News
Top Gear doubles down on Tesla vs Porsche race, claims Model S’ actual results are worse
Top Gear‘s saga involving a drag race between the Tesla Model S Performance and the Porsche Taycan Turbo S continues to unravel, as CEO Elon Musk expressed his comments on Twitter and the motoring publication posted an update defending its results.
Following the release of a thorough analysis of the Model S vs Porsche Taycan drag race which suggested that Top Gear did not engage the Tesla’s Launch Mode and full Ludicrous Plus capabilities in the race, CEO Elon Musk took to Twitter to offer his take on the two vehicles’ bout. According to Musk, Top Gear did miss the Model S’ real performance figures, especially since the numbers published by the motoring publication were inconsistent with what regular Tesla owners have recorded on their vehicles.
Amidst criticism from the electric car community, Top Gear has issued a response explaining its Model S Performance vs Taycan Turbo S drag race results. Quite surprisingly, the motoring publication admitted that they did use Model S figures from a previous race in the Tesla vs Porsche drag battle. Even more surprisingly, Top Gear claimed that this was done in favor of the Tesla Model S Performance.
Explaining its results, Top Gear stated that the best figures recorded for the Tesla Model S Performance during its battle with the Taycan were a 0-60 mph time of 2.83 seconds, a 0-100 mph time of 6.64 seconds, and a quarter-mile time of 11.23 seconds at 123.2 mph. These figures were worse than the 0-60 mph time of 2.68 seconds, 0-100 mph time of 6.46 seconds, and quarter-mile time of 11.08 seconds at 124.0 mph listed by the publication in its comparative video.
“These were numbers we recorded in a Model S on a previous occasion. We ran them because these are the best figures we’ve achieved in a Model S to date so we know that’s what the car is capable of. And just to be clear, the Tesla was in Ludicrous+ mode, the battery was pre-conditioned and both cars had around 85 per cent charge before the first run,” Top Gear wrote.
Looking at Top Gear‘s statement and clarification, it appears that the motoring publication is suggesting that the Raven Model S Performance actually has worse capbilities than a vehicle that it used from back in 2017. This does not align with the experiences of Tesla owners at all, many of whom have reported that the Raven Model S Performance can actually outrun a Tesla Model S P100D in the quarter-mile.
Interestingly, Top Gear‘s clarification did not address the main concern expressed by the Tesla community about the Model S vs Taycan race — that the Tesla was not in Launch Mode during its drag battle with the German-made all-electric sports car. This, apart from the fact that a video of the Model S’ interior while it was racing with the Taycan showed that the vehicle’s Range Mode was activated, further clouds Top Gear‘s defense of its race.
Overall, it is quite disappointing to see Top Gear standing by its Tesla Model S Performance vs Porsche Taycan Turbo S drag race results. With the race practically debunked, it would not be in the Porsche Taycan’s best interests to run away with a win from the Model S at this point. The Taycan deserves a clean win, and it is something that it can actually achieve, considering its dual-speed gearbox. Simply put, it would be better for Top Gear at this point to race the two vehicles again, this time with both cars on Launch Control, and this time with an actual Raven Model S, to provide an accurate depiction of a drag race between these two excellent vehicles.
News
Samsung’s Tesla AI5/AI6 chip factory to start key equipment tests in March: report
Samsung Electronics seems to be ramping its efforts to start operations at its Taylor, Texas semiconductor plant.
Samsung Electronics seems to be ramping its efforts to start operations at its Taylor, Texas semiconductor plant, which will produce Tesla’s next-generation AI5 chip.
Preparing for Tesla’s AI5/AI6 chips
As per a report by Sina Finance, Samsung Electronics is looking to begin trial operations of extreme ultraviolet (EUV) lithography equipment at its Taylor facility in March. These efforts are reportedly intended to support the full production of Tesla’s AI5 chips starting in the latter half of 2026.
The Taylor factory, Samsung’s first wafer fabrication plant in the United States, covers roughly 4.85 million square meters and is nearing completion. Media reports, citing contractors, have estimated that about 7,000 workers now work on the factory, about 1,000 of whom are reportedly working from the facility’s office building.
Samsung is reportedly preparing to apply for a temporary occupancy permit, which would allow production to begin before the plant is fully completed.
Tesla’s aggressive AI chip roadmap
Elon Musk recently stated that Tesla’s next-generation AI5 chip is nearly complete, while early development on its successor, AI6, is already underway. Musk shared the update in a post on X, which also happened to be a recruiting message for engineers.
As per Musk, Tesla is looking to iterate its in-house AI chips on an accelerated timeline, with future generations, including AI7, AI8, and AI9, targeting a roughly nine-month design cycle. He also stated that the rapid cadence could allow Tesla’s chips to become the highest-volume AI processors in the world.
