Does the S have more "pull" at higher speeds?

[HardHitter]

I'm considering coming to Tesla. My last 3 cars are a 911 Turbo, Stage 1 RS7 and currently a 2010 manual V10 R8. As you can see, I like the torque of the turbos and/or a large N/A motor for that low end torque.

With that said, I thought a Model 3 Performance would be sufficient, and don't get me wrong, at low speeds, it is, but when cruising on the freeway at say 70-75+ and you gun it, it loses its "pull".

I know the S Performance is quite a bit faster, but will that only impact the lower speeds or higher speeds as well?

 

[jmaddr]

While I can't answer your question with direct experience or data, with the TM3 specifically, there is a point around 60 mph where the field weakening occurs and torque (greatly) and hp (to a less extent) start dropping. The TM3P and MSP do have different part numbers so of course they will be slightly different. However, I would expect a similar drop off in power and torque once that field weakening point is reached.

This dyno graph gives an indication on the crazy amount of torque drop off at field weakening.
Tesla Model 3 LR RWD Dyno Testing At Various SOC

I've said this in a previous post, but we will have multiple speed transmissions eventually in performance cars (the original Roadster had it, but the torque destroyed it in short order so it was scrapped. The new Taycan does indeed have a 2 speed transmission for exactly this). Honestly (and I can't believe I'm uttering these words as I absolutely DESPISE them) CVT's transmissions and EVs would be a match made in heaven, but there is just no way at this point CVTs can handle the torque.

The "push you back in your seat" at any speed sensation is mostly due to torque. Tesla is using field weakening to extend the operating speed of the motor today. Current motors cannot maintain max torque and power at the large speed ranges necessary for single speed operation so they introduce field weakening. Sure, wind resistance and other factors mute the torque sensation at high speeds in all cars, but that's why high torque ICE cars have a better sensation and even better acceleration given the same max torque rating at high vehicle speeds (ICE would have their max torque available as long as they are in their rev range which they can control with transmissions whereas single speed EVs will have reduced torque for all speeds above the field weakening point).

 

[HardHitter]

While I can't answer your question with direct experience or data, with the TM3 specifically, there is a point around 60 mph where the field weakening occurs and torque (greatly) and hp (to a less extent) start dropping. The TM3P and MSP do have different part numbers so of course they will be slightly different. However, I would expect a similar drop off in power and torque once that field weakening point is reached.

This dyno graph gives an indication on the crazy amount of torque drop off at field weakening.
Tesla Model 3 LR RWD Dyno Testing At Various SOC

I've said this in a previous post, but we will have multiple speed transmissions eventually in performance cars (the original Roadster had it, but the torque destroyed it in short order so it was scrapped. The new Taycan does indeed have a 2 speed transmission for exactly this). Honestly (and I can't believe I'm uttering these words as I absolutely DESPISE them) CVT's transmissions and EVs would be a match made in heaven, but there is just no way at this point CVTs can handle the torque.

The "push you back in your seat" at any speed sensation is mostly due to torque. Tesla is using field weakening to extend the operating speed of the motor today. Current motors cannot maintain max torque and power at the large speed ranges necessary for single speed operation so they introduce field weakening. Sure, wind resistance and other factors mute the torque sensation at high speeds in all cars, but that's why high torque ICE cars have a better sensation and even better acceleration given the same max torque rating at high vehicle speeds (ICE would have their max torque available as long as they are in their rev range which they can control with transmissions whereas single speed EVs will have reduced torque for all speeds above the field weakening point).

This is a great response and I appreciate being able to see the dyno chart they tested based upon charge. So I guess one follow-up question I have is, are the motors the same between the M3P and MSP? I believe the latest Raven model of the S, actually now has the front Model 3 motor, allowing it to get that extra range. What causes the increase in power between the cars? Is it literally just software or do the cars actually have different hardware (motors)? What I'm trying to get at is if the 3 and S have the same motors, then we would see the same fall off and I shouldn't expect higher HP/TQ rating at ground speeds vs a 3?

