Tesla’s new registrations in the EU surged by 59.6 per cent in the first quarter of the year, while figures from the European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association (ACEA) showed a 101.9 per cent increase in March alone. Tesla had long not recorded growth rates at this level. The company has evolved from a niche manufacturer into a mainstream player over the years, while its ageing model range increasingly struggled against rivals due to the lack of genuinely new models. Although Tesla updated the design and equipment of its bestselling Model Y facelift, it made only limited improvements to the technology. Elon Musk’s intermittent political activities may also have deterred some potential buyers.

The significant increase in European sales at the start of 2026 is primarily due to the simpler and more affordable versions of the Model 3 and Model Y, which have been available since autumn. In the case of the Model Y Rear-Wheel Drive (the initial ‘Standard’ designation was quickly dropped), the list price in Germany starts at 39,990 euros. With a Tesla-specific discount, the price had temporarily dropped to 36,990 euros. Additionally, customers eligible for the full subsidy under the German government’s new electric vehicle incentive scheme can claim up to 6,000 euros back retrospectively – theoretically reducing the price to 30,990 euros. That’s for a spacious mid-size battery-electric SUV, not a small or compact car.

But how has Tesla achieved this price point, and how does it affect everyday use? The answer lies not in a single measure but in a series of changes. Before discussing the differences in equipment and impressions, let’s focus on the most relevant change for electrive: the powertrain.

Tesla currently offers four versions of the Model Y: the Premium model with all-wheel drive and a large battery (read our review here), the Performance model (read our review here), the Premium Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive version with a new type of battery, and the base Model Y Rear-Wheel Drive without any additional designations.

The latter is equipped with a roughly 60 kWh LFP battery, which is rated for up to 534 kilometres of WLTP range. Even the Premium Long Range Rear-Wheel Drive only achieves 609 kilometres, and the all-wheel-drive version reaches 600 kilometres, so the range reduction with the smaller LFP battery is relatively minor.

In our test, the 4.80-metre-long SUV impressed with its efficiency. Depending on driving style and conditions, consumption ranged between 14 and 16 kWh/100km. In urban traffic, it sometimes dropped to just 12 kWh/100km, and even on the motorway at speeds of 120-130 km/h, the consumption display rarely exceeded 20 kWh.

My 2023 Model Y Long Range Dual Motor consumes around three to four kilowatt-hours more per 100 kilometres under comparable conditions. Thanks to the rear-wheel drive’s low consumption, the base Model Y can still achieve 300 to 400 kilometres between charging stops, depending on conditions and driving style – or even a few more with particularly efficient driving. This is impressive and makes the smaller LFP battery a justifiable compromise for everyday use. If cost-cutting is the goal, this is the way to do it!

When it comes to fast charging, the current LFP battery does not match the 250 kW peak power of the larger NMC batteries. It also, frankly, falls short of the interim Model Y versions (pre-facelift) equipped with BYD batteries, which also used LFP cells. According to Tesla, the CATL cells now fitted should enable charging power of up to 175 kW.

However, the Model Y did not reach this value during the test. Despite battery preconditioning, charging power at the Supercharger peaked at around 140 kW. Initially, the vehicle indicated that the charging station was limiting the power, although the Supercharger site was only moderately busy. Shortly afterwards, the display switched to a message stating that the battery temperature was too low despite preconditioning and several minutes of charging.

Tesla deserves credit for clearly communicating the reason for reduced charging power via the display. In practice, however, the two explanations made little difference to charging time: the battery charged from 10 to 80 per cent in 25 minutes. As the charging curve below shows, the Model Y missed the peak by around 35 kW but still maintained 140 kW. Thanks to Tesla’s typically gradual charging curve decline, there was no deviation from the ‘ideal’ curve beyond around 40 per cent state of charge. The delay thus amounted to only one or two minutes. At a different charging station without the limitation, the Model Y would likely have briefly reached 175 kW.

Tesla is not setting new standards in this class for charging performance, but that is not the goal of the affordable base model. With a 25-minute charging time to 80 per cent, the LFP battery is even faster than the larger battery. Combined with the rear-wheel drive’s excellent efficiency, the base Model Y performs just as well on long distances as the all-wheel-drive model – at least compared to my pre-facelift version. Given Tesla’s years of experience with LFP batteries and its effective thermal management, there should be no unpleasant surprises with the LFP battery, even in the depths of winter.

