Model 3 Highland Performance/Plaid Speculation [Car announced 04.23.2024]

[Destiny1701]

So much b*tching about something that hasn’t been shown to affect anything in the real world. Seems a bit premature at best, and a waste of time and energy to boot…

Spoken by a U.S. resident lol.
Try being on the other side of the coin bro.

3.1 0-100 is already 3.01 0-60 so yes it has affected low end. Higher end will no doubt also be diff and who know down the road if ludicrous update even possible for LG.

For some it’s paying same or more for less.
Thr principle of it doesn’t sit well.

Not alone here with potential buyers holding off now…when you have the entire planet save for US on a diff spec.

a head to head test eventually may dispel this … wait and see I guess.

 

[terranx]

3.1 0-100 is already 3.01 0-60 so yes it has affected low end. Higher end will no doubt also be diff and who know down the road if ludicrous update even possible for LG.

Probably rounding error. UK which uses mph but has 460hp still quotes 2.9

 

[Destiny1701]

Probably rounding error. UK which uses mph but has 460hp still quotes 2.9

Ya I thought about that.
0-60 could be 2.93 rounded down and 0-100 could be 3.06 rounded up.

2.9 0-60 is actually 0-100 3.01…so if it was rounding, we’d see 0-100 3.0 sec flat…not 3.1.

Hope someone from Tesla clarifies this. Interested in higher end power drop on both versions.

 

[terranx]

Ya I thought about that.
0-60 could be 2.93 rounded down and 0-100 could be 3.06 rounded up.

Hope someone from Tesla clarifies this

Could even be US is 2.85, non-US is 2.94, and the 0-100 is whatever.

I think the bigger difference is likely to be up top. I'm guessing there's a reason they didn't publish 1/4 mile times.

 

[Destiny1701]

Could even be US is 2.85, non-US is 2.94, and the 0-100 is whatever.

I think the bigger difference is likely to be up top. I'm guessing there's a reason they didn't publish 1/4 mile times.

Imagine a plaid with 1.99 US only and then 2.1 0-60 for other countries? At the same price or more?

I get battery supply constraints…makes sense for them to use multiple battery suppliers. So then ensure LG packs in enough kw to match the Pano and spec the car evenly.

 

[terranx]

I get what you're saying, but tbh I give zero ****s about the Plaid's 0-60. It's the 60-130 and quarter mile that are exciting and I'd gladly give up some 0-60 to improve those parameters even more. Unfortunately I think that's where the LG model will falter regardless

 

[Engi_Nerd]

Just a random thought. I think if I could have Tesla build me any configuration of their currently available hardware, it would be this Performance trim without a front drive unit. I bet the new rear motor would still get to 60 in under 4 seconds and you'd get a sportier front end with sweeter RWD driving dynamics.

 

[Zcd1]

Spoken by a U.S. resident lol.
Try being on the other side of the coin bro.

a head to head test eventually may dispel this … wait and see I guess.

Exactly - when/if actual testing demonstrates a performance difference, THEN I could understand being miffed.

In the meantime, it's just useless speculation, IMO.

 

[P-Lo801]

So I did some wheel fitment calculations based on the reported wheel specs, and the current OEM setup looks like this with the front (orange) and rear (green) essentially both lining up evenly on the outer edge, while the inner edge of the rear wheel has more contact patch of one inch being one inch wider.

I wonder what advantage this has for driving dynamics, compared to the offsets being the same front and rear, similar to how the BMW M3 (9.5" width in the front and 10.5" in the rear) has it with staggered width sizes by an inch. Like this diagram for example:

 

[Destiny1701]

I get what you're saying, but tbh I give zero ****s about the Plaid's 0-60. It's the 60-130 and quarter mile that are exciting and I'd gladly give up some 0-60 to improve those parameters even more. Unfortunately I think that's where the LG model will falter regardless

Yep agreed. Given 0-60 is less, likely higher end 60-130 as well. I don’t care for the 100+ as much for day to day. Usless unless track.

60-130 is where I don’t want to be chintzed.

 

[Sellout]

So I did some wheel fitment calculations based on the reported wheel specs, and the current OEM setup looks like this with the front (orange) and rear (green) essentially both lining up evenly on the outer edge, while the inner edge of the rear wheel has more contact patch of one inch being one inch wider.

View attachment 1042543


I wonder what advantage this for driving dynamics, compared to the offsets being the same front and rear, similar to how the BMW M3 (9.5" width in the front and 10.5" in the rear) has it with staggered width sizes by an inch. Like this diagram for example:

View attachment 1042544

my wild ass guess based on nothing:
I suspect the difference would come down to how they decided to manage the airflow underneath the car and through/around the wheel openings, which might not have been considered as thoroughly on the BMW. Maybe?

 

[terranx]

my wild ass guess based on nothing:
I suspect the difference would come down to how they decided to manage the airflow underneath the car and through/around the wheel openings, which might not have been considered as thoroughly on the BMW. Maybe?

I think there's just too many possibilities and it mostly comes down to the suspension geometry and possibly airflow like you mentioned.

For the BMW example, sure the current one has the same offset. But that certainly wasn't always the case. My E46 M3 had ET47 front and ET25 rear, with the rear fenders flared considerably compared to the non-M variant.

Generally speaking, a wider track would give more grip I think.

