Gen 3 Powertrain Speculation (based on current drive units)

[Yggdrasill]

...because manufacturing costs for an ICE are reduced by FWD. You can install the entire drivetrain as a single unit, rather than in pieces (engine/tranny, rear axle, then driveshaft). This isn't really an issue for Tesla, since the drive units are installed as a single unit, front or rear.

Cars built on the UKL platforms are low-cost, entry-level vehicles. Cost control is, presumably, paramount.

There probably isn't a car model in the world where cost control is more of an issue than with the Model 3. $35k is an absurdly low price for a premium EV with more than 200 miles range. Some naysayers have estimated that the Model 3 will cost $70-80k.

The UKL platform was simply an example of how even BMW can be pragmatic, at the cost of RWD. Tesla will also be pragmatic, at the cost of RWD, if the facts speak for it. And I can certainly see reasons for choosing it:

1. Space considerations. The tiny frunk that you would have in a scaled down Model S would be mostly useless. Better to integrate this into the passenger compartment.
2. Cost reductions. You could install a 188 hp motor at the front, and have this be exactly the same on every Model 3. That simplifies things.
3. Unlike with ICE cars, its actually possible to combine an entry-level FWD model with a high-end AWD model on the same platform without any significant compromises. It's fairly simple when it comes to weight distribution and space allocation.

 

[mikes_fsd]

That depends on the shape of the Model 3. By what Elon Musk says, the Model 3 will be unlike any other car, and thus, it will not simply be a scaled down Model S. Necessarily, any space that the rear wheel drive unit will take up is space that could otherwise have been used to get a larger passenger or cargo space at the back. It would make more sense to put the drive unit at the front, where it's more out of the way.

That is not what he said. He was ambiguous in what he said, but he definitely did NOT say "any other car". He said, and I quote "It won't look like other cars". Big difference, because "other cars" was never defined in the conversation, we do not have enough info to truly speculate!

Link to post with screenshot: Model 3 won't look like other cars

 

[Yggdrasill]

That is not what he said. He was ambiguous in what he said, but he definitely did NOT say "any other car". He said, and I quote "It won't look like other cars". Big difference, because "other cars" was never defined in the conversation, we do not have enough info to truly speculate!

Link to post with screenshot: Model 3 won't look like other cars

True, he didn't say any other car. But from my point of view, the only way it can be intrepreted is that "other cars" means somewhere between "any other car" and "any other mass-produced premium car". I really can't see any way to interpret it in a way that allows the Model 3 to be very similar to the Model S.

 

[Kevin Harney]

I see no reason - compelling or not - to make Model 3 FWD. There is absolutely no sports car that I know of that they have picked FWD. AFAIK the reason for that is that the performance of FWD flat out stinks. Why use crap ?!?

 

[Yggdrasill]

I see no reason - compelling or not - to make Model 3 FWD. There is absolutely no sports car that I know of that they have picked FWD. AFAIK the reason for that is that the performance of FWD flat out stinks. Why use crap ?!?

A ground-up EV can't be directly compared to ICE cars. The rules are different for EVs in some regards. And it can be mentioned that the Model 3 is not intended to be a sports car, it is intended to be a sporty and luxurious family car. It is intended to appeal to as wide a segment of the population as possible.

But I have mentioned several reasons, whether you find them compelling or not.

 

[Kevin Harney]

A ground-up EV can't be directly compared to ICE cars. The rules are different for EVs in some regards. And it can be mentioned that the Model 3 is not intended to be a sports car, it is intended to be a sporty and luxurious family car. It is intended to appeal to as wide a segment of the population as possible.

But I have mentioned several reasons, whether you find them compelling or not.

