-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Eventual performance boost option for LR?
- Thread starter MC686
- Start date
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
Where'd you see that?
I'm almost considering holding off for the single motor version of LR.
If I could give Tesla $2,000 in exchange for getting 0.4 or 0.5 second reduction in 0-60 (and speaking only for myself), I think I would be happy/complete with this car... I wanted the Model 3 for it's 4.4 second *zip*. My wife wanted the Y for it's hatchback and second-row legroom for the kids... she (obviously) won out. If I still get my 4.4 (or even 4.3?) second 0-60, for $2k more, everyone wins, particularly after snagging the $3k price reduction after already having ordered at the higher price.
I'm supposed to take delivery on Wednesday, and my test drive only involved a Performance Model Y and a LR AWD Model 3 for side-by-side (all they had; I'd requested LR AWD of both via online form for a better apples-to-apples comparison), but I read and hear talk about how the LR AWD MY might be (software) limited from 0-10 or so before showing good pickup the rest of the way to 60... feels like something they might be able to just *fix* (for maybe $2k?) via a software update...?
I'm supposed to take delivery on Wednesday, and my test drive only involved a Performance Model Y and a LR AWD Model 3 for side-by-side (all they had; I'd requested LR AWD of both via online form for a better apples-to-apples comparison), but I read and hear talk about how the LR AWD MY might be (software) limited from 0-10 or so before showing good pickup the rest of the way to 60... feels like something they might be able to just *fix* (for maybe $2k?) via a software update...?
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
Different strokes for different folks n'at.
I'm fully aware that their is *more* different between LR AWD and PUP, and again, speaking only for myself, but I didn't personally value (very much) the look/aesthetic differences. I know some do. A lot. The reason I considered Performance was pretty much exclusively for the speed increase. "I give you $10,000, you give me 1.3 seconds better 0-60."
As I understand it, when $8k bought you a 1.2 second improvement in 0-60 for M3 (LR AWD to Performance), $2k improved the LR AWD by 0.5 seconds via software... which seems like a pretty good deal to me. I'd leap at something like that, if they offer it to me for my Y. "Here, take my money."
performance 3
performance Y
dual motor 3
dual motor Y
Order of quickness. Just so you know... the dual motor Y is already 4.5 - 4.59 with the 1ft rollout. Tesla is very misleading in that they quote the 0-60 of their performance cars with a rollout. The non performance cars, the 0-60 doesn't incldue rollout. Rollout usually shaves .2-.3 seconds off. To be honest, I'm still trying to determine if a really fast Y even makes sense. It didn't in my test drive. Fast 3 - yes that makes sense, because its a more dynamic, sport oriented, vehicle.
Personally, I don't take much value in 0-60 times. I prefer looking at the quarter mile times and the MPH. 0-60 is more about grip and in ICE vehicles, gearing. That's why a lot of manual vehicles, 2nd gear tops out at around 62-65 mph to avoid that one additional shift into 3rd gear.
ElectricIAC
Good-Natured Rascal
10K difference I would totally part with half for stealth perf or 1.5-2K for 4s flat.
To each his own, but 1/4 mile time is rarely more valuable than 0-60 imo. Particularly for anyone looking at MY.
0-60 times aren’t perfect, but are the best proxy for functional torque, HP, and grip that’s widely available. I frequently need to rapidly accelerate to around 60 mph
+1 and put me down for this.
Turning onto highways from a dead stop, or merging into them slower speeds, and being able to get up to 60 or 70 mph quickly, is super useful to me.
Romping on the accelerator on a quiet short straight stretch when nobody's around and getting up to speed fast is fun.
I rarely drive over 80 mph. I never drive over 90 mph. The kind of speeds you end up at after going as fast as you can for a full 1/4 mile have very little use/meaning for me and my driving habits, personally...
30-70, 50-70 times seem like a better indicator for most real world situations. I guess my area lacks highways where you have to merge from a complete stop. The only place I see this are in metro areas during rush hour and speeds aren't more than 25-30 mph, if that.
But your area doesn’t lack for 1/4 mile sprints? What area of the country is 0-60’s application limited to metro rush hour traffic at low speeds? Count how many times in a day you go from a stop to a speed between 0-60. It’ll be (much)more than how many times you drive unimpeded and unrestricted for 1/4 mile.
I wish those times were standard metrics on cars. Maybe as more EVs become popular, they will. Instantaneous passing ability with no skill required is a huge perk of EVs, and a way to differentiate EVs from the best of ICE, but also from other EVs. Until then, 0-60 is the best indication imo. 1/4 is so irrelevant to most people that there’s often a lack of the context needed for comparisons.
To me the performance trim is not regrettable. We value performance, anyone asking the question likely does too. Otherwise I’d buy a legacy EV with better fit and finish. Either trim and I’m going to fret about spending way more than I need to a car than I need to. With the performance trim, at least I don’t have to ever answer if I also spent more than I need to while also being cheap.
Similar threads
