Is it a trick question, or a naive one? You do know the difference between ICE and Electric Motor, right? Do you know how much torque E90 engine has at 700RPM vs Electric motor has?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Acceleration from 0-25.
- Thread starter ZapM3
- Start date
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
That's why ICE vehicles have a torque converters or a clutch. When you floor it from a stop the revs go up to about 3000rpm while you're barely moving. The E90 produces plenty of torque at 3000rpm and a quick search shows it goes from 0-30 in 2.0s which is faster than a Model 3. The Model 3 is way faster from 30-60 though, 2.7s vs 4.0s.
mal_tsla
Member
Yup! Ask for a P-DL model S service loaner and enjoy the mind blow that is unstunted high torque EVs!
e-FTW
New electron smell
I won't do that! I purposefully avoid that, as I want to not have that envy...
I'm already getting a Performance 3 against all financial logic.
The uncorked 75 loaner I got was enough.
I'd think it's the opposite - since the three has a dedicated electric pump pushing the oil around, it should have more flexibility in managing heat/lubrication than the S and X that don't have that.
AFAIK the coolant in all the cars is pumped by a couple of pumps up under the Frunk.
That's what I'm unclear on. I thought there was a supplier issue a year ago on shaft driven pumps for the DU. If the DU has an independently powered/operated oil pump, then my thought was not correct at all.
12Pack
Member
Lots of discussion on this in other threads. Indeed huge difference between my current P100D and my previous S85 from a standstill and not so much if both are rolling at 30 mph. TMC member Krash explained this as follows:
“There are four primary differences (P vs non-P). The chronological first is launch mode: the ability to torque load the motor. The second is the higher initial torque settings, particularly with the larger rear motor. The third is the higher max power setting. The fourth is the BackEMF profile with the larger rear motor.”
“There are four primary differences (P vs non-P). The chronological first is launch mode: the ability to torque load the motor. The second is the higher initial torque settings, particularly with the larger rear motor. The third is the higher max power setting. The fourth is the BackEMF profile with the larger rear motor.”
The under the car video clearly showed a cylindrical protrusion from the gear assembly with low voltage wiring running to it that was identified on the video as being a pump and has no analog in the S/X drive units.
That doesn't prevent them from having a shaft driven pump as well, but it makes it less likely.
One reason they might have added the pump is low speed operation of a permanent magnet motor can lead to asymmetric heating that isn't possible on an induction motor.
I think there was, and that is how the S&X motors are lubricated. (And they don't work when going in reverse, so you don't want to reverse for long distances.)
The Model 3 has a spin on filter and an electric pump, I think that is how they got rid of the first year fluid change that the S&X need.
mtndrew1
Active Member
My car is also a bit “soft” from 0-25.
I suspect this is almost entirely for drivetrain longevity. In the early Tesla days there were all sorts of warranty claims and parts revisions for various drive unit related problems. Reducing the torque shock is probably healthier for the drive unit, long term.
Though coming from a Volt, Soul EV and a Leaf the Model 3 is still a rocket ship.
I suspect this is almost entirely for drivetrain longevity. In the early Tesla days there were all sorts of warranty claims and parts revisions for various drive unit related problems. Reducing the torque shock is probably healthier for the drive unit, long term.
Though coming from a Volt, Soul EV and a Leaf the Model 3 is still a rocket ship.
That was my point. E90 engine has to go from 700 to 2500+ to get decent torque to move the car and has much lesser torque than M3, (peak torque is 200 lb-ft for E90). Those are disadvantages of ICE.
Despite that it is faster to 30 MPH than M3. That is the disappointment. If you see other EV, those are always much faster to 0-30 than comparable ICE cars.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Sometimes I feel like people here have never driven an ICE car. haha. On an automatic transmission the torque converter allows the engine speed and wheel speed to be decoupled so that you can use the torque at the higher engine speed. The E90 in 1st gear has lower gearing than the Model 3s fixed drive ratio so it's torque to the wheels is relatively higher. The Model S is just plain fast and once you get a vehicle that powerful the smoothness of power delivery and AWD are going to make it very quick 0-30. What other EV is fast from 0-30?
Daniel, you are preaching to the choir about auto-transmissions. I rebuilt few of these myself several years ago, as well as trained few folks.
Point is, given power and torque, EVs having the instantaneous torque always been much better at 0-30 than ICE. As speed builds up they lose advantage compared to ICE.
