Downsides of Performance vs Long Range?

[Paddy3101]

You have only downsides with P. Lower, stiffer suspension, bigger wheels means every bump is felt(test it on a rough tarmack), consumption range is at least 20% lower than AWD and 30% lower than RWD, and of course the price.

If you read carefully I said 10% difference to the AWD. And 22% to RWD.

So you didn't say 20% lower than the AWD, and 30% lower than the RWD above then? Or is that a mis-quote?

 

[dsgerbc]

And in the ICE world, to go from a car that has a 4.5 second 0-60 time to one with a 3.1 second 0-60 time, you'd probably have to pay between 50% more and 2 - 3x the cost.

Performance is always over-priced.

Probably closer to 3x if you constrain it to non-coupes.

 

[Wooloomooloo]

Probably closer to 3x if you constrain it to non-coupes.

Agreed - I was just hedging against some smart-Alec mentioning a Golf R that can hit that speed with an ECU Tune, new Turbo and Exhaust, or something.

The P3D is actually amazing value for the performance numbers it pumps out.

 

[dsgerbc]

The P3D is actually amazing value for the performance numbers it pumps out.

Amen. Surprising this does not get brought up more often on "enthusiast" sites. I was eyeing a discounted new MY18 Quadrifoglio which is slower and more expensive to own when I learned that a Tesla SC opened up only 30 miles away (vs 180miles prior), which made owning a Tesla viable to me.

 

[jyalpert]

The P3D is actually amazing value for the performance numbers it pumps out.

Yeah if you're willing to pay for acceleration, all the Tesla products are excellent value compared to their alike-priced competitors. Tesla knows what they're doing in terms of how to market cars. Cars are emotional purchases, and consumers see their car as a reflection of themselves. So consumers really like the idea of performance, which is most easily measured in the 0-60 time - my car is better than yours because the number is lower. Tesla didn't have to make their cars accelerate that fast - this was a shrewd marketing decision. Consumers also like weird gadgets, like falcon wing doors or pop out handles. Even if all the extra performance is utterly useless, or the gadgets are just more points of failure, people have shown time and again they are willing to pay for that sort of thing - all this stuff it really helps with the post hoc rationalization of the purchase.

 

[Black_Bird]

I’m wondering if there is a range penalty on the 20” wheels. As it is, if I get the Long Range I would want the 19” sport wheels. Thanks.

Here's a helpful page on ranges for the various models. . it's a bit dated but still worth reviewing:
https://i.imgur.com/QyKsCQT.gif

 

[Wooloomooloo]

Yeah if you're willing to pay for acceleration, all the Tesla products are excellent value compared to their alike-priced competitors. Tesla knows what they're doing in terms of how to market cars. Cars are emotional purchases, and consumers see their car as a reflection of themselves. So consumers really like the idea of performance, which is most easily measured in the 0-60 time - my car is better than yours because the number is lower. Tesla didn't have to make their cars accelerate that fast - this was a shrewd marketing decision. Consumers also like weird gadgets, like falcon wing doors or pop out handles. Even if all the extra performance is utterly useless, or the gadgets are just more points of failure, people have shown time and again they are willing to pay for that sort of thing - all this stuff it really helps with the post hoc rationalization of the purchase.

Wow, that's right up there as one of the more arrogant and bitter posts I've read in a while. If you want to debate the finer points of irrational attachment to material objects, and a consumerist world devouring its own soul, like an Empty Ghost with an insatiable desire that can't ever be fulfilled, then I am more than willing to do so. Maybe on the politics board.

But making a value judgement about a person, because they spent a little more money for a little more speed, as though you know them, their motivation, their history with a smug superiority that frankly reeks of the bitter failure of unfulfilled potential, expressed as stunted prose, isn't the way to go about that.

Enjoy your car.

 

[jyalpert]

Wow, that's right up there as one of the more arrogant and bitter posts I've read in a while. If you want to debate the finer points of irrational attachment to material objects, and a consumerist world devouring its own soul, like an Empty Ghost with an insatiable desire that can't ever be fulfilled, then I am more than willing to do so. Maybe on the politics board.