Really?!?!?! Can you find a quote fron TM that supports that ? TM has said several times that Model 3 will compete with BMW 3 series, Mercedes C class and Audi A4/5. Which one of those is not a sports car ? Which of those uses inferior technology to save $$. This car has to be better than all of them according to Elon. How is that even remotely possible with FWD ? All of those cars are designed to not only be a sedan but a coupe, wagon and convertible as well as having a high end performance version. Model 3 must be able to beat and M3/4 and and Audi A4/5S and whatever a C class performance vehicle is (AMG 65 ?) Not gonna happen with FWD.

 

[Yggdrasill]

Really?!?!?! Can you find a quote fron TM that supports that ? TM has said several times that Model 3 will compete with BMW 3 series, Mercedes C class and Audi A4/5. Which one of those is not a sports car ? Which of those uses inferior technology to save $$. This car has to be better than all of them according to Elon. How is that even remotely possible with FWD ?

The cars you mention are not sports cars, no.

As to how it will be better, as long as the AWD Model 3 knocks the socks of the competition, that's all that matters. The entry-level BMW 3-series 116d does 0-60 in 10.9 seconds. Is that sporty?

 

[TEG]

(Obvious, but) Model 3 will be smaller and very cost reduced compared to Model S, so:
I assume battery pack and motors will be similarly smaller and may not have the same ultra high performance found in Model S.
With that said, I hope they do offer AWD option even though it would be more expensive than RWD.
A 60kWh dual 221hp top line version sounds attractive to me.
I would guess that the 470HP unit is too big for the Model 3 chassis.

Some (German) AWD ICE cars in this segment:

Audi S4 Quattro
BMW 335i xDrive
Daimler C300 4MATIC

 

[Kevin Harney]

The cars you mention are not sports cars, no.

As to how it will be better, as long as the AWD Model 3 knocks the socks of the competition, that's all that matters. The entry-level BMW 3-series 116d does 0-60 in 10.9 seconds. Is that sporty?

The point is that even the base level of those cars is RWD. They are designed that way because they must support the upper versions as well like the BMW M3/4, Audi A4/5S etc. There is really no reason to have a FWD car except to save $ at the expense of performance. Once you have a trim level that demands performance you need to have RWD and then the next level up is AWD. FWD is the bottom of the barrell and only used in really cheap cars that do not offer any performance at all. Elon is a car guy at heart and TM will never produce that type of vehicle. TM is striving to be the BEST car in every category that it attempts. FWD simply is not that.

 

[tga]

There probably isn't a car model in the world where cost control is more of an issue than with the Model 3. $35k is an absurdly low price for a premium EV with more than 200 miles range. Some naysayers have estimated that the Model 3 will cost $70-80k.

You completely missed my point. I never said or implied that the Model 3 isn't cost sensitive. What I said is that ICE cars use front wheel drive (assuming front-engine layout) because it is cheaper to build a front engine/front drive car then a front engine/rear drive car, due to reduced labor costs (and some reduction in parts cost). Any other advantages (better snow handling, no driveshaft hump, etc.) is all secondary (and mostly marketing fluff, anyway).

This advantage does not apply to the Model 3, since they won't build a front motor/rear wheel drive layout. It will be front motor/FWD or rear motor/RWD. There's no cost advantage either way. The drivetrain is compact and integrated and can fit in either end. An ICE is more limited, because you have an engine and transmission that takes up much more space.

As an aside, rear engine/RWD ICE cars are equally easy to build as a front engine/FWD ICE. An experienced mechanic can drop a 911's drivetrain and re-install in an hour or less. But most cars don't use this layout, because the rear weight balance makes the car prone to oversteer, which is dangerous for the average (unskilled) driver.

The UKL platform was simply an example of how even BMW can be pragmatic, at the cost of RWD. Tesla will also be pragmatic, at the cost of RWD, if the facts speak for it. And I can certainly see reasons for choosing it:

1. Space considerations. The tiny frunk that you would have in a scaled down Model S would be mostly useless. Better to integrate this into the passenger compartment.

...and lose a big portion of the crumple zone, compromising safety. I don't see this happening.

2. Cost reductions. You could install a 188 hp motor at the front, and have this be exactly the same on every Model 3. That simplifies things.

