×
Holafly vs Airalo: Which eSIM Is Better in 2026?

Holafly vs Airalo: Which eSIM Is Better in 2026?

If you’ve recently travelled abroad, you know the huge checklist of things that need to be done before getting to relax on a quiet beach. And if you’re anything like me, there’s almost something on the list that’s forgotten, which then comes back to haunt you at the wrong time. One such thing is connectivity, as no one in the history of travel has ever liked the long queues at airports to get a new SIM card. Over the past few years, though, there’s been a solution, and that’s eSIM. These non-physical SIMs are installed on your phone and help you connect to the network in any desired country. No need to spend outrageous prices at the airport anymore. Two major players in the eSIM space are Holafly and Airalo. While both provide connectivity across different countries, their approaches are super different. I tested them both on a recent trip to Vietnam, and here’s how both operators compare.

Holafly vs Airalo: Quick Comparison

Feature Holafly eSIM Airalo eSIM
Data Plans Mostly unlimited data plans (daily/weekly/monthly) — great for heavy users. Fixed data plans (e.g., 1 GB, 5 GB, 20 GB) you buy as needed 
Pricing Generally more expensive due to unlimited data focus Cheaper with smaller, tailored data packages
Coverage ~200+ destinations globally ~200+ destinations globally
Unlimited Data Yes (main selling point) — though may throttle after heavy use. Mostly no unlimited data (except limited specific plans)
Voice/SMS Support Data-only (calls via apps like WhatsApp. Offers some plans (Discover+) with voice/SMS in certain regions
Hotspot/Tethering Yes Yes, generally allowed with your data allowance
App & Activation QR code or app install — easy setup QR code or app install — easy setup
Best For Long trips & heavy data usage (streaming, hotspot) Short trips & light to moderate data usage

Different Options, Different Pay

The biggest differentiator between Holafly and Airalo is the available package options. For context, Airalo offers plans without unlimited data, meaning you can configure how much you really need. Passing through France on a road trip to Spain? You can get a 1GB data plan (valid for three days) for $4 to continue using navigation, and you’re good to go. This significantly reduces the end user’s cost and provides more flexibility. However, there’s a problem. Airalo’s plans, while cheaper, start with 1GB or 3GB for the duration of the day you select. But given that the average American family uses 650-700 GB of data per month, 3GB isn’t actually a lot. You can get through that much data within just an hour of watching YouTube in Full HD. So, for any trip longer than a day, you’ll have to spend more on higher capacity plans, which can quickly add up.

On the other hand, Holafly’s approach is a whole lot different. Their plans are always unlimited, meaning you don’t have to worry about finishing up your quota and can watch movies, shows, and play games without worry. As you might expect, Holafly’s plans are more expensive, generally starting from $4 per day for unlimited data. While the exact pricing would depend on your specific country, I’m generally more on board with unlimited data, since even a short WhatsApp call can use several hundred megabytes. And you can also get 5% off using my coupon FOSSBYTES.

Global eSIM

Both Holafly and Airalo offer global eSIM plans for frequent travellers and business people who regularly travel to different countries. Like with the regular eSIM, the pricing and data strategy are very different on both. Airalo offers a 7-day 1GB global plan for $13, which goes all the way up to $34 for just 3GB for 30 days. Any additional data requirement will cost more. Holafly’s package, while expensive, at $62 for 7 days, offers unlimited data in 110+ countries. Honestly, if you plan to get a global SIM, that means you travel a lot, and in that case, Holafly’s unlimited plan is a really good deal.

Holafly also offers a global subscription plan with coverage in 160+ destinations, and you can cancel it at any time, so it’s a good option even if you are planning a trip for just 30 days. They have a Light Plan with 25GB of data for $49.90, an Unlimited Plan for $64.90 monthly, and you can also hotspot with no limits. And if you use my code FOSSBYTES, you get 10% off for 12 months on your subscription.