The difference is noticeable, however, when driving. Previously, Tesla tuned its rear-wheel-drive models to deliver the typical ‘electric kick’ during acceleration. Even though the base sprint from 0 to 100 km/h took longer with only one motor on the rear axle compared to the dual-motor system, the acceleration still felt more powerful. The new base model, however, has a significantly smoother power delivery – the perceived acceleration now aligns more closely with the 7.2-second figure stated in the specifications. Of course, the electric punch isn’t strictly necessary, as the Model Y’s performance is more than adequate. However, buyers should be aware that this characteristic is no longer present.

How do the numerous changes compare to the previous equipment (now labelled Premium)? Are they noticeable in everyday use? The test vehicle is painted in Stealth Grey for an additional 1,300 euros, while the standard colour remains Pearl White Multi-Coat. It also features 19-inch Crossflow wheels with hubcaps from the accessories range. As standard, the Model Y Rear-Wheel Drive comes with 18-inch Aperture wheels, which are steel wheels with hubcaps – one of the cost-saving measures.

Even without considering the wheels, the base Model Y Rear-Wheel Drive is immediately distinguishable from the Premium versions. At first glance, one might think Tesla simply omitted the continuous LED strip between the headlights, but the front end is entirely different.

In the Model Y Premium, the apparent headlights are only part of the daytime running lights, while the actual main headlights with matrix LED technology are located below in a separate unit. In the base model, however, the main headlights and high beams are integrated into the classic headlight units above, albeit with simpler LED technology and no matrix function.

While cost-cutting is evident, not all features have been removed: even the base Model Y includes a front camera under the number plate holder, a feature absent in the pre-facelift model. At the rear, the differences are also clear: apart from a narrow black strip with the Tesla logo, the entire tailgate of the base model is body-coloured. The Premium models feature differently designed rear lights and a continuous indirect lighting strip. It is immediately obvious which Model Y you are looking at.

While the differences in exterior design are largely a matter of taste – personally, I have yet to warm to the continuous light strip on the Premium models’ front end – and only the matrix LED headlights represent a significant functional difference, the changes inside the cabin are not just visible but also noticeable.

This starts even before driving: the seats are upholstered in fabric instead of vegan leather and feature different padding. The steering wheel can only be adjusted manually, not electrically – a relevant point for those who share the Model Y with multiple drivers and previously used the automatic seat and steering wheel adjustment via driver profiles. The front seats can still be adjusted electrically, but Tesla has removed the side levers; adjustments are now made via the touchscreen.

Personally, I don’t mind this change, as the seat settings are still saved in the driver profile – and I rarely adjust them once set. However, those who like to quickly adjust the seat position or backrest on long journeys using the side levers will now need to use the touchscreen or create a second driver profile with alternative seat settings.

Staying with the seats: for short trips in the city or on country roads, I found the padding acceptable, and the significantly flatter side bolsters made frequent entry and exit quite comfortable. However, during cornering, the seats lack lateral support, and on longer journeys, the new padding felt too hard. That said, I found the grey fabric upholstery very pleasant.

To start driving, all Model Y versions since the facelift require selecting the driving mode via the display – the gear stalk on the steering column was removed back in 2025. After some getting used to, this works quite well, though I still prefer the classic gear lever. The beta function, which allows the Model Y to automatically select whether you likely want to drive forwards or backwards, worked reliably for simple manoeuvres. It is also helpful that the display clearly shows which actions (e.g., turning left and pressing the brake pedal) are required to initiate a gear change. However, this only worked well in very clear situations, such as when the car was parked forwards in a space with a wall in front. In less clear environments or when additional corrections are needed during parking, the system (still) reaches its limits – it may still work, but not as reliably.

I was also sceptical about the new (or rather, missing) centre console. Below the touchscreen (now 16 inches instead of 15.4), there are still two inductive charging pads for smartphones, which I find very convenient and in line with 2026 standards. Tesla could have saved costs by removing one charging pad or omitting the inductive charging function altogether.

Back to the centre console: the actual console between the seats is well-positioned, and the cup holders and storage compartments are easily accessible. While I appreciated the large storage compartments in the centre console of my older Model Y, I didn’t miss them as much as I expected. The large pass-through to the passenger footwell with storage below was more practical than anticipated – though this clearly depends on personal preference.

