News
Why Tesla won’t lose sleep over other automakers achieving massive range ratings
Tesla is normally confronted with plenty of interesting and challenging metrics from competitors, especially in terms of range and speed. With the Mercedes-Benz VISION EQXX accomplishing a major feat of over 1,000 kilometers (620 miles) driven on a single charge earlier this week, many may wonder if Tesla engineers are scrambling around attempting to crank out some new EV with 2,000 kilometers of range. I can assure you they are not.
The accomplishments of Mercedes-Benz in its electric vehicle program are not to be slighted. While the luxury automaker is working to develop and ramp its EQ lineup, which will consist of fully and partially electric vehicles, Mercedes is definitely coming out with some pretty interesting and eye-grabbing records and points of strength, especially indicated in its most recent range ratings and assessments of its semi-autonomous driving functionality. Its most recent release from April 13 tells us the story of the VISION EQXX and how it drove 626 total miles on a charge.
“We did it! Powering through more than 1,000 kilometers with ease on a single battery charge and a consumption of only 8.7 kWh/100 km (7.1 kWh per 62 miles) in real-world traffic conditions,” Ola Källenius, Charman of the Board of Management for Mercedes-Benz Group AG, said. “The VISION EQXX is the most efficient Mercedes ever built. The technology program behind it marks a milestone in the development of electric vehicles. It underpins our strategic aim to ‘Lead in Electric.’”
Traveling on a route through Germany and Italy, crossing the towns and cities of Sindelfingen, Gotthard Tunnel, Milan, and Cassis, 11 hours and 32 minutes of driving time ended its 626-mile trek successfully with a single charge.
Erfolgreicher Roadtrip MissionXX – von Sindelfingen über die Schweizer Alpen nach Cassis an der Côte d’Azur. Der Mercedes-Benz VISION EQXX fährt über 1.000 km mit einer Batterieladung und einem Durchschnittsverbrauch von 8,7 kWh/100 km. // Successful MissionXX road trip – from Sindelfingen across the Swiss Alps to Cassis on the Cote d’Azur. The Mercedes-Benz VISION EQXX sets efficiency record – over 1,000 km on a single battery charge and average consumption of 8.7 kWh/100 km.
Many of those interested in electric vehicles may be thinking, “This is just another thing Tesla has been beaten on.” “It’s only a matter of time before others do it, too.” “Tesla won’t achieve this, they’re stuck in the 400-mile range threshold.”
Tesla, as a company, is likely excited other companies are accomplishing these endurance-type runs so they don’t have to. If the automotive industry in 2022 was the same as what it was in 2010: a gas engine-dominated sector with relatively no electric options, then sure, maybe Tesla would care. But maybe not. The landscape of the EV industry has become so obsessed with these incredible metrics that many consumers forget they won’t need over 600 miles of range. How many gas car drivers go to a dealership thinking, “I will only buy a car if it offers me 620 miles of driving on a tank?”
CEO Elon Musk even stated recently that having “too much” range is not necessarily a good thing for electric vehicles.
“We could’ve made a 600-mile Model S 12 months ago, but that would’ve made the product worse imo, as 99.9% of time you’d be carrying unneeded battery mass, which makes acceleration, handling & efficiency worse,” Musk said recently. “Even our 400+ mile range car is more than almost anyone will use.” ABC News says the average American only travels sixteen miles per day for work. U.S. Census data even says Americans only spend around 27.6 minutes driving to work one way.
Tesla has held this perspective for some time. “Mass is the enemy of both efficiency and performance, and minimizing the weight of every component is an ongoing goal for our design and engineering teams,” it said in a blog post announcing the 400-mile Model S in June 2020.“Several lessons from the engineering design and manufacturing of Model 3 and Model Y have now been carried over to Model S and Model X. This has unlocked new areas of mass reduction while maintaining the premium feel and performance of both vehicles. Additional weight savings have also been achieved through the standardization of Tesla’s in-house seat manufacturing and lighter weight materials used in our battery pack and drive units.”
While there is certainly no reason to knock on Mercedes-Benz’s accomplishments, there needs to be a relative sense of what is ultimately appropriate in terms of EV range. Endurance runs are completely legitimate and interesting ways to prove your battery and efficiency metrics, but they’re not something proven EV companies will look at down the road. The successful automakers will be focusing on avoiding supply chain issues, ramping battery supply chain manufacturing, becoming more vertically integrated, and working to create price parity between EVs and their gas counterparts.
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
