Confirmed... Model 3 will have ludicrous mode

[ModelNforNerd]

What are you talking about? Aluminum has the same properties today as it did 10 years ago, as does steel; those properties being different between the two metals. The reasons to use aluminum over steel goes beyond weight difference. No magic involved at anytime in history.

I have to agree. everyone gave Ford a hard time for going to aluminum in their truck lineup, and they ended up with the best rating on the "frontal overlap" test.

and we already know how safe aluminum is in the S and X.

 

[Red Sage]

For me, it's 5-65 on short on-ramps. There are some around me that you have to have a deathwish to attempt to use.

In my younger days, when I drove terrible cars, I would drive 5 minutes out of my way to get on the highway at a safer onramp.

I understand. Most ramps to the freeway in Los Angeles are OK. They would be BETTER if some IDIOT hadn't decided to put a friggin' signal light in the middle of them, or even further along, in a failed attempt to stagger traffic. It actually CREATES traffic, and wastes fuel. First by sitting there at a RED light; second, by forcing people to accelerate harder over a shorter distance to reach speed. It would better to teach people how to drive in a courteous manner, allowing people to merge when coming onto the freeway, and remove the stupid signal lights because they cause more harm than good.

When it comes to exit ramps though, we are pretty spoiled here. If the orange sign cautions 35 MPH, you can generally ignore it and drive 20-to-25 MPH faster than that rather safely -- unless it is raining. Several years ago I learned to pay closer attention though, because driving across I-40 in Tennessee during Winter, I learned that if a sign said you should exit at 25 MPH -- they were NOT lying! Those were some of the shortest exit ramps I've ever seen. Woof!

 

[ModelNforNerd]

I understand. Most ramps to the freeway in Los Angeles are OK. They would be BETTER if some IDIOT hadn't decided to put a friggin' signal light in the middle of them, or even further along, in a failed attempt to stagger traffic. It actually CREATES traffic, and wastes fuel. First by sitting there at a RED light; second, by forcing people to accelerate harder over a shorter distance to reach speed. It would better to teach people how to drive in a courteous manner, allowing people to merge when coming onto the freeway, and remove the stupid signal lights because they cause more harm than good.

When it comes to exit ramps though, we are pretty spoiled here. If the orange sign cautions 35 MPH, you can generally ignore it and drive 20-to-25 MPH faster than that rather safely -- unless it is raining. Several years ago I learned to pay closer attention though, because driving across I-40 in Tennessee during Winter, I learned that if a sign said you should exit at 25 MPH -- they were NOT lying! Those were some of the shortest exit ramps I've ever seen. Woof!

yea, there are many ramps in the Northeast that are pretty scary. Around me, it's usually the ramps going to residential areas. they've at least made an effort to make ramps going to places the big trucks go wide and sweeping. those are fun to take at 45-50mph.

i am glad we never did the stoplights at on-ramps thing around here. it baffled me when visiting the Phoenix area.

I have no doubts that a PxxD-L will be just fine getting on or off the highway. I test drive a P90DL, and it did just fine on the Mass Pike.

 

[Krugerrand]

No. Alloys, fab tech, and designs are constantly changing for both aluminum and steel.

It's something people don't understand about manufacturing. They think it's primitive technology compared to stock speculation or social media marketing analysis. Few people know that large improvements were made in metallurgy in the last 20 years.

There are still scientists and engineers working every day to make stronger aluminum and steel products, and people working to make them cheaper as well.

Let me remind you of your statement: Aluminum was magic in the auto industry 10 years ago, but has since lost most it's edge.

I gather from what you've now said that you believe those 'scientists' working on aluminum AND steel products have accomplished more with steel over the last 10 years than aluminum in that same time period? Otherwise this last post by you contradicts the original statement you made.

So, I ask again - what exactly were you talking about when you said "Aluminum was magic in the auto industry 10 years ago, but has since lost most of it's (should be its, btw) edge." Feel free to elaborate as you're now talking to someone that knows this area quite well and for far longer than just the past 10 or even 20 years.

What 'magic' were you referring to specifically? For example; Is there a type of steel (like a super low carbon stainless) that ISN'T prohibitively expensive or overly heavy (like a super low carbon stainless) that also doesn't rust, or does aluminum still rule the magic in that area? And if so, just exactly how do you deep draw super low carbon stainless steel that isn't prohibitively expensive or overly heavy and not have it split?

 

[McRat]

I have to agree. everyone gave Ford a hard time for going to aluminum in their truck lineup, and they ended up with the best rating on the "frontal overlap" test.

and we already know how safe aluminum is in the S and X.

Yet the steel Mustang scores 5/5/5/5.

 

[Red Sage]

I'm not sure how long that has been true...

Pretty much since, like, forever and stuff. Car companies that value reliability, durability, longevity, and a reputation for maintaining those factors build their cars to last, and design them to protect themselves. I'd expect Rolls-Royce, Cadillac, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, and Honda are among those with that general attitude.