 

[serendipitous]

This is a great response and I appreciate being able to see the dyno chart they tested based upon charge. So I guess one follow-up question I have is, are the motors the same between the M3P and MSP? I believe the latest Raven model of the S, actually now has the front Model 3 motor, allowing it to get that extra range. What causes the increase in power between the cars? Is it literally just software or do the cars actually have different hardware (motors)? What I'm trying to get at is if the 3 and S have the same motors, then we would see the same fall off and I shouldn't expect higher HP/TQ rating at ground speeds vs a 3?

The Model S Performance has the Model 3's permanent-magnet rear motor in its front, and then a much-larger-than-the-Model-3 AC induction motor in the rear. It has substantially more overall motor and inverter power.

DragTimes straps Tesla Model S P100D with Ludicrous+ to dyno

Numbers start at about 5 minutes in and you can see the graph at ~5:17. This was the pre-Raven Model S, so the less efficient, slightly less powerful front AC induction motor, but likely the same rear and inverter. ~920 lb-ft and ~588 hp.

Getting pushed back into your seat at highway speeds is not an issue in the S, although it is smooth and underwhelming acoustically - my previous cars (C6 vette, 911S, E46 and E90 M3s, tuned N54 Z4, large turbo STi) gave an overall more impressive experience even though the S is quite a bit quicker.

 

[HardHitter]

There are a ton of used 2016 P100D Ludicrous for sale on Tesla's site. Is there anything major between 2016 to Raven model?

My understanding is that the Raven models are a lot more efficient due to the Model 3 motor in the front now. Just trying to evaluate comparing a brand new Model 3 Performance vs a used S for an extra $15-$20K more.

 

[bishoppeak]

Whatever torque pull is lacking in the Tesla is more than made up for by not requiring a downshift that gets any ICE car into it's power band

 

[serendipitous]

There are a ton of used 2016 P100D Ludicrous for sale on Tesla's site. Is there anything major between 2016 to Raven model?

My understanding is that the Raven models are a lot more efficient due to the Model 3 motor in the front now. Just trying to evaluate comparing a brand new Model 3 Performance vs a used S for an extra $15-$20K more.

My theory is that the more powerful and efficient front motor is limited in 90% of scenarios by the inverter at this point. You can already see that max battery output is less than rear + front max motor input. So, I believe the Raven gets the benefit in traction limited scenarios of putting more torque up front when the rear would just spin. This gives it a potential low-end benefit, and of course the longer range. I don't see much trap speed or overall power improvement in the Raven due to the motor. As you go older, the older battery packs probably won't have the output or the longevity, and they'll have many years of lithium plating and god knows what else, so keep in mind that age is a factor even if technology didn't change much. But it's probably splitting hairs in the grand scheme of things.

 

[Cory151]

. Here's is what I recently learned:

-The P100D decimated my buddies stock beautiful C6 Z06 from a stop, so he wanted to see the difference from a roll. Probably because his car doesn't seem hook up in first gear at all, in spite of having PS2 tires.

-On a 3 honk highway pull from 50mph, the P100D (70% SOC) was able pull away from the Z06 Corvette and really seemed to lengthen the lead at his shift points. This surprised both of us, as we assumed the aerodynamics of the Vette would take over but that really wasn't the case.

Does the P100DL have more top end pull than a P3D? Absolutely.As he claims to always win rol races against the P3D. P100Ds traps in the mid 120 mph range and the Performance Model 3 seem to trap around 115 mph with the latest power update. The Vette has a low 120mph trap speed.

 

[Cory151]

There are a ton of used 2016 P100D Ludicrous for sale on Tesla's site. Is there anything major between 2016 to Raven model?

My understanding is that the Raven models are a lot more efficient due to the Model 3 motor in the front now. Just trying to evaluate comparing a brand new Model 3 Performance vs a used S for an extra $15-$20K more.