If you have time please look up 0-30 times of EVs for their HP and compare it ICE vehicle with similar power ratings. EVs are substantially better.
Defending for sake of defending Tesla, Seriously tiring. Where there is good, praise it, nothing wrong, but when there is some deficiency and someone points out, not sure why people bend out of shape.
There are two sides to this.
On the one hand, yes, the EV has a much broader region of peak power, so it's more likely to be able to put the peak power or a large fraction of it down, especially at lower speeds where the ICE might not get to peak power even in first gear.
But the ICE has a built in advantage on planned 0-60 tests, too - which I usually see reverse the trend you're quoting for 0-30 times, and which is the reason that a Tesla can usually walk away from a car that's nominally faster to 60 in real street situations. That's because when they do 0-60 times or other "racing" launches, the engine is revved up, and then the clutch/torque converter dumps all that inertia into the driveline - at a much higher rate than the engine's nominal output at that RPM, slowing the engine down and pushing the car forward faster than the rated output could.
You can clearly see the size of this advantage by comparing 0-60 and 5-60 times. On a Tesla (or most other EVs,) 5-60 is a little shorter. On most ICE cars, it's significantly longer.
I don't think inertia is the root cause. On a manual, once the clutch is out, the inertia has been used up. On an auto, it's never utilized (engine revs stay high).
I think the improved acceleration at lower end is due to the torque multiplication of transmission/ converter. Each higher gear produces a lower acceleration for the same HP input. Same reason trucks downshift on hills, they need more force to overcome the acceleration due to gravity.
While I have yet to test drive a Model 3, I noticed the same thing when I test drove (3 times) the Chevy Bolt EV. I had previously owned a gen 1 Volt, had test drive an gen 2 Volt and now have a Tesla P85+. While I didn't expect the Bolt EV to feel as quick as my P85+, I expected it to feel "more" like my Tesla than it did like my old Volt. I've seen all the numbers comparing the cars (0-30, 0-60, etc.), but it definitely came back to the "initial hit" sensation my P85 provides (note: I recently had a new 2018 Model S 100D loaner which felt the same). It was totally missing on the Bolt...I was actually pretty bummed out. Indeed, in terms of the off the line hit, the only similar car I've drive was the BMW i3 rex back in 2014. However, even that car has apparently been neutered to soften the off-the-line hit and preserve the motor mount bolts, etc. I was hoping that Bolt EV would have the same initial hit...nope.
It is actually one of the things about the Model 3 that I fear I will find a bit disappointing. It will be interesting to see if the regular (non-P) dual motor crutches this a bit.
It is actually one of the things about the Model 3 that I fear I will find a bit disappointing. It will be interesting to see if the regular (non-P) dual motor crutches this a bit.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Bolt 0-30 2.7s 0-60 6.3s
Model S60 0-30 2.2s 0-60 5.0s
BMW i3 0-30 2.7s 0-60 6.5s
Here's a giant list: Plug-In Vehicle Cross Section: Acceleration To 30 MPH and 60 MPH In EV Mode
Toyota Camry V6 0-30 2.2s 0-60 5.8s 5-60 6.2s (I didn't realize Camrys were up to 301hp now! I bet the 0-30 time here is severely traction limited because of FWD)
Some of the really slow ones might be faster than a comparable ICE vehicle to 30mph but most exhibit the same behavior as the Model 3. Maybe the Model 3 feels slow because it has less jerk, the rate of change of acceleration, than other EVs.
Totally agree with the OP. The launch from 0 feels muted when compared to a launch from about 30. Would be interesting to see people investigate this further. Elon has said that he might be able to squeeze a little more performance out of the car but didn’t want to make any promises. I think what he is referring to is what this thread is about. We probably won’t see any changes until the AWD and the P versions are out though. Gotta keep that differentiation (which sucks IMO).
While Its always fun to do a maximum acceleration launch from a stop, It's really not all that useful. The car is presently more than fast enough to beat most cars of the line at stop light when needed. I also wonder how hard a violent launch is on the driveline components. I'd prefer to not have a car destroy itself from its own power.
I find the acceleration at speed much more useful. Its great to get to the top of an on ramp, spot a break in traffic and easily dart into it and match the flow of traffic.
I find the acceleration at speed much more useful. Its great to get to the top of an on ramp, spot a break in traffic and easily dart into it and match the flow of traffic.
Similar threads
