CR full test of Model 3 - falls short on recommendation

[N5329K]

Methodical yes, but was the testing regime correct?



So doing the same test led to the same pattern.
What was the test?

Makes sense.

Okay, now we have a potential issue. They assume a mile of driving cools the brakes off. Is this ever verified? Remember the wheel looks like this (from the CR article)
View attachment 302772
vs other cars that look like:
View attachment 302773
Which brakes are going to cool off faster?


If, the brakes were over heated and pads glazed, the overnight cool down would do nothing to improve the stopping power.

All true.
Robin

 

[Daniel in SD]

The idea that the pads are getting glazed doesn't really make sense to me. If the pads were limiting the performance then ABS would not be activated on the second stop (or maybe just be activated for only part of the stop?). That's what ABS does, it REDUCES brake pressure so if your brakes don't have enough power it will never detect wheel slip and will not modulate the brakes. I would certainly notice if I pressed the brake to the floor and the ABS did not activate. That would be an extremely alarming situation! You would think a professional car reviewer would also notice and mention it as the cause in the review. It's all very bizarre. I wish I had a Model 3 so I could test it myself...

 

[RTPGiants]

All the way to 0? I do wonder where the deficiency if it exists shows up. At the beginning of the stop, the middle, or the end... would be interesting to know.

This would be interesting to know for sure.

 

[Daniel in SD]

This would be interesting to know for sure.

Doesn't anyone here have access to a G-tech and straight section of road?
There is someone in the office who's offered me a test drive...

 

[mongo]

The idea that the pads are getting glazed doesn't really make sense to me. If the pads were limiting the performance then ABS would not be activated on the second stop (or maybe just be activated for only part of the stop?). That's what ABS does, it REDUCES brake pressure so if your brakes don't have enough power it will never detect wheel slip and will not modulate the brakes. I would certainly notice if I pressed the brake to the floor and the ABS did not activate. That would be an extremely alarming situation! You would think a professional car reviewer would also notice and mention it as the cause in the review. It's all very bizarre. I wish I had a Model 3 so I could test it myself...

Where are you getting the data that ABS was activating? The linked CR page never mentions ABS. Potentially, the rear wheels were still locking, but the fronts were less effective. There is only one ABS pump, so could a driver differentiate the number of wheels being pulsed?

 

[Az_Rael]

I will tell you how many times I have adjusted my mirror in this one month - ONE TIME. ONE freakin time. Thats it. I adjusted them once when I picked up the car, and my wife did it once for her and we have our profiles. I never touched that control again.

Anyway the complaint amount mirrors is just plain silly

Not silly. Several of us are having issues with our mirrors returning to the correct position after reverse or someone else's setting. That makes it so you have to adjust the mirrors a lot. I turned off auto tilt until I can get my car to the SC for the 2nd time on this issue. The on screen controls just make this issue all the more annoying, especially after they changed it to only work with one scroll wheel.

Side Mirror Adjustment

 

[BioSehnsucht]

I highly doubt the Model 3 has a single channel ABS system. 3-channel (2 separate front, 1 rear shared) was already considered mediocre in the 90's. Should be a 4 channel system.

 

[Ruffles]

The problem I have with CR is that they use one piece of objective data - 150 foot stopping distance - to substantiate a bunch of other subjective data - such as the rear seat felt too firm or the controls might take longer to become familiar with etc. Then they say look at all the reasons why we can't recommend.

Tesla will address the stopping distance. They will either explain why the CR test is flawed and release video of their own tests and site other sources etc. or they will fix the problem and then announce how they value 3rd party feedback and safety is paramount blah blah blah. The harder part is addressing the other bogus stuff because it's all opinion and people will subconsciously equate the softness of the rear seat cushion as just as important as stopping distance because it was in the same list of reasons why CR didn't recommend the car.

