Connect with us

Published

on

Faraday Future, the oft-delayed electric vehicle startup, has finally brought the FF91 to market, and we were the first media to drive a real production-spec version of the car, around Willow Springs raceway no less.

Faraday invited us to Willow Springs to attend its latest “delivery co-creation day,” where race car driver and Le Mans class winner Justin Bell took delivery of his FF91 2.0 Futurist Alliance limited-edition vehicle. This is the seventh car the company has delivered since the official start of production in March and the start of shipping in May. Faraday is showing a video on its website to recap the events of the day, which should be live as this article is published.

Willow Springs was a fitting location since the event was also the launch of Faraday’s “Racetrack Conqueror Plan,” where the point is to visit racetracks around the world to set track records with its electric car.

Bell and his father, Derek (a multiple Le Mans winner and ex-F1 driver who also has an FF91 on order), say they’re going to work on developing a racing package for the FF91, which will help it on its way to these records. Faraday also plans to engage with other racing drivers in the future – Romain Dumas was one example given.

Faraday also invited other VIPs, including various supercar owners, to come out and challenge the FF91 on the track. A Bugatti Chiron, a Ferrari SF 90 PHEV, a Mercedes GTS AMG Black, and others were in attendance. Faraday did manage to set a record on the day and beat the various other cars at the track.

The FF91 set a lap time of 1:28.13, which beat out the Lamborghini Urus for the fastest lap by an SUV (gas or electric) by more than two seconds. According to fastestlaps.com, that puts the FF91 just behind the Porsche 911 GT3, McLaren 570S and Tesla Model S Plaid by less than a second each and just ahead of the BMW M4 CSL and the 760hp supercharged V-8 Shelby Mustang GT500.

And then, five years after Faraday’s initial production intent and with several attempts at restructuring the company and finding contingent funding inbetween, we finally got a chance to hop behind the wheel.

While Faraday has offered some media drives before, those were in prototype vehicles, whereas this is the first time in a real production vehicle and the first time on a track. We drove production VIN #1, the car belonging to Faraday Future’s founder, Yueting “YT” Jia.

First drive: 1,050 mind-blowing, silent horsepower

This was definitely just a first drive – we didn’t get any street time with the car, just a few laps on the track and a little time sitting in it and messing around with the interface.

But the track time meant we could really get a sense of what the FF91’s 1,050 horsepower (yes, you read that right, one thousand and fifty horsepower) can really do.

On the front straight, it started pulling, and then it kept pulling, and then it kept pulling. It just never stopped pulling. I got up to about 145mph (of its electronically limited 155mph), and it didn’t feel like it was petering out.

And I felt like I was taking it easy. Even at that high speed, the car showed no sign of drama. It was quiet and smooth inside, and there weren’t any theatrics on the way to achieving a faster land speed than most people will ever see.

And even better, in my opinion, was the complete lack of drama on the exterior of the car. The car was not screaming loudly as it blasted by the grandstands. (In fact, it was perhaps easier to hear the motorcycles at the neighboring Streets of Willow track than the FF91 on the big track.)

Some prefer the belching theatrics of a loud exhaust, but beyond the obvious health and climate effects and the inefficiency of noise replacing actual kinetic energy, honestly, they’re just so gauche. It was more pleasant and exciting to see the FF91 whip through the air silently than it was to smell the noisy Spoon Racing Honda idling and giving everyone a headache while it waited to take the track.

All that said, the car was maybe even too quiet. Not on the engine side of things, but with Faraday’s focus on offering a luxurious ride, extensive sound dampening meant it was hard to hear the tires working outside the vehicle.

When tracking an electric car, being able to hear the tires working is a real performance benefit compared to louder motors, as it gives you another sense to help you understand your vehicle’s dynamics. Maybe the Bell performance package will remove some sound-dampening material, which will also help to save weight.

It’s heavy, but Faraday, please stop calling it an elephant

This brings up the FF91’s big disadvantage when it comes to the track: All that size and luxury means it weighs a whopping 6,442 pounds (2,922kg).

That’s an enormous vehicle, even compared to other supercars and hypercars, which lately have seen a trend forsaking weight savings for more raw power (while the late Colin Chapman rolls in his grave). For comparison, the 1,020hp Model S Plaid is 4,700 pounds, and the 1,500hp Bugatti Chiron (one of which was in attendance) is 4,400 pounds. But then again, those vehicles don’t have reclining rear seats. More on that in a moment.

