Yeah.... probably pads get glazed because of heat first time around during that brutal braking.... probably not very good pads... easy fix... they could optimize the max pressure you can apply on the pads so you can't glaze them and still have a decent stopping distance, so the guys from CR can't complain.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Braking distance concern by Consumer Reports
- Thread starter SoCalDude
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3 Tesla Inc.
Yeah.... probably pads get glazed because of heat first time around during that brutal braking.... probably not very good pads... easy fix... they could optimize the max pressure you can apply on the pads so you can't glaze them and still have a decent stopping distance, so the guys from CR can't complain.
Ha. Yes, a single panic stop from any legal speed (plus human adjustment) is a requirement.
Real world, no one should be panic stopping from 60MPH every mile.
A mile to dissipate 620 kJ (3,800 lb 88ft/sec). If each rotor is 13.2 lbs (6 kg of carbon steel at 0.49 kJ/ (kg×K) and 70% braking is done by fronts, that's a temp rise of 74 C each event. For reference, DOT4 fluid is speced at 230C fresh. Unless those areo covers pump air across the rotors, I can see them getting toasty in only a few stops.
Plus, is there a time between stops along with the distance? Or is it stop, 0-60 weeeee, stop, 0-60 weeee? Or creep along for a mile then floor it and brake?
Sorry, this sentence makes little grammatical sense. Can you try again.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
On a mountain road with "spirited" driving you could certainly brake from 60mph every mile! Repeated 60-30mph stops are nearly as bad a 60-0. I've been known to accelerate and then brake for turns. If this is truly "within spec" then Tesla needs to make that information available because it is certainly well below industry standard.
What annoys me most about braking distance numbers is they leave out the decision and reaction time of the driver. Monash University in Australia have shown that a typical driver will need 1.5 seconds to make a decision and get their foot on the brake. 60 mph = 88 feet per second, thus it takes a driver 132 feet before they touch the brake. If the driver is alert and concentrating, this distance can be halved, If the driver is distracted then it can be doubled! When the biggest determinant of overall braking distance is down to the driver, hand-wringing over 20 or 30 feet seems trivial.
Yes I do. Sticking to the theme of cars, or rather automobiles, same goes for Car and Driver. Everyone has opinions friend. I have mine as well.
At 71 years of age, my skin is pretty thick. G'day.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
20 or 30 feet could be the difference between hitting the car in front of you or not!
Should they just add an offset to all published braking distances? What would be the point of that? I think everyone understands that braking distance is the distance from when you hit the pedal to when you stop. No one is going to think it counts distance where you're not pressing the brake pedal. That would be ridiculous.
True, the top 1/2 of the speed is 3/4 of the energy. 'Spirited' driving appreciates engine braking or copious regen if one is minimizing braking time. It also appreciates wheels that let the brakes breathe (take the mileage extending covers off)
I've done Angeles Crest highway many times. In the mid 70's, I did a lot of Angeles Crest down Route 39 to the San Gabriel Valley many more times. If the Model 3 "has it all" based on this test, I would definitely give it two thumbs up. One misjudged curve on this road with substandard braking and you're down the side of the mountain for say, 300 - 500' or more.
The Highway code in the UK does that very thing (accounts for reaction time and publishes an overall braking distance). I agree 20 or 30 feet could make a difference, but if a driver hits the car in front, that driver was travelling too close! When the driver reaction variation could be 66ft to 250 ft. That's where the focus should be. If all driver's were focused on the job at hand and 66 ft reaction was possible the 20 to 30 extra feet would be far more meaningful. Here's discussion of those distances (Stopping distances in the Highway Code are wrong - Chalkdust) The author is using outdated Highway code numbers, but mentions the differing thinking distance recommendations of different countries.
The Highway code in the UK does that very thing (accounts for reaction time and publishes an overall braking distance). I agree 20 or 30 feet could make a difference, but if a driver hits the car in front, that driver was travelling too close! When the driver reaction variation could be 66ft to 250 ft. That's where the focus should be. If all driver's were focused on the job at hand and 66 ft reaction was possible the 20 to 30 extra feet would be far more meaingful.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I guess we should get rid of abs, disc brakes, airbags, etc. because if you get in an accident it's really your own fault. How is this thread becoming a debate about how good brakes really need to be? I think brakes that stop the car faster are better. There is no reason to have substandard brakes. If Tesla truly chose to put a substandard braking system on the Model 3 then how do you explain why they are so large that they require 18" wheels?
It looks like it is software limited. I’d be curious to know why Tesla does this. This is not rocket science. CR has loads of experience doing this testing and their reputation is on the line here. If they are putting out false reports then Tesla should be sending a rebuttal shortly. The fact that Tesla chose to respond the way they did says a lot. I think Tesla owes the public and current owners a valid response. When early adopters like all of us buy a car without even driving it first we expect it to be reasonably safe. Inconsistent braking is not safe.
Similar threads