Others, like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Nissan, BMW, and Porsche...? [HECK], no. The more often you can break the car, the more often their 'independent franchised dealerships' can charge you up the ying-yang for repair costs. From their point of view, "You pays your money and you takes your chances.... SUCKER!!!" And when it comes to aftermarket tuning for any car that becomes that much more true, especially if you choose to 'track' it.

Your engine fails while driving at 65 MPH on I-10? No problem. That is warranty service.

You throw a rod while taking the corkscrew at Laguna Seca? Dude. That's a PERSONAL problem. Will that be cash, charge, or check?

 

[ModelNforNerd]

Yet the steel Mustang scores 5/5/5/5.

apples and oranges. but both metals have scored well in crash tests

 

[Red Sage]

Yet the steel Mustang scores 5/5/5/5.

They don't sell 750,000 of the Mustang in the US every year, either. The use of aluminum in the F-Series was to reduce their weight, thereby improving their fuel economy, ahead of CAFE regulation changes that will include those vehicles in the metric. If Ford had not made this change, they would have been [FOULED] when the F-Series was added to their CAFE. Its previous fuel economy ratings would have dragged the whole company down a very deep hole. Using aluminum instead of steel helped them out a LOT.

 

[Mad Hungarian]

Actually, I'm not sure we really know why the car shuts down, or what the trigger is. Or at least we didn't know last I looked.

The car could be monitoring temperatures, or it could be just based on duty cycle (ie, "no more than 2 min @ full throttle every 10 min"); we don't really know the weakest link.

I'd also have a hard time seeing the car make it through a typical track day (4 sessions, ~25 min each) on a charge. Maybe if you head over to RV parking (which a lot of tracks have, either for spectators or racers) and plug into a 14-50 for 90 min of charge. Maybe.

I'm still a real noob when it comes to EV tech, so please take everything I say on this subject with a shaker full of salt. But I've seen a few articles about lapping an S at the Nurburgring that imply one can prolong full power on the track by reducing the regen intensity to minimum, I assume because this reduces load on the inverter by not having to convert A/C energy back into to the DC pack. I also imagine the pack itself stays cooler by not being charged under deceleration?
In any case they're going to have to come up with some kind of solution for this if the Electric GT series is to be successful. Strangely no mention of cooling system or electronics mods in that article, wonder how they're going to deal with it...

 

[McRat]

Let me remind you of your statement: Aluminum was magic in the auto industry 10 years ago, but has since lost most it's edge.

I gather from what you've now said that you believe those 'scientists' working on aluminum AND steel products have accomplished more with steel over the last 10 years than aluminum in that same time period? Otherwise this last post by you contradicts the original statement you made.

So, I ask again - what exactly were you talking about when you said "Aluminum was magic in the auto industry 10 years ago, but has since lost most of it's (should be its, btw) edge." Feel free to elaborate as you're now talking to someone that knows this area quite well and for far longer than just the past 10 or even 20 years.

What 'magic' were you referring to specifically? For example; Is there a type of steel (like a super low carbon stainless) that ISN'T prohibitively expensive or overly heavy (like a super low carbon stainless) that also doesn't rust, or does aluminum still rule the magic in that area? And if so, just exactly how do you deep draw super low carbon stainless steel that isn't prohibitively expensive or overly heavy and not have it split?

When they solved the cracking issue for chassis structures, aluminum became a wonder metal, but then hydroforming improved steel alloys cut into the weight savings.

Aluminum still has issues with fatigue cracks at attachment points, hence why many "aluminum" chassis are actually a blend of steel, aluminum and reinforced polymers.

It's interesting to see that newer satellites are getting less and less aluminum content in them. They are almost entirely carbon fiber, titanium and ferrous alloys.

 

[McRat]

Pretty much since, like, forever and stuff. Car companies that value reliability, durability, longevity, and a reputation for maintaining those factors build their cars to last, and design them to protect themselves. I'd expect Rolls-Royce, Cadillac, Mercedes-Benz, Toyota, and Honda are among those with that general attitude.

Others, like Ferrari, Lamborghini, Nissan, BMW, and Porsche...? [HECK], no. The more often you can break the car, the more often their 'independent franchised dealerships' can charge you up the ying-yang for repair costs. From their point of view, "You pays your money and you takes your chances.... SUCKER!!!" And when it comes to aftermarket tuning for any car that becomes that much more true, especially if you choose to 'track' it.

Your engine fails while driving at 65 MPH on I-10? No problem. That is warranty service.

You throw a rod while taking the corkscrew at Laguna Seca? Dude. That's a PERSONAL problem. Will that be cash, charge, or check?

