There was a free performance boost update in late 2019 that improved the LR AWD M3 0-60 performance by ~10%, which put it down into the 4.0-4.1 range. I'm not sure why they never updated the official specs on it. I can't recall if that performance boost was a lineup wide thing or just the M3 though, so who knows if it had any impact on the Y.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
AWD Y Much Slower Than AWD 3
- Thread starter Stach
- Start date
There was a free performance boost update in late 2019 that improved the LR AWD M3 0-60 performance by ~10%, which put it down into the 4.0-4.1 range. I'm not sure why they never updated the official specs on it. I can't recall if that performance boost was a lineup wide thing or just the M3 though, so who knows if it had any impact on the Y.
I'm in the same boat. As much fun as the 3.5sec would be, I'd rarely ever be flooring my MY other than when I first get it, so the value isn't there for me for an extra 10K for a performance enhancement that I'll rarely use. 4.8 with the instant torque is still plenty fast relative to comparable ICE vehicles out there. I was happy with my LR AWD M3 acceleration at the 4.1 range, so I never opted for the acceleration boost to get it down to 3.6. I may however drop for the acceleration boost if they offer it on the MY and the boost puts it down in the <=4.2 range.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).
Agree, it’s rather noticeable in the Tesla context. The first time we tested the MYP I had to double-check we got the correct trim.
I didn’t expect it to be as quick given weight and profile, but for that to be on the very initial part of the acceleration is a little surprising.
I do wonder if this is strategic by Tesla. The MY is going to sell well regardless of a little less acceleration. If a little quicker, would it cannibalize the M3 too much? I could see Tesla waiting until they have more MY sold, plus modifications and production cost savings to M3, then leverage these captive consumers into freemium performance upgrades for MY and increase price of faster new MY. Such upgrades would also be great marketing of OTA capabilities, even if a ruse and staged
Mo City
Active Member
I own a Model 3 AWD and test drove a Model Y AWD last month. The MY was noticeably slower. Disappointingly slower IMO.
For me, the one and only way the Model 3 is > Model Y is the from the standpoint of the driver. The Model 3 accelerates faster, is more nimble and more fun. Some prefer being higher off the ground in the Y but that doesn't matter to me.
However, in every other single way the Model Y is clearly superior and it's very obvious to me why it will be Tesla's flagship vehicle for the indefinite future.
For me, the one and only way the Model 3 is > Model Y is the from the standpoint of the driver. The Model 3 accelerates faster, is more nimble and more fun. Some prefer being higher off the ground in the Y but that doesn't matter to me.
However, in every other single way the Model Y is clearly superior and it's very obvious to me why it will be Tesla's flagship vehicle for the indefinite future.
I'm confused, you say that you got a 4.06 and 4.10, which is what I've seen others getting, and then you attach photos of 4.39 and 4.40 dragy results. Why the discrepancy and which one is correct?
RoBoRaT
PoPeYeD'SaiLoRDuDe
Tesla uses 0-60 with 1 ft roll out for acceleration. Those numbers are with 1 ft roll out.
Tesla is making things rather muddled by using the 1ft roll-out number for performance versions, and the regular number for everything else. Makes it impossible to do any proper comparison.
So IMHO the AWD 0-60 should be specified without the roll-out, to be able to compare with the 'official' Tesla number. Though obviously this makes it impossible to tell how far the acceleration boost improves it toward the Tesla-listed performance time
Of course the solution is to always use times with or without the roll-out (or even better, just list both).
Last edited:
RoBoRaT
PoPeYeD'SaiLoRDuDe
Tesla is making things rather muddled by using the 1ft roll-out number for performance versions, and the regular number for everything else. Makes it impossible to do any proper comparison.
So IMHO the AWD 0-60 should be specified without the roll-out, to be able to compare with the 'official' Tesla number. Though obviously this makes it impossible to tell how far the acceleration boost improves it toward the Tesla-listed performance time
Of course the solution is to always use times with or without the roll-out (or even better, just list both).
Our TMC predecessors has had the same muddled discussion about this issue with the same predicament - use 1 foot roll out or not.
Here's a snippet of a long thread about 0-60 with 1 foot roll-out numbers used by Tesla to advertise MS specs.
That Motor Trend 1 foot rollout
As my Y arrives next week, I need to ask for an unrelated comparison from the 0-60 experts in the room:
Coming from someone who has never driven a Model 3, and is currently driving a 2016 Chevrolet Spark, do you think I will notice the difference in acceleration with my Model Y? Inquiring minds desperately want to know!!!
Coming from someone who has never driven a Model 3, and is currently driving a 2016 Chevrolet Spark, do you think I will notice the difference in acceleration with my Model Y? Inquiring minds desperately want to know!!!
The AWD MY is very fast. 0-20 is fast, 20-60 hits harder than a Corvette.
The chevy spark is a sub $15k, new age econobox, that takes longer than 10 second to go 0-60. Your jaw will drop the first time you floor that accelerator in your Tesla
Tesla is making things rather muddled by using the 1ft roll-out number for performance versions, and the regular number for everything else. Makes it impossible to do any proper comparison.
So IMHO the AWD 0-60 should be specified without the roll-out, to be able to compare with the 'official' Tesla number. Though obviously this makes it impossible to tell how far the acceleration boost improves it toward the Tesla-listed performance time
Of course the solution is to always use times with or without the roll-out (or even better, just list both).
Without roll-out I've seen tested numbers range from 3.6-3.9 0-60 with the boost upgrade for the AWD 3. The discrepancy could be wheels, SOC or slope angle etc. But you're getting the advertised speed and then some. I've also seen 1/4 mile numbers at the track at around 11.7-11.8 or so which is better than expected.
There's no technical reason they can't come out with a boost upgrade for the LR AWD Y, but it could depend on how much they think it might affect MY Performance sales.
jmatero
Member
The 0-60 number that I saw was underwhelming at 5.5 secs. I guess we will eventually see if that's official.
No chance the AWD M3 has 447 HP. The performance has a little more than that to the wheels.
Similar threads
