"Acceleration Boost" option, discussion as to which models and how much quicker

[MagnusMako]

This is the big problem with this update. The AWD is obviously slowed down in software and probably have exactly the same potential as a P3D-. So now they unlock half that potential for 2K$. Later they can probably offer the rest for another 2K$ and maybe also another separate 2K$ unlock for track mode. Thats 6K$ upgrades for getting a stealth that is only 2K$ more if you buy it new..

Right, but think about it if your were a LR AWD owner who bought when Stealths weren't available like I did. Your options are to sell your depreciated car now at a much bigger loss and then buy a new Stealth or just pay the $6k and keep your car and a lot less hassle. For anyone buying new, obviously Stealth is the way to go and is what I could have done without blinking had I waited a bit longer before pulling the trigger.

 

[mreynolds767]

Outside of that, I think paying $2K would actually depreciate my car, as again, for somebody looking to buy a car - why would they pay the same for my AWD+ when they could get a similar stealth P (assuming a similar one is available) for the same price? They likely wouldn't - meaning I'd need to drop the price of my car. Paying $1,000 for the upgrade vs $2,000 would help negate that depreciation issue.
QUOTE]

That makes zero sense.
Yes your car would not be worth the same as a P3D- but would always retain more value than a regular AWD (how much more can be debated but it would never be worth less than a regular AWD)

 

[MattUNI]

@mreynolds767

Sure it makes sense. I never said it would be worth the same or less than a regular AWD. I said I'd have to take a bigger hit in selling it, as I would not be able to sell it for the full $2K upgrade value - as somebody could buy a Stealth P for about the same price. Therefore, I'd need to drop it by let's say $500, or something of that nature. It would still be worth more than a regular AWD, but I would have to take a bigger hit to differentiate it from the Stealth Ps.

If the upgrade price was $1K, it would already be differentiated from the Stealth Ps by being able to be priced/sold lower, therefore not immediately increasing my car's depreciation value, while still being worth more than a regular AWD. It would also be proportionally priced in comparison to the speed/power you get in comparison to a Stealth P. Super simple economic concept.

 

[mreynolds767]

They can already easily track that since they know which VINs are requiring drive unit service, and if it's a P or not.

In fact this type of data would've been among what they analyzied when deciding to offer the two free 5% power bumps... they found the data showed a 5% bump to everyone, including P, was safe- so they pushed one. Then they found another to everyone was safe too. So they pushed one.

Likewise their data shows the 990 can handle at least this half-unlock (the 980 obviously can since it's half the upgrade the 980 is already known to be able to handle)

Adding a PN just to get data they already have is adding complexity and cost for no upside.




The rear DU is listed as higher spec output in all RWD cars compared to the AWD (even when they all had the same physical part) because the rear DU is going 100% of the work in RWD cars.






They absolutely know. This is MFG 101.

Each finished product you build has a BOM (bill of materials) with a list of every part that went into it.

That's how they know which VINs needs a specific recall or service bulletin- since they know exactly what parts went into what car.

Knightshade: since you asked me to locate an example of a P3D- car being made but sold by Telsa for $2K less as a regular AWD
See this thread here:
M3P- . What is it, how to order it, etc.
User name Sanman M3
In Sept 2019 he bought a P3D- (underline on the car and all) but asked them to sell him as a regular AWD which Telsa did.
Charging him $2K less and removing the software.
In this thread he regrets and is asking if Telsa will allow him to add it back for $2K after purchase.

This is not the only case, just the most recent one I could recall and find and the only one involving buyer remorse.
There were at least 2 others I remember over the summer where buyers bought a regular AWD that was at the dealership as a P3D-

Anyway I don't think this proves the 980 or 990 is different or not ; but makes me question if the 990 really costs Telsa less why they would permit this?
I have given multiple examples which should make you question if the 990 really is a cheaper part. It may be different but no evidence it is cheaper.

I agree with 99% of what you write but think you have yourself overly convinced of differences between 980 / 990 with no real proof. I don't have a really strong opinion one way or the other ; just trying to keep an open mind.

