TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker and becoming a Supporting Member. For more info: Support TMC
Start a Discussionhttps://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/tags/

Dual motor Qs and speculation

Discussion in 'Model 3' started by KarenRei, Aug 1, 2017.

Tags:
  1. KarenRei

    KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,306
    Location:
    Iceland
    So, obviously there's no pricing on the dual motor setup for the Model 3 yet. What are your thoughts on its pricing and specs? It appears that on the Model S there's generally about a $5k difference between a dual and single motor setup. The Model 3 is a cheaper vehicle with a cheaper motor. $3,5k perhaps? Also, judging from the range difference on the S, the ranges would probably be bumped up by something like, what, 220->229mi / 310->322mi?

    I'm also curious as to why there's so little performance difference on the S dual-motor setups (except for the performance versions). The specs cite much more horsepower on the dual-motor setups, yet the 0-60 times are almost unchanged, often only 0,1s. Is it safe to assume that that horsepower is basically inaccessible (e.g. due to power electronics / battery / wiring / etc constraints)?

    How important do you think having a dual motor setup would be for snow and ice over RWD?
     
    • Like x 1
  2. electracity

    electracity Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,629
    Location:
    60606
    Dual motors is worth $5K for northerners. Tesla would be generous at $3.5K.
     
    • Like x 1
    • Disagree x 1
    • Love x 1
  3. KarenRei

    KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,306
    Location:
    Iceland
    #3 KarenRei, Aug 1, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2017
    Do you think they'll charge the same on the 3 that they charge on the S? Because dual motor costs $5k extra on the S. By comparison, adding 90mi of range costs $9k on the 3 but $23k on the S.

    I think as it stands, if they charged $3k or less it'd be a definite "yes" from me. $3-5k a "maybe", and over $5k probably a "no". It's hard for me to justify inflating the vehicle's price by over 15% just for AWD.

    But we'll see how I feel closer to purchase time. Particularly inclusive of how my country's EV tax rates fare, which will determine how much I have to spend.
     
  4. electracity

    electracity Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2015
    Messages:
    2,629
    Location:
    60606
    If I ran Tesla I would charge $5K. This choice of making more money while building fewer AWD cars is a win.

    Tesla learned with the early model S that warranty work on drive units can be very expensive.

    The base model 3 makes no money. $9K for the big battery is showing off and making a point. Everything else needs to have decent margins.
     
  5. Lunarx

    Lunarx Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2016
    Messages:
    108
    Location:
    SoCal
    To me the main benefit of Dual Motors is getting Regen on the front wheels.
    Although, it seems to not benefit range as much as I would have expected.
    However, I can only speculate that the car will feel more stable under regen, especially in traction challenged situations.
    Secondly, I hope acceleration gets improved, by at least 1/2 sec (and ideally 1.5s via a P version).
     
    • Like x 2
  6. KarenRei

    KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,306
    Location:
    Iceland
    Acceleration improvements are marginal in the S - 0,4 seconds in the earlier models and 0,1 seconds in the later, at least according to the official spec sheet. I'd guess that it'd be the same for the Model 3 - if you want more acceleration, you have to pay separately to upgrade the wiring, inverter, etc.
     
  7. burnside

    burnside Member

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    7
    Location:
    Washington
    Dual motors will most likely cost $5k. These are also a new line of motors for the M3, not the same motors from the S. Maybe Tesla will lower the cost a bit, but by $1.5k? Not seeing it happen.
     
  8. boiler81

    boiler81 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    226
    Location:
    Manson, WA
    Elon tweeted some time ago that the dual would be less than $5k. I'm guessing $4500.
     
    • Informative x 2
    • Like x 1
  9. eSpiritIV

    eSpiritIV Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2016
    Messages:
    180
    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Yes he did. Trevor thinks it will be $4000 but i bet your in the ballpark.

    So the question is, would you take EAP or AWD if you had $5000 to spend? EAP can be upgraded by software easily in the future. AWD and battery can not.
     
  10. boiler81

    boiler81 Member

    Joined:
    Feb 22, 2016
    Messages:
    226
    Location:
    Manson, WA
    Exactly, I'm thinking of deferring purchasing EAP until it's more mature, but we don't yet know the cost penalty of buying it later. I'm hoping we will before I configure my AWD.:rolleyes:
     
  11. Cloxxki

    Cloxxki Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2016
    Messages:
    629
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    Would dual motors in the 3 really improve range?
    The RWD non-P Model 3 seems to have a more modest motor than S&X.
    Perhaps the range entending effect of the D will be greatly diminished in the case of the 3? Focus on economy in the design process has been on economy, a lot. Tires, aero...why not the motor?
    The Model S RWD was there to impress people. Saving consumption to eek out a few more miles was not worth it, the Model S needed to convert and stun people. Model 3 just needs to not suck.

