One of the rare operating fast chargers on the Nullarbor Plain is now out of action – to the frustration of EV drivers on the journey between South Australia and Western Australia – after a truck reportedly wiped out the facility’s solar canopy.

The incident at the Border Village fast charging station – operated by the NRMA – was reported online by one EV driver making the journey, Michael Fink.

“Border Village chargers are out of action, apparently taken out by a truck. We are charging at Mundrabilla,” Fink posted on the social media platform X.

Another reader suggested it was potentially an accident waiting to happen at what they rated as the best charger on the Nullarbor journey.

“That was the best charger on the Nullarbor – worked both times (78 kW) we used it in March,” wrote Alex M. Have to say the trucks pass very close as they manoeuvre for fuel. Couldn’t imagine they will repair the solar canopy in a hurry.”

A notice on the Plugshare app used by EV drivers to find EV charging spots confirmed the facility is out of action.

“This charger is currently out of service,” NRMA said in a post dated April 18. “Our Technician is scheduled to investigate and if possible, repair the charger. We hope to be up and running again soon.”

The facility at Border Village has only recently been upgraded, although users found it difficult to use for some EV models, and charging availability across the Nullarbor has long been an issue.

Fink noted that the EV charger at Norseman is also under repair, and noted the slow charging rates at other EV stations along the route, and the fact that he even had to plug in to a power point at a caravan park at one point when the EV charger at Balladonia failed.

He noted that the charging network in remote areas is “shite.”

“A painful day,” he wrote. “If you are intending to cross the Nullarbor and have an EV and a fossil fuel car, take the latter.”

See also: Electric vehicle charging in Australia; are we there yet?

Sign up for The Driven’s free daily newsletter by going to the button on the bottom right of the website’s home page at www.thedriven.io

The biggest car news and reviews, no BS

Our free daily newsletter sends the stories that really matter directly to you, every weekday.

I’ve driven practically every version of the current-gen Toyota Tundra. I was there when the pickup launched in 2021, and back then, I called it “a giant leap over the old truck.” That’s still true in terms of capability and refinement, but we’ve seen Toyota’s reputation for reliability take some major blows in the past five years. The Tundra and its twin-turbo V6 have been at the center of those woes, and even though Toyota insists the problem has been fixed, some folks are still hesitant to trust it.

I’m one of those people. After spending some more time with the impressively powerful hybrid model, I really wish I could recommend it. But I can’t bring myself to do it.

Ironically enough, the powertrain is both the most impressive part of this truck and the most concerning. The electrified lump in my tester makes 437 horsepower and—get this—583 lb-ft of torque. That’s nuts! No other half-ton truck outside of the Ram TRX and Ford F-150 Raptor R has more torque than the Tundra hybrid. You can feel it when you stomp on the throttle, and even though other trucks have beaten the ‘Yota in acceleration tests before, it’s undeniably quick.

If only Toyota hadn’t recalled more than 200,000 Tundras at this point because they need new engines.

Hybrid models have been excluded from those recalls, though they use the same 3.4-liter V6 known to spin bearings. At first, the problem appeared limited to 2022-2023 models, as Toyota blamed manufacturing debris left in the engine. Concerns swelled when 127,000 additional vehicles were recalled with the same identified cause of potential failure.

It was the recalls that came to mind, not the power, when a friend texted me about the Tundra. He and his wife were looking at buying one, so he asked for my thoughts on it. I explained that I was testing one that week, and although it’s a really stout machine, I’d be careful given all the horror stories we’ve reported. He was taken aback.

Let me be clear about what I’m saying and what I’m not: The 2026 Toyota Tundra hybrid has not been recalled for any powertrain issues, and the only complaints listed on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s website are about exploding sunroofs—not engines. Trucks like the one I drove could go on for 200,000 or 300,000 miles without issue. I hope that’s the case because Toyota has always built good pickups, and the current-gen Tundra certainly is one when it’s working as intended.

It’s just that the last five years have made me hesitant to endorse a $70,000 purchase, knowing what could happen. Any new truck on the market today could disintegrate in a couple of years; I get that. But the Tundra’s track record is more than enough to give me pause.

If none of that had ever happened, you can bet I’d drive a Tundra every day. It doesn’t chase absurdity the same way other full-size trucks do. I’m totally fine with the fact that it can’t tow 14,000 pounds, or jump a 30-foot sand dune, or whatever else. Even the styling has grown on me, though I understand if most people aren’t a fan of the massive grille.