As discussed above, there is no cost benefit to FWD vs RWD in a Tesla.

3. Unlike with ICE cars, its actually possible to combine an entry-level FWD model with a high-end AWD model on the same platform without any significant compromises. It's fairly simple when it comes to weight distribution and space allocation.

Umm, huh? What about FWD and AWD versions of the A3/A4/Golf?

 

[Yggdrasill]

The point is that even the base level of those cars is RWD. They are designed that way because they must support the upper versions as well like the BMW M3/4, Audi A4/5S etc.

Yes, and this is completely different for EVs. The entry level Model 3 doesn't need to be RWD for the high end Model 3 to be great. With the ICE technology, you can't simply take a FWD car and add a second ICE at the back of the car. This is different with EVs, it's completely unproblematic to take a FWD car and add a second motor at the back.

There is really no reason to have a FWD car except to save $ at the expense of performance. Once you have a trim level that demands performance you need to have RWD and then the next level up is AWD.

AWD is better than RWD, so why even offer it? If Tesla can make an AWD Model 3 at a lower cost than an RWD ICE car with equal performance, why on earth would Tesla instead make a RWD Model 3? Most of the power needs to be on the rear wheels, so going from an entry level RWD Model 3 to an AWD Model 3, you need to both add a second motor at the front as well as install a different motor at the back. If you start with a FWD Model 3, however, all you need to do is add the second motor at the back.

FWD is the bottom of the barrell and only used in really cheap cars that do not offer any performance at all. Elon is a car guy at heart and TM will never produce that type of vehicle. TM is striving to be the BEST car in every category that it attempts. FWD simply is not that.

The $35k entry-level Model 3 simply can't be best at everything. Even so, I'm sure that a $35k FWD Model 3 will be a lot more attractive than a $35k RWD BMW 3 series for very many people. Some things are more important than performance, including >200 mile range, everyday practicality, environmental and energy security considerations, etc.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Most of the power needs to be on the rear wheels, so going from an entry level RWD Model 3 to an AWD Model 3, you need to both add a second motor at the front as well as install a different motor at the back. If you start with a FWD Model 3, however, all you need to do is add the second motor at the back.

I think you misunderstand the architecture of the Model S. S60/S85 has a large motor in the back. 85D has small motor in the front AND back. P85D has large motor in back, small in front.

So design-wise, Tesla can just as easily put the small motor in the back as they can in the front. The trade offs will be: FWD will have slightly better regen braking, RWD will allow the full "frunk" space. Market-wise, RWD is seen as more premium and sportier than FWD. There is minimal to no cost advantage for Tesla to use FWD.

 

[JRP3]

That depends on the shape of the Model 3. By what Elon Musk says, the Model 3 will be unlike any other car, and thus, it will not simply be a scaled down Model S. Necessarily, any space that the rear wheel drive unit will take up is space that could otherwise have been used to get a larger passenger or cargo space at the back.

Not to any meaningful degree, unless you think there is a chance the Model 3 will offer a third row of seating. I don't. Plus, look at the layout of the D, the front motor/inverter needs to be in a more vertical position to fit, where the rear motor/inverter lays down taking up LESS space. If you want to maximize interior space you would not use a front motor.

 

[Kevin Harney]

Yes, and this is completely different for EVs. The entry level Model 3 doesn't need to be RWD for the high end Model 3 to be great. With the ICE technology, you can't simply take a FWD car and add a second ICE at the back of the car. This is different with EVs, it's completely unproblematic to take a FWD car and add a second motor at the back.

Yes but you are missing the logic. If FWD and RWD are both easily doable then why pick the one that makes the worst car ?

AWD is better than RWD, so why even offer it? If Tesla can make an AWD Model 3 at a lower cost than an RWD ICE car with equal performance, why on earth would Tesla instead make a RWD Model 3? Most of the power needs to be on the rear wheels, so going from an entry level RWD Model 3 to an AWD Model 3, you need to both add a second motor at the front as well as install a different motor at the back. If you start with a FWD Model 3, however, all you need to do is add the second motor at the back.

