Unplugged Performance to Showcase Tesla Builds at Electrify Expo – North America's Largest EV Festival
Unplugged Performance will be displaying four of its latest builds at the show, each with upgrades tailored for parts performance, durability, and everyday driving.
Advertisement
Tesla Model 3 Performance 'Red Rocket' Track Build
Built to dominate the track and the streets, car features our:
UP Race Pro Coilovers with Adaptive Canceller
UP Carbon Fiber Front Aero Kit + Rear Dual Spoiler and Wing Set Up + Rear Spats and Diffuser
18×10.9 UP-03 Forged Wheels
Yokohama ADVAN A052 295/35R18 Tires
Satin Red 2026 Tesla Model Y Off-Road/Street Build
Adventure-ready, this MY build includes our:
UP 35mm Leveling Lift Kit
Off-Road Spec 18″ UP-05 Forged Wheels
Off-Road Sway Bar + End Links
Yokohama GEOLANDAR Tires
UP INVINCIBLE® Cybertruck Street Build
The ultimate Tesla Cybertruck to take on anything on earth and beyond with:
HD Front & Rear Bumpers, Bull Bar, Rock Sliders
Carbon Fiber Hood w/ 50' LED Light Bar
Side Sail Panel MOLLE Rack System
22' CYBRHEX Forged Wheels
Yokohama GEOLANDAR Tires
Quicksilver 2026 Tesla Model Y Off-Road/Street Build
Ready for the streets, this MY build includes our:
22' UP Forged CYBRHEX Wheels
Moderate option Dual Rate Lowering Springs
Yokohama Parada Spex-X Tires
Learn more about our products at unpluggedperformance.com
Media Contact:
Bryan Benitez
[email protected]
Photos accompanying this announcement are available at:
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/40058729-93a6-4114-8873-ab6d621e7450
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/ab459e46-d6a2-4eed-aef0-0e0c06972570
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/13c535e2-1ad5-44f2-bd3b-acef95cba97f
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/26cf0811-acbf-4fbf-bcc0-81784aa1266c
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/8e9af86a-6a47-4496-a8f4-c438c3ef96d1
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/1a7b20e7-a15e-4049-b15d-3ace9dc4a48d
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/0c763029-22ac-4538-9552-80c7e0effb4b
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/066b550f-5e8c-4cec-afd8-4ca1d705a664
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/938fba51-c9cc-47dc-905d-a6f4e15d677f
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/42484f96-b280-48a9-82db-9e56353a78e6
https://www.globenewswire.com/NewsRoom/AttachmentNg/a50bb6cf-2ded-49e2-9284-1eb3fbcd7e6f
Disclaimer: The above press release comes to you under an arrangement with GlobeNewswire. Business Upturn takes no editorial responsibility for the same.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
an hour ago
- NBC News
Tesla plans 'friends and family' car service in California, regulator says
In an earnings call this week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk teased an expansion of his company's fledgling robotaxi service to the San Francisco Bay Area and other U.S. markets. But California regulators are making clear that Tesla is not authorized to carry passengers on public roads in autonomous vehicles and would require a human driver in control at all times. 'Tesla is not allowed to test or transport the public (paid or unpaid) in an AV with or without a driver,' the California Public Utilities Commission told CNBC in an email on Friday. 'Tesla is allowed to transport the public (paid or unpaid) in a non-AV, which, of course, would have a driver.' In other words, Tesla's service in the state will have to be more taxi than robot. Tesla has what's known in California as a charter-party carrier permit, which allows it to run a private car service with human drivers, similar to limousine companies or sightseeing services. The commission said it received a notification from Tesla on Thursday that the company plans to 'extend operations' under its permit to 'offer service to friends and family of employees and to select members of the public,' across much of the Bay Area. But under Tesla's permit, that service can only be with non-AVs, the CPUC said. The California Department of Motor Vehicles told CNBC that Tesla has had a 'drivered testing permit' since 2014, allowing the company to operate AVs with a safety driver present, but not to collect fees. The safety drivers must be Tesla employees, contractors or designees of the manufacturer under that permit, the DMV said. In Austin, Texas, Tesla is currently testing out a robotaxi service, using its Model Y SUVs equipped with the company's latest automated driving software and hardware. The limited service operates during daylight hours and in good weather, on roads with a speed limit of 40 miles per hour. Robotaxis in Austin are remotely supervised by Tesla employees and include a human safety supervisor in the front passenger seat. The service is now limited to invited users, who agree to the terms of Tesla's 'early access