Previous reports have indicated that Samsung Electronics would be manufacturing Tesla’s AI5 chip, alongside its rival, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC). The two suppliers are expected to produce different versions of Tesla’s AI5 chip, with TSMC using a 3nm process and Samsung targeting 2nm production.
Elon Musk
Elon Musk’s Boring Company studying potential Giga Nevada tunnel: report
The early-stage feasibility work was funded by a state-affiliated economic group as officials searched for alternatives to worsening traffic and accidents along Interstate 80.
Elon Musk’s tunneling startup, The Boring Company, has been studying a potential tunnel system connecting Reno to Tesla Gigafactory Nevada, as per documents obtained by Fortune. The early-stage feasibility work was funded by a state-affiliated economic group as officials searched for alternatives to worsening traffic and accidents along Interstate 80.
Potential Giga Nevada tunnel
Documents reviewed by Fortune showed that The Boring Company received $50,000 in October to produce conceptual designs and a feasibility report for a tunnel beneath a nine-mile stretch of highway leading to Gigafactory Nevada. The payment came from the Economic Development Authority of Western Nevada (EDAWN), a nonprofit that works with the state to attract and expand businesses.
The proposed tunnel was one of several transportation alternatives being explored to address rising congestion and accidents along Interstate 80, which serves the Tahoe-Reno Industrial Center. The massive industrial park houses major employers, including Tesla and Panasonic, both of which had been in contact with the Nevada Governor’s Office regarding potential transportation solutions.
Emails obtained through public records requests showed that Tesla and Panasonic have also supported a separate commuter rail study that would use existing freight rail alongside the Interstate. It remains unclear if The Boring Company’s feasibility report had been completed, and key details for the potential project, including tunnel length, cost, and if autonomous Teslas would be used, were not disclosed.

Relieving I-80 congestion
Traffic and accidents along I-80 have increased sharply as data centers and new businesses moved into the 107,000-acre industrial center. State transportation data showed that the number of vehicles traveling certain stretches of the highway during peak hours doubled between January and July 2025 alone. Roughly 22,000 employees commute daily to the industrial park, with nearly 8,000 working for Tesla and more than 4,000 for Panasonic at the Giga Nevada complex.
Bill Thomas, who runs the Regional Transportation Commission of Washoe County, shared his thoughts about safety concerns in the area. “At this point in time, there’s about (one accident) every other day,” he said. He also noted that he is supportive of any projects that could alleviate traffic and accidents on the Interstate.
“We’re not paying for it. I’m not involved in it. But I understand there are conversations exploring whether that could be done. If there’s a private solution that helps the problem and improves safety, as far as I’m concerned, more power to them,” Thomas stated.
News
Tesla might have built redundancies for Cybercab charging
When Tesla unveiled the Cybercab in 2024, the company noted that the autonomous two-seater would utilize wireless charging.
A newly spotted panel on Tesla’s Cybercab prototype may point to a practical backup for the vehicle’s wireless charging system as it nears mass production.
Tesla watchers have speculated that the panel could house a physical NACS port, which would ensure that the autonomous two-seater could operate reliably even before the company’s wireless charging infrastructure is deployed.
Cybercab possible physical charge port
The discussion was sparked by a post on X by Tesla watcher Owen Sparks, who highlighted a rather interesting panel on the Cybercab’s rear. The panel, which seemed to be present in the prototype units that have been spotted across the United States recently, seemed large enough to house a physical charge port.
When Tesla unveiled the Cybercab in 2024, the company noted that the autonomous two-seater would utilize wireless charging. Since then, however, Tesla has remained largely quiet about the system’s rollout timeline. With the Cybercab expected to enter production in a few months, equipping the vehicle with a physical NACS port would allow it to charge at Superchargers nationwide without relying exclusively on still-undeployed wireless chargers.
Such an approach would not rule out wireless charging long-term. Instead, it would give Tesla flexibility, allowing the Cybercab to operate immediately at scale while wireless charging solutions are rolled out later. For a vehicle designed to operate continuously and autonomously, redundancy in charging options would be a practical move.
Growing Cybercab sightings
Recent sightings of the Cybercab prototype in Chicago point to the same design philosophy. Images shared on social media showed the vehicle coated in road grime, while its rear camera area appeared noticeably cleaner, with visible traces of water on the trunk.
The observation suggests that the Cybercab is equipped with a rear camera washer. As noted by Model Y owner and industry watcher Sawyer Merritt, this is a feature Tesla owners have requested for years, particularly in snowy or wet climates where dirt and slush can obscure cameras and degrade the performance of systems like FSD.
While only the rear camera washer was clearly visible, the sighting raises the possibility that Tesla may equip additional exterior cameras with similar cleaning systems. For a vehicle that operates without a human driver, after all, maintaining camera visibility in all conditions is essential. Ultimately, the charge-port speculation and camera-washer sightings suggest Tesla is approaching the Cybercab with practicality in mind.