WilliamG
Hinge Fanatic
That's all we have left to discuss! There are precisely zero factual updates on progress etc, so what else would you like to talk about?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
For AWD owners wanting a P3D-
- Thread starter Urbancowboy
- Start date
That's all we have left to discuss! There are precisely zero factual updates on progress etc, so what else would you like to talk about?
That's all we have left to discuss! There are precisely zero factual updates on progress etc, so what else would you like to talk about?
I know! I'm just tired of checking this thread when there are updates only to see people talking about why it will never happen.
Would rather the thread get back on topic even if that means it goes quiet.
But there are 25,754 other Model 3 threads. Should be plenty to talk about
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Same reason they do the same sandbagging of P vs non-P with the S and X by using 2 different measurements for the 2 different versions of the car.
Because they'd prefer you pay many thousands more for a P.
The difference here is, the S/X are physically different cars in P trim. You can't just software unlock em to be a P.
With the AWD 3, at least the ones prior to ~April 2019 that all came with the same physical HW as the P3D-, you can.
Even better- since they don't use the same physical HW anymore you won't be cannibalizing future sales offering the unlock to those who got theirs when the HW was identical.
That the 990 rear motor is incapable of P performance is still conjecture.
MagnusMako
Member
And it's worth noting that there has been prominent talk from a former Tesla higher up that they are capable of "P level power". I've posted this before but doing it again since I'm sure it was lost in the mix of this cluster of a thread.
And another thing to also consider is that there was insider information posted on the M3OC forums way back in early 2017 that said a prototype had achieved a 0-60 in 2 seconds. The rest of the information in that post all turned out to be true, such as P3 numbers in the low 3 range. Not that this implies anything necessarily but my own speculation is that Tesla has built in buffer in the P3 and that the AWD is atleast as capable as the P.
Well Christmas is not that far away. We shall see if zxyzz's supposed source about "wait for Santa" comes true haha.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
If that was posted more than a few months ago, obviously they're capable of P since they're the same motor in both.
But that stopped being true about 6 months ago with the 990 came along.
Its existence tells us that.
If it's just as capable, and cheaper, they'd use it in the P too wouldn't they?
If it's just as capable and the same price or more expensive- it wouldn't exist. They'd just keep using the 980 in everything and not add a bunch of manufacturing and supply chain complexity with a second PN.
The only explanation that makes any sense to fit the facts (that it exists, and is used only in the newer non-P AWD cars) would be it's a CHEAPER motor that somehow isn't good enough for a P.... so much cheaper in fact it's worth running 2 rear motor supply chains and handling 2 different parts during manufacturing.
If you have another explanation that fits the known facts for why the 990 exists though I'm all ears.
EU registration papers for 990-equipped cars shows it’s capable.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Max output != Max sustained output.
Again though-
If it's just as capable and cheaper- why isn't it used in the P?
If it's just as capable and NOT cheaper why does it even exist?
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Well, I know a few things.
I know Tesla is HIGHLY resistant to adding complexity to MFG and supply chain.
It's why the SR didn't get cloth seats.
So I know they wouldn't add a new rear motor part without a reason.
The only reason I can think of they'd add one that only goes in AWD non-P cars is- it's cheaper. By enough to make it worth doing.
From there you have 2 choices:
A) It's cheaper AND capable of doing the same P output the 980 was. In which case there's no reason they'd not use it in ALL cars. It'd make ALL cars cost less for the same capability AND avoid needing 2 different rear DU parts. And I KNOW this is not what is happening though.
B) It's cheaper and NOT capable of doing the same thing the 980 does in a P. In which case it's fine to use in non-P cars, but not P cars. And I know this matches what is actually happening
As I say I'm perfectly willing to hear anybody elses alternative theory about why only the non-P AWD is getting the 990 in a way that fits the above facts we DO know. But I've yet to hear one.
dandrewk
Active Member
How do you see the p3d- inventory countrywide? Is there a website, or does your SA show you on their internal system?
Do you have proof the 990 is cheaper? That is a core assumption everything else hangs on.
Your logic makes sense but by your very own words what you have is a theory, not facts.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
It exists.
If it was the same cost, or more expensive, and equally or less capable why would it exist at all?
Adding a 2nd, not cheaper, not less capable, DU to the manufacturing and parts process makes 0 sense in any way.
Again I'm open to hearing any way it WOULD make sense...but....not hearing such an idea.
You’re looking for alternate theories. I’m looking for facts. That’s called an impasse.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I've listed facts.
Then pointed out the only theory that actually fits those facts
Let's see where specifically you're jumping off my logic train.
Facts:
Tesla is now actively using two different rear DUs in Model 3 production, and was not for the first ~1.5 years of life where they only used the 980?
Tesla is still using the 980 in all P models, but now using the 990 in AWD models? Tesla is NOT using the 990 in any P vehicles at all.
Tesla has several times, including in explicit statements, made clear they abhor increasing manufacturing complexity or adding alternative parts without very good reason/need, and avoid doing so as much as possible... (again see how much nicer the SR interior is than it was supposed to be as but one of many examples of this being a fact).
Ok, so, those are facts- do you agree they are facts?
Once you have those, logic requires you to admit there must be a very good reason they're using the 990 in the AWD at all.
Now let's apply logic to the possible reason(s).
A) Lower cost, but lower performance- That certainly fits the existing facts at least. Enough lower cost in fact it's worth bothering adding complexity. And since it's ONLY going into AWD the lower performance is ok. So we can leave this on the "possible" reasons... agree to THAT much?
B) Lower cost, same OR better performance- We can easily eliminate this one. If that were the case it'd be in the P too wouldn't it? It's not.
C) Same or higher cost-same performance- We can easily eliminate these too...there's no reason at all for the 990 to exist if it was true.
D) Same or higher cost- higher performance- We can easily eliminate this one as well- It'd be showing up in the P (for a future Lud mode maybe), not the AWD. That is counter-factual to what is happening.
I can think of no OTHER possible reasons besides those listed above.
All but the first (A) are impossible based on the facts we have and can be easily eliminated.
Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.
And the truth in this case isn't even all that improbable. Much cheaper, lower capability, motor, going in the car they make/sell a lot more of, and which doesn't need the higher capability.
Otherwise the existence, and use in the AWD only, of the 990 does not make any sense.
Similar threads
- Article