No car company covers organized competition under warranty. However, if you want to lap your GM product for fun, it is covered.

http://jalopnik.com/scared-to-take-your-car-out-for-a-track-day-gm-can-cha-1768765826

I have no idea whether other brands cover their cars when used for their design intent, but GM has never questioned me on warranty work, and they absolutely know how I use them.

 

[Red Sage]

But I've seen a few articles about lapping an S at the Nurburgring that imply one can prolong full power on the track by reducing the regen intensity to minimum, I assume because this reduces load on the inverter by not having to convert A/C energy back into to the DC pack. I also imagine the pack itself stays cooler by not being charged under deceleration?

That may well be the case. Can't say as I know for certain. But by reducing the Regen amount, it would put less stress on the Contactor through which the battery power flows in both directions.

My feeling though is that people are likely driving the car wrong... Yeah, I know, traditionally there is 'no coasting in racing' but I strongly believe the opposite would yield better performance on the track with an electric car. But I would try to use regen as I approach corners, and brake VERY late, then SMASH THE LIVING [HECK] out of the GO pedal on exit from turns.

I liken this to the fact that the fastest way around a track in a rear wheel drive car is not the same as it would be in a front wheel drive car. If you try to drive a FWD car like a RWD car, whipping the steering wheel in a countersteer -- the car will go where you point it -- and you will crash. A lesson a Buddy of mine learned -- while I was in the passenger seat, damn him -- when going through a local test track (large abandoned roadway around a defunct dealership).

 

[McRat]

Charging or discharging a battery both heat up the battery. For racing, you turn off Regen and use brakes.

 

[Mad Hungarian]

While this is true, the problem is that battery packs need to be kept cool, but within a rather narrow optimum range, between about 65° F and 95° F. With an ICE, the range is much wider, from about 200° F to nearly 500° F, depending upon if it is water cooled or air cooled. The fact that the Tesla Model S is as capable as it is, with its internals essentially being at room temperature, is absolutely astounding.

The problem isn't really the cooling system, so much as Tesla Motors' firm commitment to longevity and durability. The system shuts down so that you don't break it. An ICE will just give you a warning, then let you break it anyway.

Perhaps the time will come when a new battery chemistry/technology appears, that allows a wider range of operation, while still providing the energy/power density that is necessary for a Performance EV. In fact, even if it could survive LOWER temperatures, it would help a lot. Because then Tesla Motors engineers could just supercool the entire assembly. It may not be possible to build a system that would operate at 200° to 500° though...

I'd LOVE a battery back that performs well at low temps because:
1. Canada
2. I'm going to winter rally mine (can't WAIT to see the reaction the start when I show up... a row of LEDs blazing across the front of the 3)

 

[brianman]

can you one-pedal a Tesla through an Autocross course?

Not with a decent time.

 

[brianman]

considering its size (wheelbase) and (optional) adjustable air suspension, I would imagine a 3 will be able to hold its own on Autocross.

I expect/hope Model 3 to be significantly better than Model S at autocross -- weight and shape. What I'm curious about is lapping.

 

[Mad Hungarian]

I expect/hope Model 3 to be significantly better than Model S at autocross -- weight and shape. What I'm curious about is lapping.

I'm actually curious as to what the best setup is for autocrossing an S, and then using that to extrapolate, a 3. Considering how tight some of the courses are I'm thinking this is the one type of competition where a smaller battery car with its lighter weight might be able to outmaneuver a bigger one, even a "P". This assumes both are dual motor and have the same size/type of tires.
I base this on back in the day where I used to run better times in my Miata than many of the Corvettes (as long as there weren't any long straights!)

Edit: Apologies to the OP, we've strayed pretty far from the thread title. But since Ludicrous mode is all about maximum performance I guess we're at least staying kinda topical.

 

[WileyTheMan]

Well, they certainly don't make slow cars.

 

[zenmaster]

I know for BMWs, it's more the case that your particular dealership would ultimately decide. That said, I've never heard of a warranty claim being denied due to non-competition track use. Also, the car should hold up just fine if you're not abusing it - i.e. overheating. Your insurance company sure as hell won't honor track related damages though.

 

[e-FTW]

• The model 3 is the car I have wanted from Tesla since day 1, before the Roadster came out.
• Then they came out with the S, and had the 'P' versions. Oh my, I want that!
• Then the D versions confirmed I wanted AWD like my last few cars (WRX).
• And now this Ludicrous business has me wanting nutcase acceleration.

Last September, I finally ordered and took delivery of my s70, a.k.a. "The Slow Base One". And I could not be happier. And it is not very slow. I get reactions from passengers every time I mash the go-pedal. So, if you don't have the "sickness" like I do, a non-Ludicrous is plenty fast. Especially if you get dual motors, like most folks do.

As for me, my long term plan is still in effect, and the Model 3, with dual-motors, and performance package is still what I actually want. The S is much larger than what I need. My deposit is in, and well, I figure if I can make the cost of a base S work, I will probably go all out on the 3.