The Tundra does almost everything exceptionally well. It feels appropriately appointed on higher-spec models; the infotainment is easy to use; there are cameras everywhere; the multi-link rear suspension is comfy for daily driving; and even the gas-only models are plenty quick. Had Toyota never suffered any of the twin-turbo V6 failures, it’d be in the running for top truck here at our site.

Still, none of this is enough for me to overlook the past. I already feel bad enough knowing that someone may have read my previous positive reviews and bought a new Tundra, only to have their truck parked at a dealer for months waiting on a long block. And while it’s true that Toyota is going above and beyond for gas-only Tundra owners by replacing the engines altogether, hybrid owners haven’t enjoyed the same peace of mind. Instead, Toyota has chosen not to recall those models, as the battery and electric motor can help drivers get off the road if the engine fails. And while warranties are still being honored, hybrid owners don’t receive a complete long-block replacement.

All of that would make me look elsewhere. After spending some time on Tundra owner forums and Facebook groups, I know I’m not the only one.

Toyota provided The Drive with a seven-day loan of this vehicle for the purpose of writing this review.

2026 Toyota Tundra Hybrid Specs

Quick Take

In a vacuum, the Tundra hybrid is a borderline great truck. But it’s haunted by a sketchy past.

Got a tip or question for the author? Contact them directly: caleb@thedrive.com

• Tesla opened its third-ever Megacharger for recharging Semi trucks. 
• The Los Angeles-based station is the first Megacharger station that isn’t on site at a Tesla factory.
• These chargers have the ability to charge Tesla’s EVs up to a whopping 750 kW. 

Tesla has long been the king of the DC fas charging infrastructure in the U.S. One could even argue that its Supercharging network was one of the key factors in Tesla becoming the top-selling EV brand on its home turf, since it made plug-and-go charging so incredibly easy. Now it’s cranking things up with its budding Megacharger network.

The newest toy in Tesla’s charging arsenal is specifically geared to the Tesla Semi, a commercial truck with a massive battery. When making its long-distance trips, the Semi needs a ton of power delivered quickly in order to make commercial hauling achievable with a battery-electric vehicle. That’s where the Megacharger comes into play.

 

Tesla announced over the weekend that it had opened a new Megacharger at a Travel center in Ontario, California. It said that the station is accessible to the few customers who actually have taken delivery of a Semi. This is the first of at least 64 planned public Megachargers across the U.S.

Tesla lists two other Megachargers as already up and running. However, one of those locations is the Tesla Megapack facility in Lathrop, California, and the other is Tesla’s Gigafactory in Sparks, Nevada. There’s also a private Megacharger at Pepsico, one of Tesla’s earliest Semi customers. This would make the Southern California location possibly its first public Megacharger.

 

It’s also the slowest Megacharger of the bunch. The new Ontario location offers 750 kilowatts of power compared to the two other locations (which provide up to 1.2 megawatts). For context, Tesla’s newest Superchargers push up to 350-kW while its older stalls offer just 150-kW. 

The Semi can travel up to 500 miles on a single charge. That might seem like a lot, especially when you consider that the 1.2-megawatt chargers can top off its Long Range battery to 60% in just 30 minutes. However, its massive battery means charging to 60% is enough juice to charge six Standard Range Model 3s—fast charging at these massive megawatt-speeds is necessary if Tesla wants to make even short-haul trucking successful with an electric powertrain.

Last week Tesla shared an updated of the factory posted by a user on X, noting that its Semi factory was “nearing completion.” That means Semis could be just months away from hitting the road in larger numbers. Tesla unveiled the Semi nearly a decade ago in 2017, but never graduated past the pilot stage of production. 

Just as Tesla’s consumer cars got a jump start from ease of charging access, the automaker’s commercial offerings will need the same. Tesla knows that if it wants the Semi to be widely adopted, charging needs to be uncomplicated and readily accessible. Deploying as many Megachargers as possible in carefully-planned areas will be key as it readies to launch volume production.

We want your opinion!

What would you like to see on Insideevs.com?

Take our 3 minute survey.

– The InsideEVs team

The biggest car news and reviews, no BS

Our free daily newsletter sends the stories that really matter directly to you, every weekday.

Sometimes inspiration comes from the most unexpected places. In 1973, Edwin J. Saltzman, an aerospace engineer at NASA’s Dryden Flight Research Center (now the Neil A. Armstrong Flight Research Center) was bicycling to work when he noticed how the aerodynamic wakes of passing semi trucks would first push him and his bike toward the shoulder and then suck him back toward the road. What would have been a scary moment for most cyclists was a Eureka moment for Saltzman.

