Does 0 to 60 really matter? What about 55 to 75?

[StealthP3D]

Just think what it was like for Texans like us moving to Redmond, WA back in the 1980s! I flew up there in August for an interview and when I walked out of SeaTac I thought, "there must be a huge AC blower at the door, it cools so far out". Nope, it was the natural cool air. It was hilarious listening to people on the radio complaining about the "heat"

Unfortunately, by the time we moved there in September, it started sprinkling and didn't stop for nine months!

You were blessed! Nothing like a refreshing cool sprinkle! Ok, maybe 2 feet of powder snow! Just keep those blast furnaces away from me and I'm a happy camper.

 

[holmgang]

I couldn’t disagree more.

Pro tip: Very few Californians refer to their state as Cali. That abbreviation is almost universally used by out-of-staters.

The dispute almost as old as time itself ! I've heard the same about "Cali" "SF" "San Fran" "Frisco" etc. In the decade I lived there (408), I've heard locals use all of the above....hella times

Regarding the DCT (Dual Clutch Transmission). They are great at full throttle. Have the smoothest transfer of torque between gearshifts, as the higher gear gets engaged before the lower gear disengages. Makes lighting fast shifts when passing at full throttle.

However for around town traffic and parking lot situations it sucked big time. Horrible throttle modulation at low RPMs and miserable driving experience. Best used on the open roads where it was excellent.

That's why they are falling out of favor compared to modern torque-converter automatic transmission, which have 95% of the performance and retain driveability. Alfa Romeo, Supras, Maseratis, etc

[Quote
Nothing in the future is going to be better, overall than direct drive, single speed transmissions. They work quietly, efficiently, require almost no maintenance, package well with electric drive and cost far less than any multi speed transmission.[/quote] Yes. Less is more. Simpler is better. Transmissions weren't invented for the sake of invention. They came out of a need to translate limited range of input speed (=motor) to wider range of output speed (=road). Existing EV motors have sufficient range for operating conditions (0-100,125,150) that multispeeds like in Taycan is just for bragging rights.

Even in my big, lumbering, Model X, I can thread through traffic better than anything. Nobody gets any auditory warning that I am coming and I am where I want to be before anybody can even think of cutting me off.

If everyone else is so darn slow with their turbo lag and their clunky transmission, they won't have an opportunity to cut you off, will they? Even if your car announced itself with a roar.....

Some efficiencies can also be achieved by putting different gear ratios in the front and rear motors. Use the lower gearing for fast acceleration and the higher gearing for highway cruising.

so you have twice the weight and have only use 1 motor at a time? Or you mean match the road speeds so that both motors are used concurrently , but spinning at different internal RPM -- a sort of complementary torque-fill situation? Plausible, but probably unecessary unless you need to travel at 150-200. The torque band in Tesla is more than good enough to cover usable range with a single gear ratio

 

[StealthP3D]

So you have twice the weight and have only use 1 motor at a time? Or you mean match the road speeds so that both motors are used concurrently , but spinning at different internal RPM -- a sort of complementary torque-fill situation? Plausible, but probably unecessary unless you need to travel at 150-200. The torque band in Tesla is more than good enough to cover usable range with a single gear ratio

"Twice the weight" is not very meaningful unless you know what the weight is. The primary reason to use dual electric motors is so all 4 wheels can be driven. This is useful under slippery conditions or when the driving surface is not flat.

The downside to AWD in an EV is not the clunky, expensive, overly heavy solution that is generally used in a fossil car. If you are not using dual motors for performance reasons, then both motors can be downsized to save weight and cost. In the future, we will see non-performance EV's that are inexpensive and highly efficient with a small motor on (or inside) each wheel. If the motors are not in the hubs, the front motors will probably be geared about 30% higher to take advantage of the motors torque/efficiency curves. I predict eventually the motors will have such ideal torque/efficiency curves there will be no gear reduction used in any EV except for high-performance EV's.