Weight is one of the worst things for vehicle performance. The heavier your car, the harder it is to accelerate, brake, and turn. That is, it’s harder to do all of the things a car is meant to do. When legendary race car designer Colin Chapman was asked what to add to make a car faster, he responded, “Add lightness.”

This heavy weight was apparent in the car’s performance, but not as much as you’d think. The car’s heaviest portion, its 142kWh(!!!) battery, is placed at the floor between the wheels, which helps to keep a low center of gravity and low-ish moment of inertia (compared to its 206-inch length) and increases chassis rigidity. As a result, even in the flatter corners (most of Willow’s corners are banked), we felt very little body roll from the car, which is especially abnormal for an SUV.

In corners, the car was a little floaty when jumping on the throttle on corner exit, again owing to its high weight. It just takes a lot of effort to get such a big car turned. Its tri-motor system is arranged with three equally-sized motors, one in front and two in rear, with a slight rear/oversteer bias to the handling, which I actually enjoyed. I do prefer rear-wheel drive – it’s just more fun to be able to steer the car on the throttle – but everyone’s going AWD because it’s faster and easier to drive, so at least the car will still let me have a little fun.

And as for the brakes, they felt fine, but it certainly did take some real effort to get the car stopped. There’s just so much car behind them. On a track-performance basis, this is probably the car’s weakest point. Not that they felt too small or that the car didn’t behave well under them – just that the car is heavy, and when you have that much kinetic energy, it takes time to shed all of it.

Despite the weight, the car still held its own on the track on the day, setting the aforementioned SUV record and beating other supercars that were brought out to set laps. YT has repeatedly used a metaphor along the lines of “an elephant dancing with cheetahs,” and while I understand the meaning he’s getting at here, I encourage Faraday to stop calling its car an elephant. Nobody wants to hear that.

Another track weakness that I didn’t personally encounter is in the battery temperature management. While my three laps were unbothered, the next driver apparently was unable to coax full performance out of the car, as it had gone into a protection mode from the high temperatures I left it with on this warm-but-not-hot track day.

We saw a lot of this with early Teslas, which could only do a limited number of laps or sometimes couldn’t even complete a full lap of a longer track like the Nurburgring Nordschleife before derating due to temperature. By now, Tesla’s cooling systems and software have improved enough that this isn’t a problem, and there are plenty of racing-focused EVs that don’t have a problem with derating after multiple laps (Formula E, for example, where Faraday was involved in a team in season 3).

Faraday got another car out for the other driver and says that it has some ideas about how to tweak the software to avoid temperature derating, but we suspect it will take a good amount of focused effort (or perhaps a compromise of reducing peak power) to get there.

But if your car does need a break, or if you do, at least you’ve got a nice place to sit.

It’s also a luxury car

That’s the thing about the FF91: It’s not really a sports car. We’ve talked a lot about track performance because that’s where we drove it, but Faraday calls it an “all-ability” car, which merges the capabilities of a luxury car, family car, and sports car.

So its deficiencies as a sports car – namely, its weight and size – are a result of its strengths as a luxury car.

The main focus of the vehicle since its introduction has been the rear Zero-G seats, which have gobs of legroom and are capable of reclining at a 60° angle. These seats are enormous and comfortable, a class above even the Audi e-tron SUV, which is the previous most comfortable car I’ve enjoyed sitting in and even better than the original Lucid prototype rear seats, which had a similar style but were abandoned come production. (Faraday has already floated that there may eventually be a bench seat version of the FF91.)

These Zero-G seats are largely targeted at people with personal drivers and, therefore, target people who spend more time in the rear seat of their own vehicle – not so common in the US, where Faraday is based, but quite common in China, where the founder is from and which the company is clearly targeting much of its strategy at (though it would not tell me when Chinese deliveries would commence).

Upon sliding into position in the back, I immediately and subconsciously went into “comfort mode.” Think of the blue-collar dad, getting home from a hard day of work, popping a beer, kicking off his shoes, plopping into his favorite La-Z-Boy and pulling the recline handle to enter maximum relaxation mode.

Truly, this gives a new definition to the common phrase “living room on wheels.” An employee told us that his kid and wife now fight over who gets the back seat, not the front seat. I can see it.