 

[mreynolds767]

@mreynolds767

Sure it makes sense. I never said it would be worth the same or less than a regular AWD. I said I'd have to take a bigger hit in selling it, as I would not be able to sell it for the full $2K upgrade value - as somebody could buy a Stealth P for about the same price. Therefore, I'd need to drop it by let's say $500, or something of that nature. It would still be worth more than a regular AWD, but I would have to take a bigger hit to differentiate it from the Stealth Ps.

If the upgrade price was $1K, it would already be differentiated from the Stealth Ps by being able to be priced/sold lower, therefore not immediately increasing my car's depreciation value, while still being worth more than a regular AWD. Super simple economic concept.

If I buy anything for my car for $2000 today, I would not expect it to be worth $2000 extra when I sell the car.
it will be worth something extra just not the full purchase amount.
You said it will depreciate your car. That is not true, it is true you won't get full value for this upgrade when reselling.

 

[Eno Deb]

There's an intriguing thread on Twitter, and a mysterious remark by @verygreen about something called "BASE_PLUS_AWD" that he found in the firmware. Someone speculates that it's the acceleration boost, and green's answer is "just one of the levels".

 

[Sweet OJ]

I'm going to try to get this at least near the original topic, and towards something that involves more than just AWD owners. Do we have any idea whether the acceleration boost will be offered on any or all of the RWD cars? I would pay $2K for the equivalent of 0.5 seconds off of my 0-60, especially if it's truly extra horsepower available at higher speeds as well. And is there any reason to believe that having the LR might affect the ultimate power available? Does having a bigger battery make the hardware more capable of producing power in the real world?

 

[mrau]

Since the buyer of a used AWD will have the option of buying the a/boost from Tesla for 2k, you would have to sell your 2k investment for less to make it more attractive. Unless Tesla raises their prices later on.

 

[mreynolds767]

I'm going to try to get this at least near the original topic, and towards something that involves more than just AWD owners. Do we have any idea whether the acceleration boost will be offered on any or all of the RWD cars? I would pay $2K for the equivalent of 0.5 seconds off of my 0-60, especially if it's truly extra horsepower available at higher speeds as well. And is there any reason to believe that having the LR might affect the ultimate power available? Does having a bigger battery make the hardware more capable of producing power in the real world?

The SR+ ,model has room for more power via paid boost like this
The LR RWD may not ; it only has one motor and is at a high output already

The SR+ and AWD models are clearly being software limited. All the cars are but the LR RWD and P models may be closer to the safe limits.

 

[Knightshade]

Knightshade: since you asked me to locate an example of a P3D- car being made but sold by Telsa for $2K less as a regular AWD
See this thread here:
M3P- . What is it, how to order it, etc.
User name Sanman M3
In Sept 2019 he bought a P3D- (underline on the car and all) but asked them to sell him as a regular AWD which Telsa did.
Charging him $2K less and removing the software.
In this thread he regrets and is asking if Telsa will allow him to add it back for $2K after purchase.

So first- thank you very much for the link.

Anyway I don't think this proves the 980 or 990 is different or not ; but makes me question if the 990 really costs Telsa less why they would permit this?

Presumably because they're trying to deliver as many cars as possible, and a small cost difference in motor isn't a deal killer for the few one-off cases like this.

Even a $10 cheaper part, across hundreds of thousands of cars a year, would be worth it for Tesla, but losing a specific individual sale to save $10 not so much.

It may be different but no evidence it is cheaper.

If it's not cheaper, why does it exist?

If it is cheaper but just as capable, why isn't it in the P?

The fact it exists, and is not used in the P, tells us it's cheaper AND less capable.

 

[mreynolds767]

Since the buyer of a used AWD will have the option of buying the a/boost from Tesla for 2k, you would have to sell your 2k investment for less to make it more attractive. Unless Tesla raises their prices later on.

Yes, you won't get the full $2000 for this when reselling. Same as most any option you choose when buying a new car from a normal dealership.
My point is you would get something ; I don't care if it is $100, $200, $500, $1000 it is something or at least never negative value.