My wife's LR RWD Model 3 only has one motor and a gear reduction unit but it has excellent real-world performance, better than most "performance" cars until you get into the more expensive very high-performance class.

 

[brianman]

It's my understanding that to get the 2.4 second 0-60 time you need to turn on Ludicrous mode then mess with the brake+accelerator pedals when launching. And without that you end up with the standard Performance S time of 3.0. Is that not correct?

A 0.6s gap is definitely not correct for S P100D of Launch Mode vs. w/o. At least not a year ago. Maybe that changed since then. I stopped paying attention (mostly) once I traded in for Model 3 Performance.

 

[FoverM]

A 0.6s gap is definitely not correct for S P100D of Launch Mode vs. w/o. At least not a year ago. Maybe that changed since then. I stopped paying attention (mostly) once I traded in for Model 3 Performance.

I'm almost certain that the P100D, without Ludicrous, had a 0-60 time of 3.0 seconds when you used the online order form at tesla.com. Once you checked the Ludicrous option, the time dropped to 2.4.

 

[FoverM]

Back to the original topic, I found this link when looking up the 3P+'s times:

2018 Tesla Model 3 Performance Rules the Passing Lane

This Model 3 needed only 1.4 seconds to leap from 30 to 50 mph and just 2.0 seconds to get from 50 to 70. Never mind other sports sedans—they're not competitive by this measure. This Tesla's mid-range acceleration tops the performance of 700-hp sports cars like the Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 and Porsche 911 GT2 RS, in which there's a moment's delay while automatic transmissions downshift and engines rev up.

 

[al503]

Generally, I find that most of my acceleration is going from about 55 to 75 or 80 to pass a car in the fast lane. Does the Model 3 Performance beat ICE vehicle at this speed?

I had an RC-F (Yes. I'm positive it was an F as I test drove it and the LC prior to getting the 3.) come along side me on the highway around 60 and punch it. I did the same I easily walk him right up to about 90 when I shut down with almost ~2 car lengths on him. I was actually a little surprised as the 5.0 in the lexus, while a dog below ~4K rpm is terrific above it.

 

[GOOCHY]

55 to 75 is super quick too. You'd know if you owned one.

 

[brianman]

I'm almost certain that the P100D, without Ludicrous, had a 0-60 time of 3.0 seconds when you used the online order form at tesla.com. Once you checked the Ludicrous option, the time dropped to 2.4.

Ludicrous != Launch Mode

 

[StealthP3D]

Back to the original topic, I found this link when looking up the 3P+'s times:

2018 Tesla Model 3 Performance Rules the Passing Lane

This Model 3 needed only 1.4 seconds to leap from 30 to 50 mph and just 2.0 seconds to get from 50 to 70. Never mind other sports sedans—they're not competitive by this measure. This Tesla's mid-range acceleration tops the performance of 700-hp sports cars like the Chevrolet Corvette ZR1 and Porsche 911 GT2 RS, in which there's a moment's delay while automatic transmissions downshift and engines rev up.

Keep in mind those times were before Tesla did a free OTA flash update that increased peak hp and acceleration, particularly above 35 or 40 mph. Also, the Stealth version, with it's lighter wheels is a hair faster.

 

[Tummy]

I'm almost certain that the P100D, without Ludicrous, had a 0-60 time of 3.0 seconds when you used the online order form at tesla.com. Once you checked the Ludicrous option, the time dropped to 2.4.

On mine there are four modes. Chill, Sport, Ludicrous and Ludicrous+. I drive in Ludicrous all the time and people are getting about 2.5 seconds without launch mode or Ludicrous+. L+ is the battery heating mode and combined with the launch procedure, gets you down to 2.3s or less according to Car and Driver magazine. At one point Ludicrous was an option for a few months, but they made it standard again. I test drove a 3 Performance and there is no comparison, but I think it’s to the point that much faster acceleration, sub 2s in the Roadster or Plaid S, would probably stop being fun and become physically painful.