It’s a startup, after all

And yet, despite being in the first production vehicle, a number of production features were not available to test out. The car was festooned with gear that blocked the rear 27-inch screen from folding down, and the seat massagers were not activated (I’d probably still be sitting there if they were, having melted across the divide into the plane of pure relaxation). And while the software worked well, it was still waiting for some future features (but I’m no stranger to cars like that).

One of its characteristic whiz-bang startup-like features is something we’ve seen on many concepts recently (and production cars, too): funky doors. The FF91’s doors have no handles whatsoever, and are instead opened by a touch gesture either on exterior car window sill or a touchscreen on the B-pillar.

I’m okay with some door handle experimentation, but this seems like a bridge too far. The sill gesture was not reliable in my initial experience, though the touchscreen gesture worked well. This could be solved with, perhaps, auto-opening doors on walk-up or something of the sort. Handles, a button, anything along those lines would be nice. But, at least you can close them manually.

Faraday says that it will engage with early owners, whom it is calling “co-creators,” in an active feedback loop to improve its software and fit it to the needs of its owners. The company wants to offer frequent software updates and says it has much more computing power onboard than it is currently using, so it has plenty of headroom to add more capabilities.

While we didn’t get deep into using the software, the basic interface already does work pretty well. Most importantly, the interface is snappy and responsive, unlike virtually every other OEM interface that isn’t made by Apple/Android or another EV startup.

In terms of interface layout, some of the controls take one too many submenus to reach, and there was some lag between pressing certain digital controls and translating them into hardware movement (e.g., adjusting seats and steering wheel), but you should only have to do that once anyway. Faraday says its software will remember your settings and wants to eventually detect not just who’s in the car but what seat they’re in and set each seat to whatever the occupant’s preferred settings are.

The main screen is vertically oriented between the front seats, and myriad car settings can be controlled from there. There are additional touchscreens on the rear doors, which allow independent controls (such as climate control) for each back seat.

The screens themselves were a little darker than I’d like, though admittedly, it was a bright day, and I was wearing sunglasses, which brings up another point – the FF91’s HUD struggles with polarized sunglasses, something that I have noticed in other HUDs, since the whole point of polarized glasses is to reduce reflections (though the Mercedes EQS, through some black magic, still makes it work).

But even worse, the main screen didn’t look great with polarized glasses either. This is common for screens, though usually it only works when you tilt your head 90° away from the normal viewing angle (and some screens, like phone screens, avoid the problem completely). But in this case, it seemed to darken when my head was just at a diagonal angle, which strikes me as a far bigger oversight than a difficult-to-see HUD.

Note the gloss finish on driver/passenger screens. The striping is an artifact of cellphone capture, not visible in real life.

The driver instrument display and the passenger infotainment display, though, both did not have this problem. But each had a gloss finish on them, which made it difficult to see if there was a bright reflection – which there often was, especially as the strong California desert sun got lower in the sky. They could stand to be both brighter and closer to the driver/passenger, as they are set quite far back into the dash.

But the software also got a big win when I tried pairing my device with the in-car Wi-Fi system. All I had to do was scan a QR code, and my device immediately joined without needing to enter my phone’s settings, and all of a sudden, a bunch of notifications came through on my phone, which I hadn’t been getting due to poor reception at the track. So, score one for FF91’s triple-antenna cell system and a great and easy-to-use software experience.

But we didn’t have a chance to test any driver aids or semi-autonomous software at all. Like most cars on the road today, Faraday’s driver aids are SAE level 2, which means you are still responsible for driving the car. The car has 30 sensors, with cameras and LiDAR, and is powered by NVIDIA’s Orin architecture.

Faraday talked a lot about being autonomous-ready, both in their 2017 reveal and in May of this year, though at this event, it was much quieter about all that – in fact, explicitly telling me that it doesn’t want to make promises it can’t keep, unlike some other companies. This statement would be a refreshing sign of maturity if Faraday hadn’t been making those exact promises about its “FF aiHypercar+” system just a few months ago, which will be able to generate custom maps of private grounds which will allow level 4 driverless operation, and which it said it plans to charge $15k per year for.

And that’s one thing about my conversations with Faraday employees on the day. In Faraday’s marketing presentations, it has made a lot of claims about what its car is and will be capable of. These claims have also been buried under mountains of buzzwords, and the short presentation given by YT was no different.

What the heck does any of this mean?