But making a value judgement about a person, because they spent a little more money for a little more speed, as though you know them, their motivation, their history with a smug superiority that frankly reeks of the bitter failure of unfulfilled potential, expressed as stunted prose, isn't the way to go about that.

Enjoy your car.

No value judgment. People buy what they like. I, like everyone else, make irrational purchases all the time. But, eyes open. The extra acceleration has no real practical use besides fun. It's a toy. Same as I didnt need to buy the American Strat, or the custom cut road bike. I just wanted them and paid irrationally where a Squier or cheaper bike would have done just fine.

It's obviously an extreme cynical view as well, meant to elicit a response such as this, in order to make the above point. (GM proved through the 90s that you can't design cars cynically. As Lutz makes abundantly clear in "Car Guys vs Bean Counters", passion and fun must be part of car design, and clearly Tesla is excited by what they have made, though I do believe the 0-60 race is absurd.)

I do appreciate the ad hominems, though.

 

[jyalpert]

Wow, that's right up there as one of the more arrogant and bitter posts I've read in a while. If you want to debate the finer points of irrational attachment to material objects, and a consumerist world devouring its own soul, like an Empty Ghost with an insatiable desire that can't ever be fulfilled, then I am more than willing to do so. Maybe on the politics board.

But making a value judgement about a person, because they spent a little more money for a little more speed, as though you know them, their motivation, their history with a smug superiority that frankly reeks of the bitter failure of unfulfilled potential, expressed as stunted prose, isn't the way to go about that.

Enjoy your car.

Hm, upon further reflection, I suppose there is some value judgment there. And I apologize for that.

Now, this part of your comment is kinda irksome - "smug superiority that frankly reeks of the bitter failure of unfulfilled potential" - because it sounds a lot like you're saying that I can't afford a more expensive car, because I am lazy or stupid, and therefore am covering over my faults by judging those with greater means. I think this is a fair reading, and I'd say - that's about as low as my original comment. And in any event, I can quite easily afford a M3P or whatever else.

Rather, my judgment rather comes from my personal experience. That doesn't make it better, but it makes it different and perhaps adds context to my original point. Many years ago I was looking to get into track driving, cross-shopping Caymans and 911s and Evoras, and on every forum it kept saying "buy a Miata first." So I did. And I had the typical Miata experience at the track, riding with a Spec racer, passing far more expensive and higher-powered cars. As as I took more lessons and gained skill, I started passing the "fast" cars myself. I'm not a particularly talented driver, but I was kind of forced to reckon with a strange realization - the car is a tool and none of this *sugar* matters at all. 99.999% of drivers will never even access what a Miata has to offer, let alone a Lambo. The lap times posted by Randy Pobst are meaningless, because they are describing a car being driven in a way that I, nor almost anyone else, ever will. And so in my darker moments, like when I wrote that comment above, I tend toward a cynical and self-absorbed view, it's true. I should take a charitable view, but I struggle. My dad owned Corvettes the entire time I was growing up, and I took him to the track for his birthday a few years ago, and he was just a horrendous driver. But man he loves the Vette, and he loves cars. He even begrudgingly said he liked my Model 3 (which was huge - he worked the line at a GM plant to put himself through college, so he's a GM lifer). He used to take me down to the classic car auctions and we'd talk about stuff like how the 454 was oversized for 69 Chevelle, and I think back on it and I say - this is all supposed to be fun. Who am I to judge what people think is cool?

But then, stuff keeps happening. I was at the track on Saturday last week and a guy in an R8 was in the beginner group, driving an awful line, doing lap times 25 seconds slower than a Spec Miata, and I'm like - what's the point of this $150k supercar? And now I am forced, over and over, to conclude that cars are primarily emotional purchases. That just maybe Ludicrous mode is mostly a way to convince people to pony up some extra cash. It's not up to me to judge, but sometimes I do. I struggle with it, and sometimes it leaks out.

