Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

AWD Y Much Slower Than AWD 3

Stach

Member
Mar 23, 2019
459
239
Madison, WI
First, I'll start off with the main question. Why is the Model Y AWD so much slower, 0-60, than the Model 3 AWD?

The Model 3 (without acceleration boost) has a listed 0-60mph time of 4.4 seconds, but in reality it is around 4.0-4.1 seconds after a couple of key performance enhancing software releases. Dyno tests have shown the non-boosted Model 3 AWD to have 447 HP / 397 Torque.

The Model Y has a listed 0-60mph time of 4.8 seconds and testing shows it to be around the same 4.8 seconds, even though the same performance enhanced software version is running on it. The Model Y does weight 325 lbs more, but that should not equate to .7-.8 seconds slower 0-60. The Model Y AWD reviews show it as having 384 HP / 376 Torque, so why is it so much slower than the Model 3?

Maybe I missed it, but I'm surprised that I haven't seen other AWD Model Y owners disappointed by these numbers, when compared to the similar Model 3, that only weighs 325 lbs more. I'm pretty sure that the Acceleration Boost will be offered for the Y at some point (Free $$$ for Tesla), but I would really hope that Tesla will also even out these numbers as well.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Arctic_White

Stach

Member
Mar 23, 2019
459
239
Madison, WI
Its a bloated M3. Fat cars create a lot more drag

Nah, I don't believe that. They could give the Y the same HP and TQ numbers, if they wanted to, which would make the times Much more comparable. They've got enough playing room in the motors to dial it wherever they want (within reason), so I'm at a loss why they make it that much slower. The 3P and YP are only .3 seconds different and that would seem much more reasonable, giving the AWD Y a real world time of 4.4 secs before a sure-to-be-coming boost.
 

RoBoRaT

Zero Farts Given!
Nov 22, 2018
1,388
1,228
NorthSoCal
First, I'll start off with the main question. Why is the Model Y AWD so much slower, 0-60, than the Model 3 AWD?

The Model 3 (without acceleration boost) has a listed 0-60mph time of 4.4 seconds, but in reality it is around 4.0-4.1 seconds after a couple of key performance enhancing software releases. Dyno tests have shown the non-boosted Model 3 AWD to have 447 HP / 397 Torque.

The Model Y has a listed 0-60mph time of 4.8 seconds and testing shows it to be around the same 4.8 seconds, even though the same performance enhanced software version is running on it. The Model Y does weight 325 lbs more, but that should not equate to .7-.8 seconds slower 0-60. The Model Y AWD reviews show it as having 384 HP / 376 Torque, so why is it so much slower than the Model 3?

Maybe I missed it, but I'm surprised that I haven't seen other AWD Model Y owners disappointed by these numbers, when compared to the similar Model 3, that only weighs 325 lbs more. I'm pretty sure that the Acceleration Boost will be offered for the Y at some point (Free $$$ for Tesla), but I would really hope that Tesla will also even out these numbers as well.

Tesla advertises 4.4 sec for LR AWD Model 3 without the boost vs 4.8 sec for LR AWD Model Y.

My own LR AWD 3 without boost, shows 4.47 sec 0-60 mph with 1 ft roll - close to advertised time.

Where did you get 4.0-4.1 sec 0-60? Screenshot_20200902-054840_Samsung Internet.jpg Screenshot_20200614-164525_dragy.jpg
 

Stach

Member
Mar 23, 2019
459
239
Madison, WI
Tesla advertises 4.4 sec for LR AWD Model 3 without the boost vs 4.8 sec for LR AWD Model Y.

My own LR AWD 3 without boost, shows 4.47 sec 0-60 mph with 1 ft roll - close to advertised time.

Where did you get 4.0-4.1 sec 0-60? View attachment 583512 View attachment 583513

I don't have any personal experience, but I had a M3 SR+ until about 1 month ago and it was still listed at 5.3 seconds and it was getting around 5.0 to 5.1 seconds lately. I've seen lots of posts here with draggy screenshots showing very low 4's for 0-60 times these days for the M3 LR AWD. The 4.4 second time for the M3 LR AWD has remained unchanged after at least 2 software releases that improved power by 10% (not including performance boost) over the past year or so. I'm surprised that you still see a 4.4 second time as it was my impression that just about 4.0 seconds was an accepted fact these days, based upon the posts, draggy results, youtube videos, etc... Was your charge level low when you performed this run?
 

Redbrick

Member
Jun 27, 2020
213
113
Babylon 5
Nah, I don't believe that. They could give the Y the same HP and TQ numbers, if they wanted to, which would make the times Much more comparable. They've got enough playing room in the motors to dial it wherever they want (within reason), so I'm at a loss why they make it that much slower. The 3P and YP are only .3 seconds different and that would seem much more reasonable, giving the AWD Y a real world time of 4.4 secs before a sure-to-be-coming boost.

why don't you not 'believe' the previous poster? Also, what do you know about the motor to assume that there's 'playing room?' ....just want to know where you're coming from..
 
  • Like
Reactions: jmatero

moswissa

Member
Mar 20, 2020
304
129
Los angeles
First, I'll start off with the main question. Why is the Model Y AWD so much slower, 0-60, than the Model 3 AWD?