As recounted in a recent post by the American Truck Historical Society, Saltzman realized that trucks were fighting airflow and brainstormed ways to help them slice through it more easily, improving fuel efficiency in the process. He recruited some colleagues and an old Ford van from the Dryden motor pool, which was transformed into a test bed—and a pretty radical-looking one at that.

The engineers started by covering the van in flat sheets of aluminum with 90-degree corners. According to a more detailed official recounting of the project, this was to provide a baseline drag measurement while also simulating the boxy motorhomes of the period. The team then methodically altered the shape to reduce drag, first rounding off the front vertical corners, then other surfaces, and finally sealing the underside of the vehicle. These changes created a smoother path for air flowing around the vehicle compared to trucks of the period. A typical truck would plough through the air with its broad front end, leaving that air to flow around the vehicle unevenly, as well as congregate in a low-pressure area at the back—all of which created drag.

The van was retested after each modification. Engineers recorded a 52% drag reduction from rounding off all four front edges, and a further 7% reduction from sealing the van’s underside, which they estimated would increase fuel economy by 15-25% at highway speeds. Dryden researchers later tried similar modifications to a leased cab over engine semi truck. The blunt front end was smoothed with sheetmetal curves, and a fairing was added over the cab. Again, rounding off all front edges reduced drag by over 50%. Later tests with underbody fairings and a boat tail showed a 15% drag reduction.

This test truck looks crude, but not any more bizarre than the products of the Energy Department’s SuperTruck program, which challenges manufacturers like Navistar and Kenworth to build more-efficient rigs. And NASA’s research has had a real impact on the shape of new trucks.

Today, aerodynamic fairings and rounded corners are common features on semi trucks. Some trucks and trailers also have Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution-style vortex generators marketed under the Airtab brand name, a direct result of later NASA research. It’s an example of how the agency’s considerable engineering resources are used for more than just space exploration.

Got a tip? Send it in: tips@thedrive.com

The biggest car news and reviews, no BS

Our free daily newsletter sends the stories that really matter directly to you, every weekday.

How much does the United States like pickup trucks? You don’t need me to answer that question. Just look out the window and you’ll see all the reasons a manufacturer might need to build their own. Now, a company like Hyundai or its luxury arm Genesis can’t simply decide to sell a body-on-frame pickup and have the same success as Detroit’s Big Three. But at least one—if not both—of those automakers seems set to release a truck of their own in the near future. Hyundai says it’ll bring such a vehicle to market by 2030, and Genesis has even gone so far as designing one already.

The chunky rig was featured in a recent issue of Auto&Design, an Italian publication. There’s no mistaking it for anything else, as the grille and parallel headlight elements are distinctly Genesis. Said LEDs wrap all the way around the front fenders and pick back up on the rearmost part of the bedsides. In that way, it’s a lot like the X Gran Equator Concept that Genesis unveiled last spring. This truck actually shares a lot with that wild SUV once you look at them side-by-side.

It doesn’t have some secretive internal designation, according to the Auto&Design article; it’s simply referred to as “the pickup.” Luc Donckerwolke, chief creative officer and chief brand officer for Genesis, is quoted as saying, “An electric pickup truck? Why not? Then we discarded it because we had to focus on different projects. Maybe in the future, who knows.”

I’m not saying reverse psychology is at play here, but I’ve certainly heard similar talk from auto execs before, only for that very thing to become a reality in the near future.

My guess is that Genesis did the prep work in case Hyundai has success with its body-on-frame truck and the market seems ready for a more premium version. Aside from it being an unfamiliar name in the pickup segment, I think its biggest blocker would be the electric powertrain. I’m not saying it can’t work, but we’ve seen the EV forecast shift drastically in the past 12 months, and even a company like Rivian only sells a handful of battery-powered pickups compared to its SUVs.

I won’t hold my breath waiting for this to reach production, at least in the next four or five years. Whether or not this ever gets built likely depends on how well the public receives Hyundai’s version. That’ll be interesting to observe on its own, as I’m curious if it’ll have more success than the Santa Cruz. I bet it’ll be good, but whether or not it’ll be enough to capture a piece of the pie from other established players in the space seems a lot less certain.

Got a tip or question for the author? Contact them directly: caleb@thedrive.com