Not sure anybody in a 2016 P100D gives a hoot about efficiency since all of them Supercharge for free.
I would buy the lowest priced P100D you can, or wait for the plaid addition which will run 9s and make all Ravens and P100D less desirable. I've still yet to see anybody in a Raven surpass what the "old" induction front motor P100D did in Motor trends 10.50 in the quarter mile.

2017 Tesla Model S P100D First Test: A New Record -- 0-60 MPH in 2.28 Seconds! - Motor Trend

 

[serendipitous]

. Here's is what I recently learned:

-On a 3 honk highway pull from 50mph, the P100D (70% SOC) was able pull away from the Z06 Corvette and really seemed to lengthen the lead at his shift points. This surprised both of us, as we assumed the aerodynamics of the Vette would take over but that really wasn't the case.

The Model S has one of the lowest coefficients of drag of any car at 0.24, much less than the C6 at 0.36

 

[maximizese]

Whatever torque pull is lacking in the Tesla is more than made up for by not requiring a downshift that gets any ICE car into it's power band

But downshifting is so much fun. It gives you that thrust of perceived power boost switching to a shorter gear ratio when you accelerate and makes your car sound so cool when you blip the throttle while downshifting before corner-entry.

Yes a direct drive motor has a consistent power band and you really can't beat its efficiency, but there's something more satisfying about the driver input and judgments of driving a manny tranny.

OP: I hope you never sell your R8. I had an opportunity to buy a well cared for 2010 R8 8-cyl for $54K back in 2016; I kick myself for not buying it as the market has bottomed and the prices are ascending. That's got to be the best shifter mechanism I've ever driven.

 

[panditron420]

I'm considering coming to Tesla. My last 3 cars are a 911 Turbo, Stage 1 RS7 and currently a 2010 manual V10 R8. As you can see, I like the torque of the turbos and/or a large N/A motor for that low end torque.

With that said, I thought a Model 3 Performance would be sufficient, and don't get me wrong, at low speeds, it is, but when cruising on the freeway at say 70-75+ and you gun it, it loses its "pull".

I know the S Performance is quite a bit faster, but will that only impact the lower speeds or higher speeds as well?

The S has more pull on any speed range, i've the p100d and a M3 LR but tried the M3P also. But both are so quick it's crazy, until 120mph they are unbeatable. Above 120mph both are still fast but a 400+HP ICE car will be faster.

 

[shellderp]

stomping it at 60mph still jerks you hard, but at 80+ it's much weaker. If you must have that power at any speed, wait for the model S plaid or the roadster. The feeling at low speeds is unbelievable

 

[gnxs]

I'm considering coming to Tesla. My last 3 cars are a 911 Turbo, Stage 1 RS7 and currently a 2010 manual V10 R8. As you can see, I like the torque of the turbos and/or a large N/A motor for that low end torque.

With that said, I thought a Model 3 Performance would be sufficient, and don't get me wrong, at low speeds, it is, but when cruising on the freeway at say 70-75+ and you gun it, it loses its "pull".

I know the S Performance is quite a bit faster, but will that only impact the lower speeds or higher speeds as well?

Only you know what will satisfy you when it comes to a highway roll. I suggest taking a Raven Performance model for a highway test drive to see what you think yourself.

 

[Cory151]

The Model S has one of the lowest coefficients of drag of any car at 0.24, much less than the C6 at 0.36

Probably because it needs the downforce for traction. The Mercedes A class is the current world record holder for CD at .22 surpassing the MS.

 

[beatle]

Keep in mind that the frontal area of an object (like a car) matters in determining the total drag. A low drag coefficient will help, but if the vehicle is large (like the S) the the total drag will be higher than a smaller vehicle.