But in direct conversations, employees mostly spoke in normal human terms, forgoing the buzzwords and just talking about what the car can do, what it will hopefully be able to do in the near future, and what it seems like will come further down the timeline. And at times, the employees recognized the need to distance themselves from promises and designs generated long ago before many of them were with the company.

These conversations were refreshing to experience, but I would like to see them reflected in Faraday’s higher-level messaging. Maybe I’m completely missing the market here, but I just don’t think anyone is served by phrases like “FF aiHyper 6×4 Architecture 2.0.” It doesn’t mean anything to anyone. Focus.

Now it’s time to focus

Putting three cars in one was always going to be a challenge. I’ve written a lot of words about Faraday’s “kitchen sink” approach, reaching all the way back to its original reveal in 2017. In short, I think it’s dangerous to try to make a car that’s everything to everybody. You have to eventually sit down, focus, and trim the fat somehow.

Since that reveal, Faraday has moved from benchmarking itself against the Tesla Model S in its original announcement in 2017 (this wasn’t explicit, but it was still obvious) to now benchmarking itself against Maybach and Ferrari. This latter benchmark surely helps it to justify its $309,000 price tag on these first vehicles, but in the interim, we’ve seen Mercedes announce a starting price of $180,000 on its Maybach EQS SUV, which is quite the undercut compared to FF91’s announced pricing.

Faraday’s less-limited-edition FF91 2.0 Futurist model will start at a lower $249,000 base price, and the base-model FF91 2.0 will be lower still, though that last price point has not yet been announced. We’ll see how close it gets to the Maybach.

Faraday also says that it has one big advantage over the Germans, which is that, as a tech company, it can move faster and has a much better understanding of how people are engaging with technology and devices today.

On this point, I don’t disagree. One thing I love about my early Model 3 is that it is a better car today than it was when it was released due to software updates (and the rollout of the Supercharger network); the same can’t generally be said about cars from traditional OEMs. But I am not the target market for a $309,000 (or $249,000) car, so what I think about this doesn’t particularly matter.

The question is: Will people buying Maybachs want to spend a similar amount of money – or more – on a car that doesn’t have a name with as long of an established history? Will the status gained from having early access to a rare and expensive new brand outstrip the status from having a car with a logo everyone (with money) knows about already and has for a hundred years? Surely, for some people, but are there enough buyers out there of that description to fund Faraday’s operations?

Those operations are the primary focus of Faraday Future’s new CEO, Matthias Aydt, appointed last month after less than a year under the previous temporary CEO, Xuefeng Chen, who is now back to his prior position as FF China CEO.

Aydt said he is focusing on cost-down and ramp-up, with the company targeting .5 cars an hour worth of output in the short term and hoping to reach two cars per hour output around the beginning of 2025.

Those numbers annualize to 2,500 cars a year and 10,000 cars a year, respectively – which is quite a shout from the seven that have been delivered so far this year (though more have been produced and many were brought out to the track). It’s the difference between a real car company producing cars in volume and literally being able to name every owner off the top of your head, the latter of which is possible now.

Aydt gave a public update on Faraday’s progress on October 15, primarily focused toward concerned investors who have seen the stock price fall significantly lately. The company will give more updates on its progress on this front at its quarterly update on November 13 and investor day at its HQ in Gardena, California, on November 15.

So the story of Faraday is one that, despite a lot of ink already being spilled, is still being written – and the company and its investors hope that we are still writing the early pages of that story. Getting here, bringing a competent vehicle to the road, is an achievement that many, myself included, thought would never happen. Faraday deserves credit for that, not only for getting the car to road but for getting it to the road with specs similar to what was promised (minus some of the more hopeful software features… which may still come in updates).

This is why I titled this article “the Faraday Future FF91 actually exists.” This may sound like I am damning the company with faint praise, but it truly is an achievement to have brought this car to market and to have managed some superlatives along the way. Its power is incredible, its rear seat comfort is beyond compare, and its software shows promise. But its strategy at times seems rudderless, and despite the superlatives, its price is still tough to justify. (But hey, I’m not spending over $200,000 on a car; what do I know about what that group wants?)

So now comes the time to focus, to separate the wheat from the chaff, to turn this dream into reality.

And, for goodness sake, stop calling your car an elephant.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

California announces lawsuit to resist Congress’ illegal attacks on clean air

Published

on

By

California announces lawsuit to resist Congress' illegal attacks on clean air

California will go to court to protect its clean air in the face of illegal attacks by republicans in Congress, said California Governor Gavin Newsom today.