Length Holafly Airalo
7 days Unlimited data for $62.00 1 GB for $13.00
15 days Unlimited data for $134.00 2 GB for $24.00
30 days Unlimited data for $224.00 3 GB for $34.00

Support & App Experience

Holafly and Airalo offer plenty of installation options for both Android and iOS users. You can either set up using the QR code, do it manually, or even through their respective apps. It’s the support infrastructure, though, where Holafly edges ahead. On Trustpilot, Holafly has a rating of 4.6, with multiple reviews highlighting the company’s 24/7 multilingual support, which has proven very helpful during times of worry. People have also mentioned Holafly’s excellent refund policy, which works for up to 6 months after purchase. Their app, however, isn’t the best. It was buggy when reporting total data usage, and I also ran into the infamous “this content isn’t available at your location” problem on Netflix a couple of times.

On the other hand, Airalo has a rating of 3.9. While it’s by no means bad, there have been some complaints about the network coverage and unhelpful support staff. That being said, the Airalo app is really stable. It was easy to use and free of bugs that could hinder the user experience, and included helpful tutorials that made the setup straightforward. 

Both Holafly and Airalo have loyalty programs that grant users special discounts and cashback. Airalo’s loyalty program offers up to 10% cashback on every purchase, compared to Holafly’s 7%. 

Personal Experience

Featured image for Holafly article

As mentioned, I decided to put both services head-to-head during my recent trip to Vietnam. For some context, I set up both before my flight, and the experience was excellent on both. I bought the unlimited week plan with Holafly for $27, while the 10GB 7-day plan cost me $16. Both plans were instantly connected to service after I landed, and, being a tech reviewer, I started my usual testing, which included speed testing, downloading content, and calling my family back home. 

Call quality with WhatsApp was really good with both, and my family didn’t have any problems hearing my voice. Similarly, navigation and translation between Vietnamese and English were handled very well on both. Network speeds were also comparable in both Saigon and the quiet beach town of Tuy Hoa, hovering around 50 Mbps download and 15 Mbps upload. However, the 10GB network limit didn’t last very long. After only a few days, I ran through all my data while on a train journey without Wi-Fi. This was a big worry. But fortunately, Holafly was there to the rescue with the unlimited data. Personally, I’d choose Holafly over Airalo because data can run out quickly, and you could end up stuck in an unfamiliar place. 

Verdict

In the end, the choice would depend on your specific needs. If you’re like me and can’t stop worrying about finishing your data mid-trip, or if you frequently have to be on video calls, then Holafly is the best bet. The only downside is the app glitches, which can sometimes interfere with sessions. However, if you’re transiting through a country for a short time or taking a short trip, Airalo’s cost savings are the way to go. Don’t forget to use my code FOSSBYTES at Holafly if you want to get a discount on your eSIM.

Source link
#Holafly #Airalo #eSIM


Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off.

Or at least now I know it’s not just me.

Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds.

Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017.

The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean.

I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.

#Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits">Random People Armed with AI and No Lawyer Are Reportedly Filling Judicial Dockets with Lawsuits
                Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off. Or at least now I know it’s not just me. Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed. It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds. Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

 According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017. The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

 To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean. I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.      #Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits

new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds.

Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017.

The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean.

I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.

#Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits">Random People Armed with AI and No Lawyer Are Reportedly Filling Judicial Dockets with LawsuitsRandom People Armed with AI and No Lawyer Are Reportedly Filling Judicial Dockets with Lawsuits
                Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off. Or at least now I know it’s not just me. Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed. It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds. Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

 According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017. The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

 To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean. I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.      #Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits

Don’t play innocent. If you’re a non-lawyer in the 2020s, you’ve at least had the passing thought that you could use an LLM to help you generate a killer lawsuit against someone who pissed you off.

Or at least now I know it’s not just me.

Thanks to AI, plaintiffs representing themselves, also known as “pro se” plaintiffs, are changing the legal landscape for the worse, according to a new study by MIT’s Anand Shah and USC’s Joshua Levy, reported on by the New York Times on Monday. The study has not yet been peer reviewed.

It says that since the rollout of widely available LLMs, 18 percent of pro se filings now contain what the authors have deemed AI-generated text. Perhaps consequently, “the total volume of pro se docket entries per court in the first 180 days of a case has grown by 64% on average across the post-AI period,” the study finds.

Typically, pro se filings come from prisoners working on their cases from behind bars, but the study notes that “national non-prisoner pro se filing share rose sharply from its approximately 11% historical steady state to 16.8% in fiscal year 2025, a gain that has no precedent in 25 years of administrative records.”

