TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

3.7 and 3.9 0-60 Times

Discussion in 'Roadster' started by Pantera Dude, Dec 10, 2012.

  1. Pantera Dude

    Pantera Dude Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    468
    Location:
    Long Beach, California
    Can someone tell me which cars were capable of 0-60 in 3.7? And how did they accomplish that? Is there any upgraded hardware or is it just different programming allowing more energy to go to the motor?
     
  2. DrComputer

    DrComputer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    891
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks, CA
    The original 1.5 and 2.0 and 2.5 cars without the Sport option were supposed to achieve 3.9s 0-60 times. The sport option on the 2.0 and 2.5 lowered the time to 3.7s. The reality is that the 1.5's were never able to achieve the 3.9s times but the 2.0 and 2.5 standard models could. Originally Tesla marketed the Sport models as having a special "hand wound motor" but that mumbo-jumbo got quickly erased from history. The reality is that there only difference between the standard 2.0/2.5 and 2.0/2.5 Sport is just a firmware difference (and appropriate Sport badging). My hope is that since they are no longer selling any new Roadsters they will just offer a reasonably priced firmware upgrade to all 2.0 and 2.5 non-sport customers to get the Sport firmware. When I say reasonable I mean less than $1K.
     
  3. dhrivnak

    dhrivnak Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,150
    Location:
    NE Tennessee
    Those are the Sport version and have a special handwound motor. It was a $20,000 option. I had a chance to do 4 1/4 mile runs against a sport and i was very surprised i won 2 of the 4 heats. And they had their hard top on and no passengers. I always had a rider and had my top off both of which hurts time. When i did lose it was less than a car lenght. Not worth the extra money in my book.
     
  4. Pantera Dude

    Pantera Dude Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    468
    Location:
    Long Beach, California
    I suppose doing 3.7 would be harder on the battery, motor and PEM than doing 3.9?
     
  5. Jackyche

    Jackyche Member

    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2012
    Messages:
    319
    Location:
    Seattle
    What??? The 1.5's can't do the 3.9s as advertised? Should I be upset? What can it do? 4.0? 4.1? I never tested it or anything.

     
  6. AndrewBissell

    AndrewBissell Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2009
    Messages:
    645
    I believe you are incorrect. The PEM is the same between Sport and non-Sport, but there is a hardware difference to the motor. I believe they were wound with more turns of copper wire for the Sport, and I think that was possible because at the time humans were able to wind more densely than machines.

    Subsequently Tesla may have machine-winding to the same level.
     
  7. Pantera Dude

    Pantera Dude Member

    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2012
    Messages:
    468
    Location:
    Long Beach, California
    What are the different models of the Roadster supposed to do 0-60 in standard drive mode?
     
  8. Doug_G

    Doug_G Lead Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2010
    Messages:
    15,848
    Location:
    Ottawa, Canada
    A senior engineer at Tesla told me that the cables coming from the battery on the Sport are bigger than those on the base. So whether or not there are differences in the motor, there definitely are other hardware differences.
     
  9. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    When you are talking tenths of a second you need perfect everything. The Roadster was shown to do those speeds under exactly controlled conditions. Just like everyone other car maker does to make the number law as possible.
     
  10. dhrivnak

    dhrivnak Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,150
    Location:
    NE Tennessee
    I think you are wrong here as a 1.5 can hold its’ own against the 2010 Sport, any other “performance” car.

    My first data point is from Road & Track which in their tests say 0-60 in 4.0, not much difference than the advertised 3.9 Road Test of the 2009 Tesla Roadster - Full Authoritative Test of the 2009 Tesla Roadster at RoadandTrack.com

    A second data point is four 1/4 mile runs against a Roadster Sport one day last year. I won two races and he won two. He also had the advantage of no passenger and the hard top which is more aerodynamic than the open top I was running with. In the two I lost I was less than a body length behind. I concede the Sport was faster but not by much.

    My third data point was a night at "Street Fights" at the Bristol raceway where amateurs get to run down the ¼ mile. I raced against a Corvette, a 2011 Shelby edition Mustang, a Cadillac CTS and beat them all. My only loss was to a Chevy S-10 (it had a big block with nitrous injection I later found out).
     
  11. DrComputer

    DrComputer Member

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    891
    Location:
    Sherman Oaks, CA
    Eric VFX and I both took our cars to the Irwindale Speedway drag strip about a year after having our cars and I beat him consistantly on each run by the same amount of time every time. He has a 1.5 and I have a non-sport 2.0.
     
  12. dhrivnak

    dhrivnak Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2011
    Messages:
    2,150
    Location:
    NE Tennessee

    Curious do you remember the times? My 1.5 is between 13.1 and 13.4 in the quarter with a final speed between 98 and 104 the top adds 2mph for me.
     
  13. vfx

    vfx Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2006
    Messages:
    14,792
    Location:
    CA CA
    Our track was 1/8 mile. I contend he won because I had a big meal before we hit the track.
     

Share This Page