@FlyNavy01 Pretty much killed all Model 3 Performance records on dragy leaderboards yesterday. 3.37sec. Taking away 0.25-.30 for rollout that would be a strip run of 3.12 - 3.07sec. He states 95% SOC, AC on (lol). Pretty nice on the stock Pilot Sport 4S.....
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Dragy GPS Times
- Thread starter gilscales
- Start date
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
That's quite a launch he got. I hate on these Dragy plots how the Speed and and Acceleration plots are not consistent with each other. Obviously pulling more than 1G from a standstill on the Speed plot.
What do you mean by "Obviously pulling more than 1G from a standstill on the Speed plot"? I'm not sure you're reading these charts correctly.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Acceleration is the derivative (slope) of speed vs. time. 1g is 22mph/sec. It says the acceleration from 0-10MPH is 0.46sec or an average of ~1g. That's not consistent with the Acceleration plot. One of the two plots is wrong.
Guessing they are using an underdamped low-pass filter. It is unfortunate, I agree. I trust the speed plot more.
Am curious what he sees after swapping out his wheels. I imagine those might be good for another tenth with the right tires.
insaneoctane
Well-Known Member
Interesting, good catch. Acceleration shows to be incredibly linear, yet force is not, so there is certainly something fishy going on there. We should certainly be seeing far more peaks at or above the 1g mark based on this linear acceleration. I always assumed that the force was being derived/calculated from the acceleration, but to your point, that does not appear to be the case. What the heck are they doing?
Jedi2155
Model 3 has Arrived.
I wonder if draggy uses both GPS data and accelerometer to provide the data. The accelerometer would likely be a much higher sampling data than the GPS input.
I agree on the sampling rate, but you factually know the acceleration (0-60 in ~3.3s), then clearly the accelerometer is providing misleading data if that is how they are deriving force. I also don't like that they only track force in tenths, which hides important resolution. You can absolutely feel 0.05g's.
Hey I know that guy! I'll try to do the same run this weekend on the staggered 19's. Optimistically hoping for <3.25sec (sub 3.0 w/ rollout
).
Gah. Took the car to the 1/8 mile strip tonight, and of course it was a +1% slope. Best time of the night was 3.50s @ 90% SOC. That poor racecar Subie... Also had a close one with what I believe was a Jeep Trackhawk, but I edged him out by two tenths.
245/40/19 and 275/35/19.
I did five 0-60mph runs on them last night at 90% SoC and they ranged between 3.41sec to 3.50sec on Dragy (~3.16 to 3.25 corrected for rollout), so they don't seem to make much difference in acceleration grip so far. Really like them in terms or ride quality and handling though. Efficiency seems to be about the same as the 20's as far as I can tell.
Did you weigh the 20" sport or did you get these numbers somewhere?
Tsportline list aeros 21.6lbs
No recorded measurement of the 20" sport that I know of but based off the 19" 27.5-28 lbs is about right.
Michelin website list PrimacyMXM4 as 24.9lbs and Pilot Sport 4S at 22.6lbs
Last edited:
I'm a little surprised you didn't see improvement with the wider backs. I'd be very curious to see this setup on 1/4 mile as that has been where the P seems lacking (P and AWD are only 1s diff on 1/4, which shouldn't be the case).
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Why shouldn’t it be the case?
It takes 160 feet to get to 60mph but only 130 feet to brake from 60 to 0 (presumably much less on the summer tires that come on 20s). The car is not traction limited.
Similar threads