Poster I commented to implied it would devalue his car by getting this upgrade ; implying negative value if you read his original post.
When selling a car, what you paid for the car or it's options is not relevant.
So many used model 3's were overpriced throughout 2019 for this very reason, owners only cared about what they paid rather than the value.

 

[Siddhartha]

So...you are saying that ELON lied?

Are you saying that there IS a physical difference?

 

[CMoZ]

False.

They confirm the efficiency of the motor in the range/mileage data. How much power it consumers under identical conditions far less than max output to the power consumed by the other motor.

And they're different.

Which is impossible if they are the same motor.


That has nothing to do with the max output #s.

Again- this is discssed, as length, with links to all the EPA data, in the other thread if you want to dig into it.




yes, and what you're saying is directly debunked by the EPA data showing they're functionally different parts.

Lol you're grasping at straws. They're Measuring the car. They're not pulling out the motors so it's still a rating of motor controller limited operation of the motors. And If you pull the EPA's 2020 data it says the motors are identical 147 and 188kW.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Are you saying that there IS a physical difference?

No...

Let me be clear....

I'll say it again.


ELON said there IS a physical difference.

 

[silenteski]

No, I havent. its your opinion that the best way to handle this is to let everyone create separate threads, and then have each individual person figure out how to filter out by tags etc, even if the people did not tag their threads.

its my opinion that a "few" threads on the same topic is fine, but when a topic incites people to make so many threads they would take over the entire front page (like this one), or, for another similar situation, the "I lost 4 miles of range on my battery, has anyone else seen this problem?!?!?!" threads, they should be consolodated so that people who want to actually participate in that discussion can, and those that dont, dont need to stop visiting the site or figure out how to filter, etc.

We just have different opinions on the topic, but no, I have not missed your point at all.

Again, you’ve completely missed the point. I’m saying a simple solution that preserves the separation while giving options for filtering and aggregating, with no extra steps for a mod, would be much better.

In the example solution I threw out from the top of my head, the mod would simply tag a thread, rather than move it. When you, as a user, decide you don’t want to see all the threads about a popular topic, all you do is “ignore” that topic (or drill into that topic if you want to view them in aggregate for whatever reason).

And users that want to follow specific conversation threads wouldn’t need to sift through 50+ pages of noise to do so.

If you can’t digest an alternative like that it’s because you feel everyone else should use the forum exactly like you do.

 

[e-FTW]

My money is on Tesla eventually releasing a similar paid upgrade for the Model 3 P models that might include a launch mode. Say Ludicrous mode?

 

[robski]

I think the 990 comes with an extra USB cable. Or maybe now it supports USB-C. Similar thing happened to me recently on a Blu-ray player purchase from Costco.

 

[Knightshade]

Lol you're grasping at straws.

No, I'm citing factual measured data.

They're Measuring the car. They're not pulling out the motors so it's still a rating of motor controller limited operation of the motors.

Yes.

And in the same car (model 3) the efficiency measurement of the 990 vehicle and the 980 vehicle are different.

"grasping at straws" would be your argument that somehow Tesla wrote motor control code to make the AWD less efficient despite using the same motor.

Which is nonsensical.

No- the 990 is physically less efficient than the 980.

Which is why Tesla had to ask the EPA to reduce the published mileage figure for the P so as to be able to advertise the same range on AWD and P.

But the raw data showing the difference is there in the data.


Paging @AlanSubie4Life who has dug into this a lot deeper elsewhere and can probably direct link to the data you seem to be missing.

And If you pull the EPA's 2020 data it says the motors are identical 147 and 188kW.

Which would be relevant if this was a discussion on max power.

It's not.

At all.

It's on consumption at FAR LESS than max output.

 

[M3forwin]

just bought the performance boast last night, i gotta say worth every penny.

 

[Knightshade]

No...

Let me be clear....

I'll say it again.


ELON said there IS a physical difference.

Let me be clear.

No, he absolutely did not


The fact you don't understand what burn in means doesn't change what he actually said.