Earlier today, the US Senate voted to revoke California’s waiver to set its own clean air rules using the Congressional Review Act (CRA). The House previously voted on a similar measure earlier this month.

For more than half a century, California has asked for and been granted this waiver that allows it to set its own emissions rules. Other states can follow California’s rules (and around 11 states do so, though that amount differs for each rule), as long as they do so exactly, and as long as those rules are stronger than the national ones.

It has this unique authority because California had its own Clean Air Act before the federal Clean Air Act was passed, and because the state had a unique problem with smog at the time and needed stricter rules than the rest of the country. So a carveout was made in the federal law in recognition of this, and California has been granted this waiver over 100 times after following proper rulemaking processes, and denied zero times.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

California’s clean air laws have been effective in reducing pollution, with vehicle-based pollutants dropping by 98% in the last 50 years. But of course, there’s still more to be done, as the LA area remains one of the smoggiest in the country due to factors including geography, high car dependency, heavy shipping traffic, and a lack of public transitt.

Despite the protestations of industry at the time and since, these rules have not made it impossible for them to operate, or sell cars, or profit from selling cars, in California or any other states that follow its rules.

California’s newest set of rules is set to save Californians, and the residents of other states who follow them, hundreds of billions of dollars on health, fuel, and maintenance costs through 2050 by encouraging electrification – and of course will save thousands of lives due to pollution reductions.

Republicans targeted not just California’s regulation on light duty vehicles (ACC II), but also some other truck emissions rules (the ACT and HD low-NOx Omnibus rules), with their CRA action today.

The problem is, Congress does not have the power to revoke this waiver, because that’s not how the CRA works.

The CRA is an until-recently rarely-used Act which allows Congress to disapprove of recent rules set by a federal government agency, and bar that agency from implementing similar rules.

However, California’s waiver is not a rule from a federal government agency, it’s a waiver from the EPA to let California set its own rules. Therefore, the CRA doesn’t apply, as acknowledged by the Senate Parliamentarian, the Government Accountability Office, manymany other legal observers, and even Congress itself, where Senator Mike Lee voted to rescind the waiver, despite saying clearly that it “cannot be reviewed under the Congressional Review Act (CRA).”

It’s also outside the 60 day window allowed for review by the CRA. Stack another violation of law on top of the first one.

So, today’s action by Congress is illegal, and California is now going to court to stop it.

California announces lawsuit to protect clean air

Hot on the heels of republicans declaring their desire to raise health and fuel costs for Americans, and their opposition to clean air, California Governor Gavin Newsom came out with a response, committing to taking the issue to court, as California has done (and won) in the face of previous republican attacks on clean air.

Gov. Newsom declared his opposition to the republican plan to “Make America Smoggy Again” today, saying:

“This Senate vote is illegal. Republicans went around their own parliamentarian to defy decades of precedent. We won’t stand by as Trump Republicans make America smoggy again — undoing work that goes back to the days of Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan — all while ceding our economic future to China. We’re going to fight this unconstitutional attack on California in court.”

-California Governor Gavin Newsom

California Attorney General Rob Bonta also spoke at the press conference, saying:

“With these votes, Senate Republicans are bending the knee to President Trump once again. The weaponization of the Congressional Review Act to attack California’s waivers is just another part of the continuous, partisan campaign against California’s efforts to protect the public and the planet from harmful pollution. As we have said before, this reckless misuse of the Congressional Review Act is unlawful, and California will not stand idly by. We need to hold the line on strong emissions standards and keep the waivers in place, and we will sue to defend California’s waivers.”

In its press release, the California Governor’s Office pointed to the decades of precedent upholding California’s waiver, which is protected by the Clean Air Act. It also pointed out that the California Air Resources Board was established under Governor Ronald Reagan, and waivers were first granted by President Richard Nixon.

Both of these individuals are republicans, though from a time before the party had fallen quite so far down the rabbit hole of openly wishing harm on Americans.

California goes on to talk about how Congress’ actions make driving less affordable by raising fuel and health costs, hand over the keys to the auto industry to China by slowing down the US auto industry’s transition to EVs, and harm the climate leadership of California, the most productive state and the 4th largest economy in the world, which has grown by 78% since the year 2000 while cutting greenhouse gas emissions by 20% since then.