 

[jjrandorin]

Yep agreed. Given 0-60 is less, likely higher end 60-130 as well. I don’t care for the 100+ as much for day to day. Usless unless track.

60-130 is where I don’t want to be chintzed.

All this talk about "60-130" speed (I just quoted you because it was the last one I saw, definitely not the only one). People are saying "I dont care about the track, I dont care about 0-60, I just care about 60-130".

"0-60" you can actually legally drive, on the street, multiple times a day, if you enjoy playing "stoplight hero" or something. Where, exactly, is everyone driving "60-130" legally on regular streets / highway / freeways? In europe I know there are unregulated speed zones, there arent any of those on regular streets / highways in the US I am aware of.

Do they exist in Canada? If not, where are you planning on driving to 130MPH legally to "enjoy" any 60-130 gains, if "I dont care about the track" is also an accurate statement?

 

[JezzaE]

All this talk about "60-130" speed (I just quoted you because it was the last one I saw, definitely not the only one). People are saying "I dont care about the track, I dont care about 0-60, I just care about 60-130".

"0-60" you can actually legally drive, on the street, multiple times a day, if you enjoy playing "stoplight hero" or something. Where, exactly, is everyone driving "60-130" legally on regular streets / highway / freeways? In europe I know there are unregulated speed zones, there arent any of those on regular streets / highways in the US I am aware of.

Do they exist in Canada? If not, where are you planning on driving to 130MPH legally to "enjoy" any 60-130 gains, if "I dont care about the track" is also an accurate statement?

There’s roads in the state of Montana that have no speed limit during the daytime.

 

[brianman]

Where, exactly, is everyone driving "60-130" legally on regular streets / highway / freeways?

Road courses are why this is a (hopefully) compelling improvement with M3(H)P for me. Several other things as well.

 

[terranx]

There’s roads in the state of Montana that have no speed limit during the daytime.

I don’t think that’s been true since I was a child.

But I think it’s also fair to say many of the individuals buying 500+ hp cars frequently drive extralegal speeds.

 

[Destiny1701]

All this talk about "60-130" speed (I just quoted you because it was the last one I saw, definitely not the only one). People are saying "I dont care about the track, I dont care about 0-60, I just care about 60-130".

"0-60" you can actually legally drive, on the street, multiple times a day, if you enjoy playing "stoplight hero" or something. Where, exactly, is everyone driving "60-130" legally on regular streets / highway / freeways? In europe I know there are unregulated speed zones, there arent any of those on regular streets / highways in the US I am aware of.

Do they exist in Canada? If not, where are you planning on driving to 130MPH legally to "enjoy" any 60-130 gains, if "I dont care about the track" is also an accurate statement?

Let me clarify
I live in the metric world of km.

For me 0-100 is legal. And it’s the metric I use for day to day ‘fun factor’.

80-110/120kph is the acceleration to a highway.

120-140 are somewhat ‘normal’ traffic speeds in greater Toronto highways.

When I say 60-130…tbh I mean 50-90 tops.
There are no roads in Canada allowing a 60-130 lol.

 

[JezzaE]

I don’t think that’s been true since I was a child.

But I think it’s also fair to say many of the individuals buying 500+ hp cars frequently drive extralegal speeds.

That very well may be true…where I live it’s race it if ya got it!

 

[P-Lo801]

my wild ass guess based on nothing:
I suspect the difference would come down to how they decided to manage the airflow underneath the car and through/around the wheel openings, which might not have been considered as thoroughly on the BMW. Maybe?

This is a fair point. I forgot about the significance of aero dynamics for this car.

I think there's just too many possibilities and it mostly comes down to the suspension geometry and possibly airflow like you mentioned.

For the BMW example, sure the current one has the same offset. But that certainly wasn't always the case. My E46 M3 had ET47 front and ET25 rear, with the rear fenders flared considerably compared to the non-M variant.

Generally speaking, a wider track would give more grip I think.

Yeah it's all speculative at this point since we don't know the suspension geometry and alignment specs for the new one yet. I just couldn't help but notice that the legacy M3P was equipped with square 20x9 et34. And now the new one is equipped with the same wheel specs for the front, only this time the rear is wider by an inch, yet it still lines up evenly with the outer edge of the front.

I'm hoping we can launch a more technical discussion of the new wheel specs and its (potential) effects on driving dynamics in the driving dynamics forum for this car; mainly because i'm a novice. Personally, I want to get aftermarket 18s or 19s on the car eventually and push the rear wheel out to be more flush with the wheel well (see photo below), because I love that flush look. But I don't know if i'd want to mess with it too much if it came at the expense of the engineering intended for the driving dynamics. So ideally, I would get 19x9 et34 in the front, and 19x10 et34 in the rear. But i'm concerned how much impact, if any, pushing the rear out by 11mm would affect the driving dynamics intended for the car.

I took this photo of the rear when I checked out the new m3p yesterday:

 

[jjrandorin]

I don’t think that’s been true since I was a child.

But I think it’s also fair to say many of the individuals buying 500+ hp cars frequently drive extralegal speeds.

Sure... but not "60-130MPH" at regular intervals. "60-90mph"... Sure. "0-90"? sure. Are you saying that where you are, people are regularly accelerating past 100 MPH on a regular basis?