 

[Daniel in SD]

The problem I have with CR is that they use one piece of objective data - 150 foot stopping distance - to substantiate a bunch of other subjective data - such as the rear seat felt too firm or the controls might take longer to become familiar with etc. Then they say look at all the reasons why we can't recommend.

Tesla will address the stopping distance. They will either explain why the CR test is flawed and release video of their own tests and site other sources etc. or they will fix the problem and then announce how they value 3rd party feedback and safety is paramount blah blah blah. The harder part is addressing the other bogus stuff because it's all opinion and people will subconsciously equate the softness of the rear seat cushion as just as important as stopping distance because it was in the same list of reasons why CR didn't recommend the car.

The rear seat IS horrible! That is objectively true. Consumers should know that if they're thinking about buying a Model 3. The controls seem fine to me but I can imagine that they're not for everyone. I didn't like their comment about the regen at the end though. They seem biased against it. One foot driving is great.

 

[Daniel in SD]

Where are you getting the data that ABS was activating? The linked CR page never mentions ABS. Potentially, the rear wheels were still locking, but the fronts were less effective. There is only one ABS pump, so could a driver differentiate the number of wheels being pulsed?

Because anyone that drives cars for a living would notice if the ABS did not activate. I would stop driving the car immediately if that happened. You're right it might be hard to tell if only some of the brakes failed.

 

[mongo]

I highly doubt the Model 3 has a single channel ABS system. 3-channel (2 separate front, 1 rear shared) was already considered mediocre in the 90's. Should be a 4 channel system.

It needs 4 channel for traction control due to the open differentials. There is still only one ABS pump though.

 

[voip-ninja]

I wonder if the brakes were fixed if it would still miss on a recommendation since they also criticized the touch screen controls and the poor rear seat comfort.

 

[Electroman]

Not silly. Several of us are having issues with our mirrors returning to the correct position after reverse or someone else's setting. That makes it so you have to adjust the mirrors a lot. I turned off auto tilt until I can get my car to the SC for the 2nd time on this issue. The on screen controls just make this issue all the more annoying, especially after they changed it to only work with one scroll wheel.

Side Mirror Adjustment

That is a specific defect in your car that need to be fixed. But the point remains that any car with no mirror defect like yours, you will perhaps adjust them once every .... perhaps one year ?

And all the whining is for that? You know why because we are all used to adjusting the mirror using physical controls all through our lives even though we rarely touch them.

 

[SteveG3]

I wonder if the brakes were fixed if it would still miss on a recommendation since they also criticized the touch screen controls and the poor rear seat comfort.

fwiw, the gas powered 3 series scored a 78 and is recommended, Model 3 scored a 72 and is not.

Edit: Interestingly enough, the details of the ratings for the Model 3 now are all blanked out (were there this afternoon), and the page with those details say "in testing" again (other pages still show 72 overall score). Could well be nothing, but, perhaps CR has taken a step back to look further into this braking situation.

 

[ohmman]

mod note: 8 posts moved to quarantine. TMC is not the place for political discussion, per the Terms and Rules.

 

[xav-]

So most magazines are seeing variable results with the brakes. The brake pads aren’t up to the abuse associated with multiple repeated stops. They were probably designed to work best under normal circumstances. Panic stop followed by continued driving and not another panic stop for a long time. When tested the stopping distance gets longer if little time is left to cool them. No big surprise and not good for track duty. CR let’s them cool between stops. I wonder if they cooled them by driving normally or put the car in park for a set amount of time and repeat. This would be a bad idea and could lead to damage or glazing of the rear pads since the parking brake clamps down when the car is in park. This could cause the problems CR found. If this is what they did this proves how inept CR is at testing vehicles.

I don’t mean to be offensive but can we please stop finding excuses for this. 155 feet is unacceptable. Even 133 feet is highly questionable for a $55k car this size or for a car that is sold as the safest car in its class. It’s not the reviewer’s fault, it’s not the fact that it’s electric..