According to the Times, pro se plaintiffs lost 96% of their cases from 1998-2017.

The Times is largely spotlighting frivolous lawsuits generated with AI—and what a waste of time it is for the courts to painstakingly read and process all these slop-filled filings. A Minnesota federal judge named Patrick J. Schiltz, called it “an existential threat to the federal courts.”

To illustrate their point, the Times interviewed a man who uses AI to generate lawsuits. This person gave the paper his name, and allowed himself to be photographed for the story. Courts have alleged some unsavory things about this person, and the Times says he lives in his car. He is, to use one of the president’s favorite terms, straight from central casting—so much so that the Times’ story borders on, well, mean.

I can’t dispute that AI lawsuits sound like a massive problem. At the same time, lawsuits are often the only weapon downtrodden Americans have—a substitute for institutions and politicians that actually help make us whole when we’re harmed and it’s not our fault. Part of me can’t help but long to read a David and Goliath story about a rando armed with Claude who bootstraps their way to some life-changing, ten-figure legal victory—presumably after using the LLM to figure out how to argue a case in a courtroom as well.

#Random #People #Armed #Lawyer #Reportedly #Filling #Judicial #Dockets #LawsuitsArtificial intelligence,lawsuits

We have been waiting for the Ferrari Luce for eight years.

It was January 2018 when, at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, former Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.

“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”

Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.

Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Courtesy of Ferrari

The numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).

The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.

Image may contain Machine Wheel Alloy Wheel Car Car Wheel Spoke Tire Transportation Vehicle and Limo

Courtesy of Ferrari

#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids">Let There Be Luce: The Electric Ferrari Is Finally HereWe have been waiting for the Ferrari Luce for eight years.It was January 2018 when, at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, former Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.Courtesy of FerrariThe numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.Courtesy of Ferrari#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids

Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.

“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”

Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.

Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Courtesy of Ferrari

The numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).

The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.

Image may contain Machine Wheel Alloy Wheel Car Car Wheel Spoke Tire Transportation Vehicle and Limo

Courtesy of Ferrari

#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids">Let There Be Luce: The Electric Ferrari Is Finally Here

We have been waiting for the Ferrari Luce for eight years.

It was January 2018 when, at the North American International Auto Show in Detroit, former Ferrari chairman and CEO Sergio Marchionne first hinted at a “prancing horse” EV to compete with Tesla.

“If there is an electric supercar to be built, then Ferrari will be the first,” Marchionne said. “People are amazed at what Tesla did with a supercar: I’m not trying to minimize what Elon, did but I think it’s doable by all of us.”

Well, Ferrari has not been the first. But it has certainly taken the award for most anticipated EV launch ever, what with the drip-feed strategy of an initial model “nickname” of Elettrica, then last October’s powertrain reveal, then, in February, the Apple-esque LoveFrom-designed interior spearheaded by Jony Ive and Marc Newson.

Today’s reveal of the exterior in Rome by Ferrari ends the secrecy and completes the process. This is the Luce (Italian for “light”), the most consequential thing Maranello has made in decades.

Image may contain Car Transportation and Vehicle

Courtesy of Ferrari

The numbers are suitably high-end. Four motors, one per wheel, have a combined output of over 1,000 horsepower in Boost mode. The rear axle puts out 832 hp and 7,750 Nm to the wheels. The front axle adds 282 hp and 3,400 Nm. Full power is available in less than a second. Zero to 62 mph is dealt with in 2.5 seconds, then on to a top speed of 192 mph. This is effectively a hypercar in a GT disguise with five seats (a first for Ferrari).

The 122 kWh battery—one of the largest in any production EV—charges at up to 350 kW on an 800-volt system. Ferrari is claiming this battery gives the Luce a range of more than 329 miles per charge. The all-wheel drive and steering are inspired by the Purosangue SUV. Ferrari has confirmed a curb weight of 4,982 pounds, or 2,260 kg, which is only around 200 pounds more than the Purosangue, despite that thumping great battery pack.

Image may contain Machine Wheel Alloy Wheel Car Car Wheel Spoke Tire Transportation Vehicle and Limo

Courtesy of Ferrari

#Luce #Electric #Ferrari #Finallyferrari,electric vehicles,sports cars,design,evs and hybrids

Post Comment