program.' On Friday, Business Insider, citing an internal Tesla memo, reported that Tesla told staff it planned to expand its robotaxi service to the San Francisco Bay Area this weekend. Tesla didn't respond to a request for comment on that report. In a separate matter in California, the DMV has accused Tesla of misleading consumers about the capabilities of its driver assistance systems, previously marketed under the names Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (or FSD). Tesla now calls its premium driver assistance features, 'FSD Supervised.' In owners manuals, Tesla says Autopilot and FSD Supervised are 'hands on' systems, requiring a driver at the wheel, ready to steer or brake at all times. But in user-generated videos shared by Tesla on X, the company shows customers using FSD hands-free while engaged in other tasks. The DMV is arguing that Tesla's license to sell vehicles in California should be suspended, with arguments ongoing through Friday at the state's Office of Administrative Hearings in Oakland. Under California state law, autonomous taxi services are regulated at the state level. Some city and county officials said on Friday that they were out of the loop regarding a potential Tesla service in the state. Stephanie Moulton-Peters, a member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, said in a phone interview that she had not heard from Tesla about its plans. She urged the company to be more transparent. 'I certainly expect they will tell us and I think it's a good business practice to do that,' she said. Moulton-Peters said she was undecided on robotaxis generally and wasn't sure how Marin County, located north of San Francisco, would react to Tesla's service. 'The news of change coming always has mixed results in the community,' she said. Brian Colbert, another member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, said in an interview that he's open to the idea of Tesla's service being a good thing but that he was disappointed in the lack of communication. 'They should have done a better job about informing the community about the launch,' he said. Google spinoff Waymo, which is far ahead of Tesla in the robotaxi market, obtained a number of permits from the DMV and CPUC before starting its driverless ride-hailing service in the state. Waymo was granted a CPUC driverless deployment permit in 2023, allowing it to charge for rides in the state. The company has been seeking amendments to both its DMV and CPUC driverless deployment permits as it expands its service territory in the state.
CNBC
2 hours ago
- CNBC
Tesla plans 'friends and family' car service in California, regulator says
In an earnings call this week, Tesla CEO Elon Musk teased an expansion of his company's fledgling robotaxi service to the San Francisco Bay Area and other U.S. markets. But California regulators are making clear that Tesla is not authorized to carry passengers on public roads in autonomous vehicles and would require a human driver in control at all times. "Tesla is not allowed to test or transport the public (paid or unpaid) in an AV with or without a driver," the California Public Utilities Commission told CNBC in an email on Friday. "Tesla is allowed to transport the public (paid or unpaid) in a non-AV, which, of course, would have a driver." In other words, Tesla's service in the state will have to be more taxi than robot. Tesla has what's known in California as a charter-party carrier permit, which allows it to run a private car service with human drivers, similar to limousine companies or sightseeing services. The commission said it received a notification from Tesla on Thursday that the company plans to "extend operations" under its permit to "offer service to friends and family of employees and to select members of the public," across much of the Bay Area. But under Tesla's permit, that service can only be with non-AVs, the CPUC said. The California Department of Motor Vehicles told CNBC that Tesla has had a "drivered testing permit" since 2014, allowing the company to operate AVs with a safety driver present, but not to collect fees. The safety drivers must be Tesla employees, contractors or designees of the manufacturer under that permit, the DMV said. In Austin, Texas, Tesla is currently testing out a robotaxi service, using its Model Y SUVs equipped with the company's latest automated driving software and hardware. The limited service operates during daylight hours and in good weather, on roads with a speed limit of 40 miles per hour. Robotaxis in Austin are remotely supervised by Tesla employees, and include a human in the front passenger seat. The service is now limited to invited users, who agree to the terms of Tesla's "early access program." On Friday, Business Insider, citing an internal Tesla memo, reported that Tesla told staff it planned to expand its robotaxi service