So I'm sorry for the shitty comment. Again it's not up to me to judge anyone else's purchase decision. But deep down I still think there is no practical value in doubling the price of the already great, already way too fast-to-ever-use base model.

 

[mswlogo]

Here's an example of Range on a P3D+. Average of 237Wh/mile at an average of approx 65mph over 114 miles. Last 30 miles is at 222.

Each to their own, that's why there is a range of cars, But the performance of the P is Very usable. Most of the difference between the AWD and the P happens at normal/legal road speeds.

View attachment 415598

Sorry, I disagree, at "Normal/legal road speeds" there is very little difference between P and AWD.
It's when you push it, that's when you see/feel the difference.

Now, some folks like to "Push it" more often than others, and you most certainly can legally, they are just "shorter" amounts of time because you get up to speed so much faster. No difference in the joy folks get out of more power on AWD than RWD. It's the same thing.

Chill mode is NOT required to get range. Chill helps "Train you" to not push it. But you can drive just as efficiently with Chill off with a P as you can with Chill on with an AWD. It all depends on self control of the driver. Chill is just "training mode". You can drive plenty inefficiently with Chill on too.

The ONLY difference between P and AWD is the tire compound. The diameter of the rim doesn't matter. Some will argue the 0.4" suspension is some high performance huge difference because some parts are different. I don't think it's that different. Not enough to worry about.

I do keep my P (stealth with 19" OEM) car normally in Chill because I don't want to develop bad habits that will get me trouble, that includes with my wife and eating tires. My friend with an RWD generally gets worse wh/mi than I do, he's not in chill, because he drives too aggressively, IMHO. It's like Xmas every time I take it out of Chill. I don't need Xmas every day.

The only real issue with P is the OEM 20" Rims are fragile. But they can be dealt with. It's up to the owner how sticky a tire they want to run vs range. There are less options for more efficient 20" tires in that aspect ratio. You can get just as sticky tires on 18" and you will lose probably 10%

I've heard mixed stories that a 19" OEM will now fit a P. Part of it was Hub Bore in the Wheel, offset was slightly changed and suspension tweaked. The 20" tires used to need an AWD/RWD modified and they no longer do. Some folks say 19" are compatible now with P+. But I'm not sure. And I think it's only the rear was an issue. Someone put 18" aftermarket wheels on P+ and grinded off a hair of the caliper to make them fit. I think 19" OEM might be that close and perhaps squeezed on. I love the 19" OEM Wheels.

 

[mswlogo]

Here's a helpful page on ranges for the various models. . it's a bit dated but still worth reviewing:
https://i.imgur.com/QyKsCQT.gif

That stupid chart is what made me not get 19" initially because I thought I was gonna lose all this range. I was prepared to lose 15%. I lost nothing. Because I put more efficient tire on than the Primacy.

That chart implies "Rim Size" is all that matters. It has nothing to do with Rim size. It's tire compound.

Put the same tire on all 3 models and then see what you get.

And how you drive trumps everything.

 

[Watts_Up]

That stupid chart is what made me not get 19" initially because I thought I was gonna lose all this range.
I was prepared to lose 15%. I lost nothing. Because I put more efficient tire on than the Primacy.

That chart implies "Rim Size" is all that matters.

It has nothing to do with Rim size. It's tire compound.

Put the same tire on all 3 models and then see what you get.

And how you drive trumps everything.

The silver 19" wheels have a really nicer look than the Aero 18" (with or without cover).

If you really care about mileage, just drive at 75 miles / hour instead of 85 miles / hour.

 

[UngaBunga1989]

And this proves exactly what? If you actually do the math correctly, it is less than ,55mph ,a not 65,and there is a huge difference between 65 and 55 in wind resistance and not so much between 55 and 45. For example.

But even so, you mainly prooved the point, since an AWD would've been closer to 22Wh/mi on that run and an RWD closer to 20.
And you basically spent 10,000$ more just to drive the car with 60mph flat with AP on... And maybe, just maybe, floor it once or twice. To each their own, Tesla will love you. But if you are going out of the way and 10-15,000$ is a lot of money to you go with AWD or RWD.

