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

[Knightshade]

Do you have these difference breakdowns above 60 mph? I think the previous poster was really talking about freeway speeds (>60mph), which I also didn't notice a difference vs no AB.

Unfortunately I don't- most folks posting their draggy data were doing 0-60 runs... and at the time even folks posting 1/4 times didn't seem to be giving 10 mph splits.

But as mentioned if you do the math, the fact the differences in ETs at the end of the 1/4 mile are only a few hundredths of a second different from the 0-60 time difference suggests your thinking is correct and there's little to no difference above 60 anyway.

 

[OUengineer]

Unfortunately I don't- most folks posting their draggy data were doing 0-60 runs... and at the time even folks posting 1/4 times didn't seem to be giving 10 mph splits.

But as mentioned if you do the math, the fact the differences in ETs at the end of the 1/4 mile are only a few hundredths of a second different from the 0-60 time difference suggests your thinking is correct and there's little to no difference above 60 anyway.

The difference above 60 between the P, AB, and LR looks hard to pin down. Just going off typical eighth mile and quarter mile times and trap speeds, I'd venture to say almost no difference between AB and P, small difference between AB and LR.

Would love to see if anyone has any roll racing video at these speeds between the three. Anecdotally, when I test drove the P and LR back to back, the LR felt really slow below 45 in comparison, and similar, but slightly slower at highway speeds.

 

[tezlam3]

The difference above 60 between the P, AB, and LR looks hard to pin down. Just going off typical eighth mile and quarter mile times and trap speeds, I'd venture to say almost no difference between AB and P, small difference between AB and LR.

Would love to see if anyone has any roll racing video at these speeds between the three. Anecdotally, when I test drove the P and LR back to back, the LR felt really slow below 45 in comparison, and similar, but slightly slower at highway speeds.

interesting to see those numbers above 60, iirc someone said theres noticeable difference in that range... just wondering if anyone ever tested it

 

[Knightshade]

interesting to see those numbers above 60, iirc someone said theres noticeable difference in that range... just wondering if anyone ever tested it

As both I and OUengineer suggested- The 1/8th and 1/4 mile figures appear to do exactly that, and support the idea there's little difference above 60. Otherwise the ET gap at the end of either would be noticeably larger than the gap in the 0-60 times.

 

[tezlam3]

As both I and OUengineer suggested- The 1/8th and 1/4 mile figures appear to do exactly that, and support the idea there's little difference above 60. Otherwise the ET gap at the end of either would be noticeably larger than the gap in the 0-60 times.

thats a great guess but i was asking if its actually been tested and what the numbers look like

 

[john5520]

I've often wondered if there was a noticeable difference between the 18's and 19's in terms of quarter miles times, and this video may have answered that.

Not sure what 19s that guy was running but the cam car was on the stock 18 aeros:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=whytzLDZgNU&t=40s

This channel owner have also run a couple 11.6s / 11.7s. Highest trap I believe is 118.

 

[Knightshade]

I've often wondered if there was a noticeable difference between the 18's and 19's in terms of quarter miles times, and this video may have answered that.

Not sure what 19s that guy was running but the cam car was on the stock 18 aeros:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=whytzLDZgNU&t=40s

This channel owner have also run a couple 11.6s / 11.7s. Highest trap I believe is 118.

How does that answer it if we don't know what the guy with 19s actually ran?

Who gets to the end first doesn't tell us anything super useful since the other guy might have just had a bad RT.

 

[TLLMRRJ]

How does that answer it if we don't know what the guy with 19s actually ran?

Who gets to the end first doesn't tell us anything super useful since the other guy might have just had a bad RT.

The info was in the comment section by the author of the video.

 

[john5520]

How does that answer it if we don't know what the guy with 19s actually ran?

Who gets to the end first doesn't tell us anything super useful since the other guy might have just had a bad RT.

Yeah, check the comments, the other guy's best run that day was 11.8X. Plus, he was pulling on him all the way to the quarter. I've seen another video with a similar result from another youtuber. Will post if I find it.

 

[1.21GW]

I have 19s and my best so far is 11.82 @117.92

I shared a video a while back on this. To me, i think there are more factors than just the wheels that cause that gap.

 

[john5520]

The channel owner said he hooked up better at different tracks so his time can vary by up to 2 tenths. To me, the best way to really test the two configurations is to run them on the same track, similar soc, same day. Preferably side by side like in this video.

But yeah, still, this is only one video which is a totally fair point to bring up, and we don't know anything about the other guy. He could be a big dude and there could very well be other factors at play.

I plan to do some long trips so I found an excuse to swap back to the Aeros from the Sport 19s. Gave up some handling for sure running these stock all-seasons, but will put on some summers after running them a bit. They're practically new. Will do some runs with the dragy to see how things go.

 

[1.21GW]

Acceleration boost makes life too easy at the drag strip...

 

[john5520]

Another Mustang getting beat up:

 

[MrSlippery]

Acceleration boost makes life too easy at the drag strip...

Just love to see those consistent 11.8 times

 

[Brenkj]

I just stumbled across a Model 3 LR AWD in inventory and I jumped on it. The listing shows the standard 4.2 acceleration. So now I'm debating over whether to spring for the performance boost. I've seen different reports on exactly how much the boost brings down the 0-60 time. Can anyone who has purchased the boost weigh in as to your experience with how much of a difference the boost makes? Thanks.

 

[1.21GW]

I just stumbled across a Model 3 LR AWD in inventory and I jumped on it. The listing shows the standard 4.2 acceleration. So now I'm debating over whether to spring for the performance boost. I've seen different reports on exactly how much the boost brings down the 0-60 time. Can anyone who has purchased the boost weigh in as to your experience with how much of a difference the boost makes? Thanks.

0-60: 4.2 --> 3.7
1/4 mile: 12.3 -->11.8

I think there are many videos and results in this thread that can show details

 

[Brenkj]

0-60: 4.2 --> 3.7
1/4 mile: 12.3 -->11.8

I think there are many videos and results in this thread that can show details

Thanks. Does anyone know how that compares to my 2018 M3 LR RWD? I know I got a S/W update at some point that sped up the car a bit, but I don’t know the official 0-60 estimate.

 

[Snowball316]

Thanks. Does anyone know how that compares to my 2018 M3 LR RWD? I know I got a S/W update at some point that sped up the car a bit, but I don’t know the official 0-60 estimate.

Many videos on Youtube, 136 pages on this thread, or perhaps search keyword RWD vs AWD 0-60?

 

[P-Lo801]

Thanks. Does anyone know how that compares to my 2018 M3 LR RWD? I know I got a S/W update at some point that sped up the car a bit, but I don’t know the official 0-60 estimate.

I had a RWD that I ended up trading in for LR AWD. With the software updates, it brought the 0-60 down to 4.8 IIRC.

 

[Brenkj]

I had a RWD that I ended up trading in for LR AWD. With the software updates, it brought the 0-60 down to 4.8 IIRC.

Thanks. .6 secs. is pretty significant. I think I'll wait and drive the new car for a bit before deciding on the performance boost.