For example, a motorcycle has an absolutely awful drag coefficient, but it has a much smaller area than a car, so its total drag can often be similar. Here is another example showing the MS against several other electric and hybrid vehicles (scroll to page 4): https://www.tesla.com/sites/default/files/blog_attachments/the-slipperiest-car-on-the-road.pdf

 

[Griz Hunter]

I have noticed in the videos of the Tesla Model S P100D racing high performance ICE cars on the quarter mile drag strip that the ICE cars invariably pull harder toward the end of the drag strip than the Teslas. It seems to me that the Tesla either needs a gearing change to a slightly higher gear ratio (lower numerically), or, better yet, they need to go to a two-speed transmission to address that weakness.

I'm considering coming to Tesla. My last 3 cars are a 911 Turbo, Stage 1 RS7 and currently a 2010 manual V10 R8. As you can see, I like the torque of the turbos and/or a large N/A motor for that low end torque.

With that said, I thought a Model 3 Performance would be sufficient, and don't get me wrong, at low speeds, it is, but when cruising on the freeway at say 70-75+ and you gun it, it loses its "pull".

I know the S Performance is quite a bit faster, but will that only impact the lower speeds or higher speeds as well?

 

[AmpedRealtor]

A powerful ICE like a 911 will out-accelerate the most expensive Tesla on the freeway. Heck, a much less powerful ICE will out-accelerate most Teslas above 70 MPH. This is why Tesla focuses on 0-60 in all of the acceleration videos. As with most things Tesla, the devil is in the details and what Tesla doesn't say.

When Tesla caps your battery pack to avoid safety and/or warranty claims, as it has done to thousands of owners (search for #batterygate), your acceleration will drop as well. The performance of your Tesla will degrade over time, as will its range and charging rate. Newer owners will not know or be affected by any of this, it's us older owners who now know Tesla's MO and what they will do to you over time.

There is currently a class action lawsuit over this as well as a NHTSA petition review.

There is enough reason and concern to believe this will eventually happen to all Model S/X owners. Here is the thread referenced above (#batterygate), it's long so you may want to skip.

Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

Some articles regarding the issue...

Tesla owner lawsuit claims software update fraudulently cut battery capacity

https://ww.electrek.co/2019/10/04/t...ttery-capacity-loss-fire-investigation-nhtsa/

Tesla’s disappearing miles: Owners say automatic software fix has had unwanted side effects

Tesla under scrutiny by feds for battery, software issues

 

[Mediocrates]

A powerful ICE like a 911 will out-accelerate the most expensive Tesla on the freeway. Heck, a much less powerful ICE will out-accelerate most Teslas above 70 MPH. This is why Tesla focuses on 0-60 in all of the acceleration videos. As with most things Tesla, the devil is in the details and what Tesla doesn't say.

Anecdotally, I had an informal "competition" with a Cadillac CTS-V (640hp supercharged V8) in my Model S P100D about a week ago on a freeway. From about 80MPH to about 115MPH, the Cadillac could not pull away, but I could also not gain any distance (I was behind it in the same lane). I abandoned the game at about the 115MPH point due to traffic conditions, so I do not know how much longer we would have remained stalemated. I was not in Ludicrous+ mode and I don't recall my charge percentage (probably in the 50-70% range, as most of my trip was in that range).

 

[shellderp]

Anecdotally, I had an informal "competition" with a Cadillac CTS-V (640hp supercharged V8) in my Model S P100D about a week ago on a freeway. From about 80MPH to about 115MPH, the Cadillac could not pull away, but I could also not gain any distance (I was behind it in the same lane). I abandoned the game at about the 115MPH point due to traffic conditions, so I do not know how much longer we would have remained stalemated. I was not in Ludicrous+ mode and I don't recall my charge percentage (probably in the 50-70% range, as most of my trip was in that range).

I've done similar against a few beefy looking german cars and usually keep up until at least 105mph (and they start pulling first, so no downshift penalty). At that point I don't want to risk losing my license anyway. I think people underestimate the p100d at high speeds because they compare it to its own performance at low speeds, because it's so stupid fast there. High end porsches and lambos and corvettes will win easily at those speeds, but the S isn't slow at all.