That is my sound advice.

Everyone's economic equation is different. Let me offer a counterpoint...

Purchaser is a car enthusiast (e.g. me).

Purchaser used to have one great performance car to drive hard (mainly on weekends) and enjoy purely for the sake of its performance and the joy / fun of driving. Said performance car was very expensive (think Ferrari in my case, but the 'value' equation works with almost any true performance-oriented car, no matter how reasonable the price if it results in you also needing a Daily Driver).

Purchaser is also environmentally conscious and has a Daily Driver (e.g. a Volt, or before that [ugh!] a Prius) too because he /she commutes and does "normal" things with cars like goes shopping, parks it in a tight spot at the mall, etc.

Instead this customer now has one car that does both better than either of their prior cars for collectively significantly less than 1/2 the money. With this equation the P3D is the best "value" available in performance-oriented segment of the automotive market today.

I believe that many people that say "you don't need the P3D's performance" are correct -- but they are also not necessarily car enthusiasts. As a younger man (back when you could actually tinker with cars because they were mechanical), I remember spending a lot of money and time to eek out almost inconsequential gains in performance. I also remember working on (or having someone work on, in the more complicated projects) my Alfa Romeo GTV 6 to get the 0-60 time down from (IIRC) 8.7 seconds to something like 8.2 seconds. All kinds of different parts, time under the hood and $$ to get that to happen.

With this as part of my history, the P3D comes across to me as a truly REVOLUTIONARY car that is a genuine marvel of automotive design. The fact that you can get a car that performs this well, is this efficient AND is this fun to drive at this price point? Truly remarkable IMHO.

 

[jbcarioca]

Ditto. Except I bought the set with all seasons on them.

Actually, mine have MXM which is all-season.

 

[Paddy3101]

Everyone's economic equation is different. Let me offer a counterpoint...

Purchaser is a car enthusiast (e.g. me).

Purchaser used to have one great performance car to drive hard (mainly on weekends) and enjoy purely for the sake of its performance and the joy / fun of driving. Said performance car was very expensive (think Ferrari in my case, but the 'value' equation works with almost any true performance-oriented car, no matter how reasonable the price if it results in you also needing a Daily Driver).

Purchaser is also environmentally conscious and has a Daily Driver (e.g. a Volt, or before that [ugh!] a Prius) too because he /she commutes and does "normal" things with cars like goes shopping, parks it in a tight spot at the mall, etc.

Instead this customer now has one car that does both better than either of their prior cars for collectively significantly less than 1/2 the money. With this equation the P3D is the best "value" available in performance-oriented segment of the automotive market today.

I believe that many people that say "you don't need the P3D's performance" are correct -- but they are also not necessarily car enthusiasts. As a younger man (back when you could actually tinker with cars because they were mechanical), I remember spending a lot of money and time to eek out almost inconsequential gains in performance. I also remember working on (or having someone work on, in the more complicated projects) my Alfa Romeo GTV 6 to get the 0-60 time down from (IIRC) 8.7 seconds to something like 8.2 seconds. All kinds of different parts, time under the hood and $$ to get that to happen.

With this as part of my history, the P3D comes across to me as a truly REVOLUTIONARY car that is a genuine marvel of automotive design. The fact that you can get a car that performs this well, is this efficient AND is this fun to drive at this price point? Truly remarkable IMHO.

Couldn't agree with you more.

My last performance car was a TVR (Very Eccentric British Sports Car - Think Very low-volume, hand-built Dodge Viper ACR), which had comparable performance to the M3P+. Very Different, but comparable. I did daily drive it, but it was hard to live with. Spent lots of time tinkering on maintenance, fixing stuff, and fuel. Lots of upgrades on it. Lots of performance, but NO driver aids, safety features or convenience features. However, 1st gear was pointless, just produced lots of smoke from the tires, so grab 2nd gear early. 2nd takes you up to 90mph, still smoking the tires up to 60. 3,4,5 just used less fuel, and weren't so noisy. Couldn't use 5th below about 45 as it would bog down. Virtually all corners were an opportunity to go sideways. Exhaust spits flames (or the inerds of the Cats). Not intended to be a 'Track' car, or fast round a track,

At the same time, I had a VW Golf TDI as my commuter car, which was old, beat-up, tired and smelly, but cost virtually nothing to run, and didn't get any maintenance.