to the San Francisco Bay Area this weekend. Tesla didn't respond to a request for comment on that report. In a separate matter in California, the DMV has accused Tesla of misleading consumers about the capabilities of its driver assistance systems, previously marketed under the names Autopilot and Full Self-Driving (or FSD). Tesla now calls its premium driver assistance features, "FSD Supervised." In owners manuals, Tesla says Autopilot and FSD Supervised are "hands on" systems, requiring a driver at the wheel, ready to steer or brake at all times. But in user-generated videos shared by Tesla on X, the company shows customers using FSD hands-free while engaged in other tasks. The DMV is arguing that Tesla's license to sell vehicles in California should be suspended, with arguments ongoing through Friday at the state's Office of Administrative Hearings in Oakland. Under California state law, autonomous taxi services are regulated at the state level. Some city and county officials said on Friday that they were out of the loop regarding a potential Tesla service in the state. Stephanie Moulton-Peters, a member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, said in a phone interview that she had not heard from Tesla about its plans. She urged the company to be more transparent. "I certainly expect they will tell us and I think it's a good business practice to do that," she said. Moulton-Peters said she was undecided on robotaxis generally and wasn't sure how Marin County, located north of San Francisco, would react to Tesla's service. "The news of change coming always has mixed results in the community," she said. Brian Colbert, another member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, said in an interview that he's open to the idea of Tesla's service being a good thing but that he was disappointed in the lack of communication. "They should have done a better job about informing the community about the launch," he said. Alphabet's Waymo, which is far ahead of Tesla in the robotaxi market, obtained a number of permits from the DMV and CPUC before starting its driverless ride-hailing service in the state. Waymo was granted a CPUC driverless deployment permit in 2023, allowing it to charge for rides in the state. The company has been seeking amendments to both its DMV and CPUC driverless deployment permits as it expands its service territory in the state.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
‘His income is limited': Should I pay $800 a month towards my husband's $67,000 student debt?
My husband is 40 and I am 44. When we got married a year ago, I was aware that he had about $67,000 in student-loan debt as well as credit-card debt from living paycheck-to-paycheck. He never consolidated his student loans and they all have varying interest rates between 5% to 8%. I did not have him consolidate the loans as there were potential benefits under the Biden administration for him not doing so. In the meantime, I was able to get him to change his spending habits and pay off all his credit cards by helping him understand the principles behind how interest and payments work. He also has his own business, which has a small financial footprint supported by his income. As for myself, my income allowed me to purchase a house in 2020 with a 2.6% interest rate. I am able to pay all the bills to support us both and then some. Wall Street braces for deluge of Treasury bills, a crucial test of market demand Why Tesla analysts are mostly upbeat about earnings, but investors aren't happy 'If I was writing the checks at Coke, I wouldn't write the check for this,' one expert says about cane-sugar Coke Related: The 5 huge changes coming for student-loan borrowers and colleges under GOP megabill I have stopped short of paying for his business, his car payment and health insurance. Yes, there are a few incidentals he also helps support for our family, such as food, but his income is limited due to his new business and part-time work. I would like to grow my retirement and emergency funds some more, but I am very aware of my husband's student-loan debt, which he is not paying down in a timely manner. I graduated with about $57,000 worth of student loans in the early 2000s. A modest lifestyle on an income that rarely topped $15 per hour and low rent helped me pay off my own student-loan debt in 10 years. I have been working for the same company for over 15 years and I have built a career path that has led me to making almost six figures annually. I have an estimated retirement income of about $6,500 per month. I believe I can contribute about $800 per month to paying off my husband's student-loan debt. From what I understand, I am not legally responsible for his student debt, which was all taken out by him before we were married. We also keep our bank accounts separate so that if something should happen where the