well into next year.”
Now, the company’s CEO is chiming in as well, stating that the report is “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Napoli said:
“Lucid is not considering bankruptcy or a transaction to take the company private. Those reports are false. The Board did not explore either scenario. Period.
As disclosed in our most recent quarterly filing, Lucid has sufficient liquidity to fund its operations well into next year.
We work with outside advisors to improve operational performance and execution. They are not advising Lucid on a take-private transaction or bankruptcy, and any suggestion that they have recommended either course of action to management or the Board is false.
My priority is clear: turn this company around. That is where the leadership team and I are focused.
I look forward to providing a full update during our quarterly earnings call on August 4th.”
🚨 Lucid CEO Silvio Napoli calls rumors of financial issues “so far from the facts that they require a direct response.”
Read his full remarks here: https://t.co/t3Pg1NHvzy pic.twitter.com/LvHUPhO4Qf
— TESLARATI (@Teslarati) July 15, 2026
It seems pretty clear that Lucid is confident things will be okay, and, to be honest, they should not have much to worry about, especially considering the company has been backed by the Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) for years. It has solid financial backing, and its sales, while weak, are pretty much right on par with a company of this age.
Lucid also sent a Cease & Desist letter to the publication for their report.
Lucid shares have rebounded nicely and are up nearly 21 percent at the time of publication. As soon as the company dispelled the rumors of bankruptcy yesterday, the stock began to climb back toward more reasonable levels.
Tesla has once again demonstrated strong customer focus by swiftly addressing and fully refunding a bizarre Supercharger pricing glitch that affected drivers in Atlantic Canada.
The issue surfaced earlier this month when the Tesla app began displaying dramatically inflated per-minute charging rates at stations in Prince Edward Island and parts of New Brunswick.
One widely shared screenshot from a Charlottetown, PEI Supercharger showed rates reaching ridiculous levels: $6.00 per minute for the 180-250 kW tier, along with $3.57/min for 100-180 kW and $2.29/min for 60-100 kW.
Correct pricing will be going live at midnight tonight. All fees since July 2nd 2026 will be waived.
— Tesla Charging (@TeslaCharging) July 13, 2026
These figures were several times higher than normal Supercharger pricing in the region.
To put the error in perspective, charging at the highest incorrect rate would have been shockingly expensive.
At 250 kW, a common charging speed at Superchargers, a vehicle pulls roughly 4.17 kWh per minute. Under the glitch, a driver spending just 10 minutes at peak power would face a $60 bill. A typical 20- to 30-minute session to add meaningful range could have cost $120 to $180 or more, before any congestion fees.
Tesla gets another layer of gamification with Free Supercharging on the line
By comparison, standard Canadian Supercharger rates usually fall between $0.25 and $0.60 per kWh, making a similar session cost roughly $15–$40. The erroneous per-minute structure, combined with the inflated numbers, turned what should be a convenient stop into a potential financial shock.
The glitch appears to have started sometime around early July, and quickly drew attention on social media as owners questioned whether Tesla had implemented steep hidden increases. Some drivers even reported seeing $0 charges in their history, indicating broader billing confusion.
Tesla’s official Charging account on X stated that correct pricing would roll out at midnight on July 13, so the fix is already in effect. More importantly, the company announced it would waive all fees for every Supercharger session since July 2. This blanket waiver covers the entire affected period without requiring users to file individual claims, with automated refunds expected soon. The decision affects stations in PEI and nearby areas in New Brunswick and Nova Scotia.
It’s a classy move, and rather than issuing partial credits or forcing owners to submit support tickets, Tesla simply absorbed the cost of the system error and made drivers whole. In an industry where hidden fees and bill disputes are common, Tesla’s proactive, no-questions-asked approach reinforces owner trust and highlights the company’s commitment to service excellence.
The incident, while disruptive for a short time, ultimately showcases Tesla’s ability to own mistakes and prioritize customer satisfaction. Atlantic Canada Tesla owners can now charge with confidence again, knowing the company has their back when technology glitches occur.
In an era of complex EV billing, such transparency and generosity are refreshing and set a positive example for the industry.
NTSB findings on fatal Tesla crash tell a very different story
Elon Musk’s Texas ranch to showcase the lifelong work that changed the world