Now I the performance of my previous performance car, but in a form factor and usability profile which is much more accessible. (Maybe doesn't have quite the same sense of Drama), and has a cost to run and maintenance profile, better that the Golf.

And it is safer, more environmentally friendly, and just more usable, then the previous combination.

So, I would agree, that it REVOLUTIONARY, and really is kind of a bargain.

 

[mswlogo]

Couldn't agree with you more.

My last performance car was a TVR (Very Eccentric British Sports Car - Think Very low-volume, hand-built Dodge Viper ACR), which had comparable performance to the M3P+. Very Different, but comparable. I did daily drive it, but it was hard to live with. Spent lots of time tinkering on maintenance, fixing stuff, and fuel. Lots of upgrades on it. Lots of performance, but NO driver aids, safety features or convenience features. However, 1st gear was pointless, just produced lots of smoke from the tires, so grab 2nd gear early. 2nd takes you up to 90mph, still smoking the tires up to 60. 3,4,5 just used less fuel, and weren't so noisy. Couldn't use 5th below about 45 as it would bog down. Virtually all corners were an opportunity to go sideways. Exhaust spits flames (or the inerds of the Cats). Not intended to be a 'Track' car, or fast round a track,

At the same time, I had a VW Golf TDI as my commuter car, which was old, beat-up, tired and smelly, but cost virtually nothing to run, and didn't get any maintenance.

Now I the performance of my previous performance car, but in a form factor and usability profile which is much more accessible. (Maybe doesn't have quite the same sense of Drama), and has a cost to run and maintenance profile, better that the Golf.

And it is safer, more environmentally friendly, and just more usable, then the previous combination.

So, I would agree, that it REVOLUTIONARY, and really is kind of a bargain.

I've never owned a "sports car". I could never justify poisoning the earth (more), just for my pleasure. Using a car to go to work is a necessity. I had an AWD on order. I was nervous I wasn't gonna get my car before Dec 31st tax credit. Tesla said 2 month wait for AWD. Then I learned I could get a Performance in 2 weeks and get free super charging. Then I thought this is probably my one chance in a life time to a have a "Performance" sports car (with 4 doors no less) and not feel guilty about it (for $10K more). I still drive like I never had a sports car , but I play with it and show it off now and then. The free supercharging is what sold me on it. It would have been tough to justify without that. Then I learned that's whole lot of supercharging and took the $5K credit.

I suspect if Tesla offered the Performance with 19" wheels they would sell a lot more of them. Because today, the 20" wheels would be a huge turn off for even considering it.

 

[Wooloomooloo]

Couldn't agree with you more.

My last performance car was a TVR (Very Eccentric British Sports Car - Think Very low-volume, hand-built Dodge Viper ACR)

When I first learned that TVR was a contraction of "Trevor" (the founder's first name) I lost all interest - this was a couple of decades ago mind you, when the Tuscon was all the rage. Obviously that's completely unfair given many car makers are named after their founders (Ford, Ferrari, Porsche)... but Trevor?

 

[brianman]

Actually, mine have MXM which is all-season.

What I meant was that I bought the package rather than just the wheels. Details.

 

[Watts_Up]

When I first learned that TVR was a contraction of "Trevor" (the founder's first name) I lost all interest
- this was a couple of decades ago mind you, when the Tuscon was all the rage.
Obviously that's completely unfair given many car makers are named after their founders
(Ford, Ferrari, Porsche)... but Trevor?

So what about MG, the initials of Morris Garages.... Morris ?

You mean Morris, like Morris West, author of The Shoes of the Fisherman?

 

[Wooloomooloo]

So what about MG, the initials of Morris Garages.... Morris ?

May be Morris, like Morris West, author of The Shoes of the Fisherman?

I named my cat Morris!