Also let’s not imply that this only impact racing the car on the track... brakes are not just designed for the track. If all we care is “under normal circumstances” then maybe we should get rid of features like AEB, seat belts, anti lock brakes or traction control.

If you own the car you are very welcome to put your car to the test and validate your theory. I will not do that with mine because I strongly suspect that doing a couple of these 60 to 0 tests is going to mess up my brake pads and I will be vulnerable to this issue.

 

[SteveG3]

I don’t mean to be offensive but can we please stop finding excuses for this. 155 feet is unacceptable. Even 133 feet is highly questionable for a $55k car this size or for a car that is sold as the safest car in its class. It’s not the reviewer’s fault, it’s not the fact that it’s electric..

Also let’s not imply that this only impact racing the car on the track... brakes are not just designed for the track. If all we care is “under normal circumstances” then maybe we should get rid of features like AEB, seat belts, anti lock brakes or traction control.

If you own the car you are very welcome to put your car to the test and validate your theory. I will not do that with mine because I strongly suspect that doing a couple of these 60 to 0 tests is going to mess up my brake pads and I will be vulnerable to this issue.

Strongly agree that whatever led to the 152 foot number is highly important to understand and respond to.

As to 133 feet being “highly questionable” for a car in the Model 3’s class, are you aware in CR’s testing of 2018 models, the results were 132, 136, and 135 feet respectively for the BMW 3 series, Mercedes C Class and Audi A4?

 

[xav-]

I wonder if the brakes were fixed if it would still miss on a recommendation since they also criticized the touch screen controls and the poor rear seat comfort.

As much as I think they are on to something witj those brakes. Their criticism of the touch screen is beyond idiotic. Wind noise, while being a bit high, is not a valid reason to give a better rating to an ICE. That makes so sense. Of course I wish tesla had done a better job insulating the car. But a 3 series has a better rating? That’s laughable.

 

[Az_Rael]

That is a specific defect in your car that need to be fixed. But the point remains that any car with no mirror defect like yours, you will perhaps adjust them once every .... perhaps one year ?

And all the whining is for that? You know why because we are all used to adjusting the mirror using physical controls all through our lives even though we rarely touch them.

OK, once my (and others, it's not just me) get our mirrors fixed, we won't be adjusting them often. The defect just highlights how hard they are to use through the screen (especially after the software update). There are times when backing in or parallel parking that I want a different mirror setting than normal reverse to see the curb, but with the current setup, I just deal vs digging into menus to adjust the mirror properly.

The one button I miss the most? Mirror Fold. I have to dig into that menu daily to park in my garage. Its very annoying and all it would have cost was 1 button by the windows like the S has. I have gotten quite the routine now - get in car, unfold mirrors (to see edge of opening while backing - its tight), reverse out of garage, bring up menu and fold mirrors just prior to garage door, close menu to see camera again, fully exit garage, open menu and unfold mirrors again, then close menu to see reverse camera.

I guess I could just summon the car eventually if I trusted it to not hit things as others have reported it sometimes doing.


Either way, I think Tesla went a bit too far with the touchscreen controls. At least until the car is actually driving me around not me driving it.

 

[xav-]

Strongly agree that whatever led to the 152 foot number is highly important to understand and respond to.

As to 133 feet being “highly questionable” for a car in the Model 3’s class, are you aware in CR’s testing of 2018 models, the results were 132, 136, and 135 feet respectively for the BMW 3 series, Mercedes C Class and Audi A4?

Then I do not know how they test their cars because I have seen numbers on motortrend as low as 119 feet for a Nissan Altima. I saw something similar for the Chevy volt.

But then if we rely on CR we have to also trust that 155 feet figure.. we can’t just cherry pick the numbers that we like and ignore the rest...

IMO when I drive the car I feel those brakes are not strong. Also Edmunds if I recollect said that the braking results were not strong. Then we have that user here who lost his brakes after 4 laps on the track.

I don’t know I think CR is on to something for once.