California did not yet file the lawsuit, merely stated its intent to do so today. But courts have ruled in favor of California many times in the past in cases related to its authority to protect its own air, most recently doing so in December.

Clean air groups also offered their support for California’s lawsuit. The Environmental Defense Fund said:

“We stand with California’s leaders in protecting the health and safety of millions of people from harmful vehicle pollution. The state’s clean air standards for new cars and trucks protect children’s lungs and the communities where they grow up from smog and soot. They help farmers, builders, and others who work outdoors breathe easier. They reduce the climate pollution that fuels deadly wildfires, droughts, and other disasters. They save hard-earned money at the pump — and they save thousands and thousands of lives”

-Vickie Patton, General Counsel, Environmental Defense Fund

While the EDF did not yet join the lawsuit (as it hasn’t been filed), a number of nonprofits joined another California lawsuit against an illegal freeze on charging funds today, so we may expect future comment from the groups involved in that lawsuit.


On another note, republicans took action to cut the rooftop solar credit today. That means you could have only until the end of this year to install rooftop solar on your home, before republicans raise the cost of doing so by an average of ~$10,000. So if you want to go solar, get started now, because these things take time and the system needs to be active before you file for the credit.

To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.

Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here. – ad*

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Tesla Model Y compared to ‘Tesla killer’ Xiaomi YU7: it’s not even close

Published

on

By

Tesla Model Y compared to 'Tesla killer' Xiaomi YU7: it's not even close

Here we compare the specs of the new Tesla Model Y (Chinese version) to the newly unveiled Xiaomi YU7, a vehicle dubbed the ‘Tesla killer’.

For years, we laughed at people using the term ‘Tesla killer’ for new electric vehicles. To this day, even as Tesla’s sales are declining, it’s a bit dumb to use the term since no single EV is going to “kill” Tesla.

However, there’s one that is as close to do it as we have seen so far.

Earlier this year, we reported on how Xiaomi’s first electric vehicle, the SU7, had a major negative impact on Tesla’s Model 3 sales in China.

Advertisement – scroll for more content

At the time, we reported that the bigger concern for Tesla was that the Chinese electronics giant was now planning to launch a new EV, the YU7, aimed at competing against Tesla’s popular Model Y.

The Xiaomi YU7 was unveiled today, and we can now provide a side-by-side specs comparison that highlights Tesla’s problem in China.

Tesla Model Y vs Xiaomi YU7

The only thing that is missing about the YU7 as of the time of writing is the price, but it is expected to be very similar to Model Y and even likely to undercut by a bit.

Specs Tesla Model Y RWD Tesla Model Y Long Range AWD Xiaomi YU7 Standard (RWD) Xiaomi YU7 Pro (AWD) Xiaomi YU7 Max (AWD)
Launch Date January 2025 January 2025 July 2025 (expected) July 2025 (expected) July 2025 (expected)
Price (CNY) ¥263,500 ¥303,500 ~¥250,000 (est.) Not announced Not announced
Price (USD) ~$36,600 ~$42,200 ~$34,700 (est.) Not announced Not announced
Dimensions (L x W x H) 4,797 x 1,920 x 1,624 mm 4,797 x 1,920 x 1,624 mm 4,999 x 1,996 x 1,600 mm 4,999 x 1,996 x 1,600 mm 4,999 x 1,996 x 1,600 mm
Wheelbase 2,890 mm 2,890 mm 3,000 mm 3,000 mm 3,000 mm
Weight 1,921 kg 1,992 kg Not specified 2,405 kg 2,405 kg
Powertrain Single motor RWD Dual motor AWD Single motor RWD Dual motor AWD Dual motor AWD
Power Output Not specified (est. 200-250 kW) Not specified (est. 350-400 kW) 235 kW (315 hp) 508 kW (681 hp) 508 kW (681 hp)
0-100 km/h 5.9 s 4.3 s 5.8 s 4.3 s ~3.2 s
Top Speed 201 km/h 201 km/h 240 km/h 253 km/h 253 km/h
Battery Type LFP NMC LFP LFP Li-ion ternary (CATL)
Battery Capacity ~62.5 kWh ~80 kWh 96.3 kWh 96.3 kWh ~101.7 kWh
Range (CLTC) 593 km 719 km 835 km 750 km 760 km
Charging Architecture 400V 400V 800V 800V 800V
Seating Capacity 5 (7 optional) 5 (7 optional) 5 5 5
Key Features – Updated design – Rear seat touchscreen – FSD-capable – Same as RWD – Higher performance – Panoramic HUD – HyperOS – Larger cabin – Same as Standard – Higher performance – Top-tier performance – Premium interior (assumed)
Autonomous Driving FSD with AI4 computer FSD with AI4 computer Nvidia Thor chip (700 TOPS) Nvidia Thor chip (700 TOPS) Nvidia Thor chip (700 TOPS)