government lands on student loans, my income is in no way touched and all the normal bills could be paid like normal. Am I better off paying toward my husband's student-loan payments, or should I take this monthly amount and invest it elsewhere? Thank you for your kind attention. Student Loans Are Killing Us All Don't miss: 'Why am I so afraid to retire?' I'm 60 and lost $1.2 million in a divorce. Can I rebuild my life? I have a funny feeling you're going to do what you're going to do. But since you asked… You married this man, who may be a wonderful guy, and appear to be paying the lion's share of the bills. You are now considering crossing that imaginary line and helping him pay off other extraneous expenses, and are now giving serious consideration to paying off his student debt. Paying your husband's bills won't teach him to make smarter financial decisions in the future, nor will it help you in your own retirement goals. The fact that he would actually accept $800 a month from you to pay off his student debt also gives me pause. It tells me: He ain't gonna change his financial habits. You are not responsible for these loans, as I'm sure you are aware, given that they were taken out before your marriage. So I wonder why you have the 'disease to please' or, in this context, the 'fret about his debt,' and see it as much your obligation to pay off as his. Why do you see his debts as your duty to pay? You don't have to pay his bills. You don't have to make up the shortfall because his business is not performing. You don't have to take money from your own retirement fund in order to pay off his student loan because he didn't do what you did —live far below your means and work a $15-an-hour job. You didn't clear your own loan so you would have the time/money to clear his debts. If you paid off this loan solo — let's say your husband became overwhelmed with other expenses, which would not be so farfetched given his current and previous financial situation — it would take you more than 10 years and end up costing you nearly $100,000, including roughly $33,000 in interest. If you and he paid $800 each, it would take half that time (five years) and cost just over $76,000, including $9,000 interest. Related: My husband and I are 40. I have $200,000 in student debt, while he has $600,000 in retirement savings. Are we in trouble? It's important to see what you are giving up by paying your husband's debts: Let's say you invested $800 a month in the S&P 500 SPX for 10 years and 4 months — the same amount of time it would take you to pay off his student loan alone. At an average annual return of 7%, compounded monthly, you would end up with $138,000 for your retirement and/or emergency fund by the time you're 54. Nice work, if you can get it. If you do the math, it makes more sense for you to invest that $800 and tell your husband that he should put together a plan to pay his student loan just like you did. If you don't pay his student loans, it doesn't mean that you don't love him. It doesn't make you a bad person or an uncaring or unsympathetic partner. It does make you somebody who values their own financial independence and intends to lead by example. Let me share a story with you that I have not thought about in many years. When I was a kid, I had a paper route. It was, you might say, my first job in journalism. I finished school early on a Wednesday afternoon and I delivered newspapers for exactly one penny per paper. It sounds like I grew up in Dickensian times, but it was Ireland before the economic boom. It was my first taste of earning my own money and it felt bloody great. One week, I finished my paper route shortly after lunch and my friend who lived on my street neglected to do his route until late in the day, so I suggested helping him. It never occurred to me to ask for money and, if he did offer, I refused. Either way, I arrived home empty handed feeling pretty good about my good deed. My mother went through me for a short cut. She told me I should not have done half of his route in addition to my own. That's a roundabout way of saying: Allow your husband to deliver his own newspapers. Related: My daughter has $500K in med-school expenses. Can my wife and I afford to pay it off? My daughter has $500K in med-school expenses. Can my wife and I afford to pay it off? Can my husband contest his late brother's $600K will? He experienced oxygen deprivation due to COPD before he died. I have early Alzheimer's and my husband has stage 4 kidney disease. We just inherited $50K. How can this help us? . 'I'm already up $45,000 in about an hour' — Reddit traders boast about wins as meme-stock mania returns Dow cuts dividend in half in reaction to 'lower-for-longer' earnings The S&P 500 just did something it's only done four times in 50 years. Here's what happened next. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