This also applies to three further changes that significantly impact the overall experience: acoustics. In the base model, the side windows are only single-glazed, unlike the Premium version, which features double glazing. This noticeably increases noise levels on the motorway, though the difference is barely noticeable in urban traffic.

While the base Model Y still includes a glass roof, Tesla has scrapped the UV protection, opting for a cheaper headliner instead. This makes the interior slightly darker but, in my opinion, significantly reduces wind noise from above. Overall, the interior is not necessarily louder or quieter; the sound profile simply feels different.

However, the existing wind noise is harder to mask with music: the simpler sound system features only seven speakers instead of 15 and lacks a subwoofer. The system doesn’t sound bad, but it doesn’t quite match the excellent Premium system. That said, if it helps save over 10,000 euros in total, even the simpler system is a good compromise!

The simpler materials are also noticeable but still acceptable for this price range. With the Juniper facelift, Tesla had just upgraded the previously plastic-heavy and minimalist interior, but the base model takes a step back. The ambient lighting and rear passenger display have not made it into the base model, as these features are (understandably) reserved for the Premium version and not part of the cost-optimised variant.

The lower section of the door panels is made of hard plastic, and the carpeted inserts in the door storage compartments have also been removed. However, this is not unusual for vehicles priced under 40,000 euros today. With the fabric elements in the upper section (matching the seat upholstery), the door panels still look modern and far from cheap.

The cost-cutting measures become more apparent under the bonnet – and not only because Tesla now uses steel instead of aluminium. The most noticeable difference concerns the frunk. In the Premium models, plastic cladding covers the entire visible area, while the frunk itself consists of a large plastic tray. In the base model, Tesla replaces this setup with a single pressed textile component that does not fully cover the area, leaving more metal and hoses exposed around the edges.

Visually, this may be acceptable, but the functionality does not match the Premium version. The frunk itself is smaller, and the long-term durability of the textile material remains unclear. Since the bonnet is not sealed, water, dirt and leaves can enter the compartment. Plastic surfaces can simply be wiped clean, but it remains to be seen how well the textile material withstands prolonged exposure to moisture. Another omission under the bonnet is the large HEPA filter for the air-conditioning system, which Tesla no longer includes in the base model.

There is a small difference in the rear boot: the parcel shelf included in the Premium versions is not standard equipment, but can be ordered as an accessory for 135 euros. Personally, I didn’t miss it, as Tesla’s parcel shelf has always been impractical and has been sitting in my cellar. The sub-boot under the boot floor is slightly smaller due to a new lining, but it remains very large and practical compared to competitors.

Overall, the Model Y has lost little of its practicality: the boot is very spacious for its segment, easy to use, and features deep side storage compartments for additional space. The rear seats also offer plenty of room, whereas in many other models, you have to choose between a large boot or generous legroom due to a sliding rear bench. In the Model Y, you get both.

To conclude the practicality chapter: the optional tow bar (1,350 euros) allows even the simplest Model Y to tow trailers weighing up to 1,600 kilograms. In other models, the full towing capacity is only available with all-wheel drive or a large battery, but the Model Y offers this even with the small LFP battery and rear-wheel drive. The roof rack (525 euros as an accessory) also supports a roof load of 75 kilograms, with no differences compared to the more expensive Model Y versions.

Tesla has achieved exactly what it set out to do with the Model Y Rear-Wheel Drive: a practical family vehicle with an excellent price-to-performance ratio. The eye-catching features once expected from Tesla are missing here. While the functional differences are noticeable, they are primarily ‘different’ rather than worse. Whether they are inferior depends largely on individual expectations and needs.

The Model Y, as a volume model, faces a dilemma: on one hand, the all-wheel-drive versions are often compared to models from premium brands, and customers switching from Audi, Mercedes, or BMW to a Tesla have certain expectations. On the other hand, the Model Y is Tesla’s volume model and aims to attract customers who are not necessarily willing to pay more for premium gimmicks. Dividing the Model Y into two equipment variants thus makes sense.

However, whether such a clear distinction in bodywork – with different front and rear sections – was necessary, or whether two different headlight technologies in the same basic body (as seen with established manufacturers) would have sufficed, is something only Tesla can answer. I see advantages in both versions of the Model Y and would personally prefer to combine features more freely, such as the new centre console from the base model with the ‘Premium’ seats, double glazing, but still with the closed headliner. However, this level of customisation would make production more expensive and complex. So, it remains an either-or choice.