No one said AWD and RWD cost the same. I am suggesting that RWD will be the base car and AWD will be in the P85D version equivalent to the BMW M3/4 model. The rear motor needs to be the larger doing most of the work not the front. FWD performs inadequately when compared to RWD. Not opinion just fact. Ask any professional driver.

The $35k entry-level Model 3 simply can't be best at everything. Even so, I'm sure that a $35k FWD Model 3 will be a lot more attractive than a $35k RWD BMW 3 series for very many people. Some things are more important than performance, including >200 mile range, everyday practicality, environmental and energy security considerations, etc.

Why can't it be the best of everything ? The $35K car is likely not going to outperform something in another class such as a BMW M3/4 or an Audi A4/5S but if you compare apple to apples it will be the best. If you are suggesting that a $35K FWD Model 3 would be more attractive than a RWD BMW 328 then I think you would get a LOT of arguments on that one and MOST people would pick the BMW. If you are aiming to build the best car possible then FWD is not the right choice. It has absolutely no benefit except cost and that benefit does not apply to Tesla because it does not use the extra parts and labor in the first place so there is no savings.

I am 99.9% sure that the Model 3 will be RWD and AWD if it is not I will not be buying it. Regardless I will be getting the AWD version if at all possible.

 

[Yggdrasill]

You completely missed my point. I never said or implied that the Model 3 isn't cost sensitive. What I said is that ICE cars use front wheel drive (assuming front-engine layout) because it is cheaper to build a front engine/front drive car then a front engine/rear drive car, due to reduced labor costs (and some reduction in parts cost). Any other advantages (better snow handling, no driveshaft hump, etc.) is all secondary (and mostly marketing fluff, anyway).

This advantage does not apply to the Model 3, since they won't build a front motor/rear wheel drive layout. It will be front motor/FWD or rear motor/RWD. There's no cost advantage either way. The drivetrain is compact and integrated and can fit in either end. An ICE is more limited, because you have an engine and transmission that takes up much more space.

I'll certainly agree that the cost savings are significantly less than going from front motor/RWD to front motor/FWD, but there will still be cost savings involved. When the space only needs to accomodate a single configuration, you can eliminate a lot of parts and documentation. The software will also be simpler. Whether these cost savings are significant, I don't know, but they are one factor in the considerations.

...and lose a big portion of the crumple zone, compromising safety. I don't see this happening.

Even with a shorter nose, the Model 3 would most likely be safer than other cars in the same class. The electric motor takes less space than an ICE, so you can get an equivalent crumple zone with less space to work with. There *will* be compromises when it comes to the Model 3.

Umm, huh? What about FWD and AWD versions of the A3/A4/Golf?

Significant compromises have been made. You always have unutilized space, less ideal weight distribution or cost-inflating solutions.

- - - Updated - - -

I think you misunderstand the architecture of the Model S. S60/S85 has a large motor in the back. 85D has small motor in the front AND back. P85D has large motor in back, small in front.

So design-wise, Tesla can just as easily put the small motor in the back as they can in the front. The trade offs will be: FWD will have slightly better regen braking, RWD will allow the full "frunk" space. Market-wise, RWD is seen as more premium and sportier than FWD. There is minimal to no cost advantage for Tesla to use FWD.

It's not a given that Tesla will offer a small motor at the back. They may offer just two drive train configurations, FWD and dual motor AWD. Cutting down on configurations is one way to cut costs, and this solution would allow them to have just two different drive units, while still adressing both the low end, and high end of the market.

- - - Updated - - -

No one said AWD and RWD cost the same. I am suggesting that RWD will be the base car and AWD will be in the P85D version equivalent to the BMW M3/4 model. The rear motor needs to be the larger doing most of the work not the front. FWD performs inadequately when compared to RWD. Not opinion just fact. Ask any professional driver.