These specs show that the vehicles are extremely similar. The main difference is that Xiaomi packs a lot more batteries into the YU7 than Tesla puts into the Model Y, resulting in a significant difference in range.

To be fair to Tesla, it still dominates in efficiency as it does more with fewer batteries, which is an important skill to have. However, most customers don’t care about that and want a longer range. They don’t care how you make it happen.

Another big difference is the design.

As we previously reported, the Tesla Model Y design refresh looks similar to other Chinese EVs.

Based on the online reception, the Model Y is viewed as having a more tired design that is not as luxurious as the YU7.

That’s particularly true of the exteriors.

It’s a similar situation in the interior, but Xiaomi also outshines Tesla here with more technology, like display along the dash:

Both vehicles feature a large center display where most of the controls are located.

Electrek’s Take

I think Tesla is in trouble in China. The competition is impressive and there are vehicles that clearly directly target Model Y, Tesla’s bread and butter, and there’s no better example than this one.

The only thing missing is pricing, but if it’s priced as expected, which is like the SU7 to the Model 3, it will make it a no-brainer for most buyers.

Also, Xiaomi often gets mentioned as a ‘Tesla killer’ because the vehicles are not only ultra competitive with Tesla, but it is also producing them in high volumes.

SU7 outsold the Model 3 within a year of launching. The YU7 is coming to market within the next 2 months, and it should reach impressive volumes that are going to put pressure on Tesla’s Model Y sales by the end of the year.

FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links. More.

Continue Reading

Environment

Top $TRUMP holders head to crypto dinner with president that Democrats call ‘orgy of corruption’

Published

on

By

Top $TRUMP holders head to crypto dinner with president that Democrats call 'orgy of corruption'

Jonathan Raa | Nurphoto | Getty Images

Nick Pinto is a marketing director at his family’s law firm in New Jersey. He’s also a crypto trader who spent enough money on Donald Trump’s meme coin to win a spot at a private black-tie dinner with the president scheduled for Thursday night.

“I was kind of early in bitcoin and ethereum, so I’ve always been trading crypto,” said the 25-year-old Pinto, who claims he finished number 72 on the leaderboard for the token contest. “Once I saw the announcement that Trump was releasing a coin, I immediately started to purchase it.”

Pinto said in an interview that he spent half a million dollars on the $TRUMP meme token in order to attend the dinner, which is being held at President Trump’s private golf club in Potomac Falls, Virginia, near Washington, D.C. Pinto shared screenshots with CNBC that appear to back up his claim.

The $TRUMP coin, which has no attached asset or underlying value, was launched just ahead of the president’s inauguration in January and has drawn heavy scrutiny from Democratic lawmakers who say President Trump is profiting from his position of power.

The dinner was announced last month and promised to reward the top 220 token owners with “the most exclusive invitation in the world.” The top 25 finishers were also told they would get a private reception with the president, as well as a “special VIP tour.”

President Trump hosts meme coin megadonors amid conflict of interest claims

Democratic senators called the competition a blatant example of “‘pay to play’ corruption” — the coin jumped 50% after the dinner announcement. Earlier this week, the Senate advanced a Trump-backed crypto regulation bill called the GENIUS Act after getting enough Democratic support to clear a potential filibuster.

Guests for Thursday night’s dinner were required to complete a background check, according to a copy of the invitation viewed by CNBC. Attendees were instructed not to arrive before 5:30 p.m., with the dinner starting at 7 p.m. and expected to last three hours.

Pinto doesn’t know what his investment in $TRUMP will get him other than the dinner. He said he thinks the tokens will be usable in a digital Trump golf game that was announced in December and is expected to launch next month, according to a press release.

“There’s a few things that I want to ask him,” Pinto said. “I definitely want to find out if he’s going to want to use this coin in the game. That’s probably my top question, because not many people know about that game.”