The Model 3 (without acceleration boost) has a listed 0-60mph time of 4.4 seconds, but in reality it is around 4.0-4.1 seconds after a couple of key performance enhancing software releases. Dyno tests have shown the non-boosted Model 3 AWD to have 447 HP / 397 Torque.

The Model Y has a listed 0-60mph time of 4.8 seconds and testing shows it to be around the same 4.8 seconds, even though the same performance enhanced software version is running on it. The Model Y does weight 325 lbs more, but that should not equate to .7-.8 seconds slower 0-60. The Model Y AWD reviews show it as having 384 HP / 376 Torque, so why is it so much slower than the Model 3?

Maybe I missed it, but I'm surprised that I haven't seen other AWD Model Y owners disappointed by these numbers, when compared to the similar Model 3, that only weighs 325 lbs more. I'm pretty sure that the Acceleration Boost will be offered for the Y at some point (Free $$$ for Tesla), but I would really hope that Tesla will also even out these numbers as well.

Same goes with the performance models. The M3P in reality can get 2.9 compared to reality of MYP 3.4 from what I seen so far.

I agree the that the weight issue is BS. Look at BMW for example. The m4 and m3 are near identical in performance despite the weight and size difference. Tesla is holding back on initial torque values. Who knows if they will tweak it but I think they want to keep the range up.

you sound like you should have gotten the performance model if you are itching for the quickest.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: CoastalMikey

moswissa

Member
Mar 20, 2020
304
129
Los angeles
why don't you not 'believe' the previous poster? Also, what do you know about the motor to assume that there's 'playing room?' ....just want to know where you're coming from..

There is always playing room. No doubt about that. Doesn’t have to be increase in power but rather initial torque. I think Tesla is holding back on the Y because either it’s too new or they don’t want to range decease. I’m happy with my 3.5 0-60 in a family SUV. Already ridiculous. I rarely floor it because everything goes flying inside car
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ruffles

Stach

Member
Mar 23, 2019
459
239
Madison, WI
Same goes with the performance models. The M3P in reality can get 2.9 compared to reality of MYP 3.4 from what I seen so far.

I agree the that the weight issue is BS. Look at BMW for example. The m4 and m3 are near identical in performance despite the weight and size difference. Tesla is holding back on initial torque values. Who knows if they will tweak it but I think they want to keep the range up.

you sound like you should have gotten the performance model if you are itching for the quickest.

I hear you, I'd love the YP, but unfortunately I don't have $10K burning a hole in my pocket, that couldn't be used better elsewhere. I do however have $2,000 burning a hole in my pocket, so I'm planning on getting the Performance Boost, whenever that is made available, but I'd like the actual numbers to improve before that as well (to the 4.4-4.5 range). :)
 

Stach

Member
Mar 23, 2019
459
239
Madison, WI
There is always playing room. No doubt about that. Doesn’t have to be increase in power but rather initial torque. I think Tesla is holding back on the Y because either it’s too new or they don’t want to range decease. I’m happy with my 3.5 0-60 in a family SUV. Already ridiculous. I rarely floor it because everything goes flying inside car

There'd only be a range decrease if you floored it all the time (past what you could before), right? That would be my bad and I can live with that. :)
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Arctic_White

Stach

Member
Mar 23, 2019
459
239
Madison, WI
why don't you not 'believe' the previous poster? Also, what do you know about the motor to assume that there's 'playing room?' ....just want to know where you're coming from..

There's playing room because the AWD M3 and AWD MY have the exact same motors, yet they have very different HP and TQ numbers currently (non-Performance Boost)

M3 AWD = 447 HP / 397 Torque
MY AWD = 384 HP / 376 Torque
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: Arctic_White

Snow Drift

[Off-Road Assist] Activated
Feb 10, 2016
1,982
1,519
Long Island
There's playing room because the AWD M3 and AWD MY have the exact same motors, yet they have very different HP and TQ numbers currently (non-Performance Boost)

M3 AWD = 447 HP / 397 Torque
MY AWD = 384 HP / 376 Torque
Where are these numbers from? Are they from the same dyno, and the same state of charge?

In terms of physics vs. the M3: The Model Y is an SUV. It weighs more, is wider, has a taller roof, different rear shape, rides higher off the ground and has larger tires, which all decrease 0-60.
 

jmatero

Member
Feb 5, 2020
550
446
San Jose, CA, USA
There's playing room because the AWD M3 and AWD MY have the exact same motors, yet they have very different HP and TQ numbers currently (non-Performance Boost)

M3 AWD = 447 HP / 397 Torque
MY AWD = 384 HP / 376 Torque

It might be the larger tire diameter according to post #10 (assuming the HP/Torque numbers are at the contact patch). So many reasons this may be the case. The torque/range on the X are less than the S.
 

About Us

Formed in 2006, Tesla Motors Club (TMC) was the first independent online Tesla community. Today it remains the largest and most dynamic community of Tesla enthusiasts. Learn more.

Do you value your experience at TMC? Consider becoming a Supporting Member of Tesla Motors Club. As a thank you for your contribution, you'll get nearly no ads in the Community and Groups sections. Additional perks are available depending on the level of contribution. Please visit the Account Upgrades page for more details.


SUPPORT TMC
Top