    About range, if you don't take aero wheels, you may lose more range than you're realistically going to gain from the D?
     
    • Helpful x 1
  12. juanmedina

    juanmedina Member

    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2016
    Messages:
    140
    Location:
    sc
    Adding more power and more grip and only getting a tenth of a second in the 0-60mph is just another example of Tesla software handicapping their cars .
     
    • Disagree x 1
  13. Boourns

    Boourns Member

    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2016
    Messages:
    900
    Location:
    Dallas
    Here's the tweet: Elon Musk on Twitter
     
    • Like x 1
  14. KarenRei

    KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei KarenRei

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2017
    Messages:
    1,306
    Location:
    Iceland
    #14 KarenRei, Aug 1, 2017
    Last edited: Aug 1, 2017
    I would assume so, for the same reasons as the S. Every motor, including that of the 3, will have an optimal performance band, and having two motors lets you control that better over differing driving conditions.

    Lol, I would pay extra for aero wheels over stupid "baller" wheels that hurt 95% of the performance aspects of the vehicle (including aero)

    Not necessarily. A motor doesn't run itself - an inverter does. And power electronics are expensive - the more power you want, the more it costs you. You also need heftier cabling (more copper) and potentially better cooling.

    I don't doubt that Tesla's margins are highest on their performance vehicles. But let's not pretend that the performance is just some sort of software handicap. There can be software handicaps, but they're generally to protect the motors and electronics (and can potentially be relaxed with time as Tesla gets more data about how well the motors take it). Look at the launch mode controversy for an example - they let you do a given number of launches, but cap it off - not because there's some secret profit to be made from some later upgrade, but because they don't want you burning out your powertrain. Same with supercharger limitations.
     
    • Like x 1
  15. NCC-1701-T

    NCC-1701-T To boldly go...

    Joined:
    Jan 27, 2017
    Messages:
    29
    Location:
    Sacramento
    Question: Is dual motors worth waiting for someone who lives in CA and already has a Subaru XV for snow? I would like the quickest possible model and AWD is nice for the mountain roads I frequently drive but waiting until Oct-Dec 18 (at the earliest) when tax credits start expiring is worrisome to me. Perhaps a premium long range RWD is the ticket for my situation. Thoughts? I've already switched my preference twice. Don't want to make Elon mad. :)
     
  16. jtpassat

    jtpassat Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2015
    Messages:
    150
    Location:
    Providence, RI
    what's more important to you? getting tax credits means you'll have to get the first batch of cars. anything after that will end up being partial tax credits or none at all. if the tax credits aren't important then keep waiting for the all wheel drive P model which could be well into 2019

     
  17. shrspeedblade

    shrspeedblade Member

    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2015
    Messages:
    485
    Location:
    CA, United States
    One of the posts in a past thread I found quite interesting was the idea of an induction motor up front paired with the PMAC motor in the back, kind of giving you the best of both worlds. Then you're looking at a LR model that could get near 350 miles out on the highway!
     
  18. internalaudit

    internalaudit Member

    Joined:
    Mar 11, 2016
    Messages:
    535
    Location:
    Toronto, Ontario, Canada
  19. Snow Drift

    Snow Drift Member

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2016
    Messages:
    360
    Location:
    Long Island
    I'd say no, you don't really need AWD since you have the XV and live in SF where doesn't really snow. As much as I prefer AWD in all conditions, even dry roads, if you have an XV you could enjoy a RWD M3.

    <<<----For me, the M3 will replace our XV Hybrid, but my wife and I both need AWD. I have an STI, and she will get the M3 Dual Motor.
     
  20. Cloxxki

    Cloxxki Member

    Joined:
    Aug 20, 2016
    Messages:
    629
    Location:
    Rotterdam
    If you take the 310 mile figure for gospel, on "near 350", say 345, simply: NO.
    I can't fathom that there is still 13% of losses on TM3's motor during an EPA test cycle, let alone that adding another motor would obliterate all these losses. But considering TM3LR is possible a real 334mi, perhaps...
     

Share This Page