The Trump coin team didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Because crypto wallets are pseudonymous, most participants in the competition appeared only as three- to four-letter usernames linked to cryptographic wallet addresses. Many of the winners are tied to international exchanges, according to blockchain analytics firm Inca Digital, raising concern that non-Americans may be paying for the opportunity to try and influence the U.S. president.  

While Pinto is going public about his participation, most of the identities tied to top wallets are unknown. Blockchain data shows that a majority of the top entrants used offshore exchanges barred to U.S. residents. An analysis by Bloomberg revealed that 19 of the top 25 wallets, and more than half of the top 220, are almost certainly owned by individuals operating outside the U.S.

The competition drew an estimated $148 million in purchases from supporters around the world, a massive fundraising haul for a digital asset launched just months ago. Among those attending is Justin Sun, the Chinese-born founder of the TRON blockchain, who confirmed this week that he is the contest’s top-ranked investor.

At current prices, Sun’s stake in $TRUMP is now worth more than $20 million. Sun was also one of the first major backers of World Liberty Financial, the Trump family’s crypto venture, buying at least $75 million of its native token “WLFI.”

In 2023, U.S. regulators accused Sun of illegally selling unregistered securities and artificially inflating token prices. A month into Trump’s second White House term, a federal court filing showed the SEC was in settlement talks with Sun to resolve the civil fraud charges.

Trump hosts exclusive gala for meme coin holders as lawmakers raise ethics concerns

Final leaderboard

MemeCore, a Singapore-based crypto network that was vocal in its quest to secure a spot at the Trump dinner, landed in second place with an investment of around $19.7 million, according to a post on X that the company later deleted. MemeCore didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Some buyers didn’t make the cut.

Freight Technologies, a Houston-based logistics company, said it spent $2 million on $TRUMP tokens as part of what it called a strategic push to “champion fair and free trade” across the U.S.-Mexico border. The company still finished in 250th place. Freight trades on the Nasdaq as a penny stock and has a market cap of about $6.5 million.

The final leaderboard was calculated using a time-weighted formula that factored in both the size and duration of each participant’s holdings. That means early buyers who held onto their tokens consistently, like Pinto, could outrank bigger last-minute spenders.

Investors in $TRUMP, like with other meme coins, have to be prepared for big ups and downs.

Immediately after its launch in January, the Trump coin spiked to a $15 billion market cap before crashing within days. It’s currently worth about $2.1 billion.

That volatility has created stark winners and losers. Blockchain data shows that more than $5.2 billion in profits flowed to the top wallets, while over 590,000 wallets — mostly small retail traders — collectively lost nearly $4 billion.

Since January, more than $324 million in trading fees have been routed to wallets tied to the project’s creators, according to Chainalysis. The token’s code automatically directs a cut of each transaction to these addresses, allowing the team to profit from ongoing activity. The blockchain analytics firm stopped tracking the president’s meme token about two weeks ago, citing a need to refocus resources on paying clients.

The Trump family has reaped enormous financial benefit. Roughly 75% of proceeds from World Liberty Financial and more than 80% of profits from the meme coin have gone directly to the Trump Organization and affiliated entities. The project has also generated hundreds of millions of dollars in trading fees.

Senator Chris Murphy, D-Conn., has introduced legislation that would ban sitting presidents from profiting off meme coins while in office.

In a press conference hours before the dinner, Murphy warned that “just because the corruption is playing out in public where everybody can see, it doesn’t mean that it isn’t rampant, rapacious corruption.” He called tonight’s event “maybe the most corrupt, of all of the corruption.”

Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., went further, describing the gathering as “an orgy of corruption” and accusing Trump of using the presidency “to make himself richer through crypto.” She called for changes to the GENIUS Act that would bar any president from profiting off stablecoin ventures.

With Republicans in control of both chambers of Congress, Democrats have limited ability to force action.

In response to CNBC’s questions about the dinner, Deputy White House Press Secretary Anna Kelly said, “The president is working to secure good deals for the American people, not for himself,” adding that he “only acts in the best interests of the American public.”

Pinto, who paid $500,000 for his invitation and still holds most of his tokens, said the risk is worth it.

“I didn’t put in more than I’m willing to lose,” he said. “I’m fine if it goes to zero.”

WATCH: Bitcoin surges to new record high above $111,000: CNBC Crypto World

Bitcoin surges to new record high above $111,000: CNBC Crypto World

Continue Reading

Trending