*I* said AWD and RWD may cost the same. At least for a given level of performance. Accepted truths regarding ICE cars may not be as true when it comes to EVs. It's a brave new world and auto makers will need to experiment a bit to determine the best way to do things. Tesla may already know the answer.

Why can't it be the best of everything ? The $35K car is likely not going to outperform something in another class such as a BMW M3/4 or an Audi A4/5S but if you compare apple to apples it will be the best. If you are suggesting that a $35K FWD Model 3 would be more attractive than a RWD BMW 328 then I think you would get a LOT of arguments on that one and MOST people would pick the BMW. If you are aiming to build the best car possible then FWD is not the right choice. It has absolutely no benefit except cost and that benefit does not apply to Tesla because it does not use the extra parts and labor in the first place so there is no savings.

There are savings, as explained above.

I am 99.9% sure that the Model 3 will be RWD and AWD if it is not I will not be buying it. Regardless I will be getting the AWD version if at all possible.

Exactly, if Tesla does things the way I suggest they will, you will still be a happy customer.

 

[stopcrazypp]

It's not a given that Tesla will offer a small motor at the back. They may offer just two drive train configurations, FWD and dual motor AWD. Cutting down on configurations is one way to cut costs, and this solution would allow them to have just two different drive units, while still adressing both the low end, and high end of the market.

You are talking about a configuration of FWD small motor and AWD small+big motor. However, in the more likely case of a dual small motor configuration option (it's not a given the Model 3 can fit the larger motor in the back), there is no configuration savings to having FWD. And I doubt the amount of savings from eliminating such a configuration (given it already exists in the Model S) will outweigh the loss of sales from making the car FWD.

 

[JohnQ]

A major reason to offer FWD rather than rear wheel drive? Fear. Many people are frightened to death of driving a rear wheel drive car in the snow. You can argue about great traction control algorithms and such but it's a big deal and an easier sell in the mass market.

The A4 and BMW 3-series are decidedly not sports cars. It would be generous to call the mid-level performance sedans. S and M trims are a different matter but that's what different trim levels on the Model 3 are for. And, the A4 options are FWD or AWD. No RWD option.

Put a RWD in the base Model 3 and either it will be handicapped or the vast majority of folks will try and upgrade to the AWD model ... if they can afford to do so.

 

[Yggdrasill]

You are talking about a configuration of FWD small motor and AWD small+big motor. However, in the more likely case of a dual small motor configuration option (it's not a given the Model 3 can fit the larger motor in the back), there is no configuration savings to having FWD. And I doubt the amount of savings from eliminating such a configuration (given it already exists in the Model S) will outweigh the loss of sales from making the car FWD.

First I would say that if the Model 3 would only use the small motors, I'd agree that it would be more likely that the base model 3 would be RWD. But if it only used the small motors, that would be a bit disappointing. It would then have around 400 hp maximum, which isn't mind-blowing. 600-700 hp, however, that would be mind-blowing. (0-60 in 2.8 seconds, anyone?) I think you could fit the large motor in the back, although you might need to redesign it somewhat. I also think you would be able to fit a battery pack greater than 85 kWh, given progress on the battery tech as well as the new battery cell format. You might have the versions 70 kWh FWD, 70 kWh AWD and 90 kWh AWD Performance, for instance.

And I think that it's not a given that there will be a measurable effect on sales from the base model being FWD. In the $35k price range people aren't as consumed by RWD vs FWD. 188 hp won't be amazing whether we are talking about FWD, RWD or AWD. Some people would of course be put off, but they have the option of going for a Model S, and I think Tesla would still be supply-limited, in any case.

 

[Kevin Harney]

First I would say that if the Model 3 would only use the small motors, I'd agree that it would be more likely that the base model 3 would be RWD. But if it only used the small motors, that would be a bit disappointing. It would then have around 400 hp maximum, which isn't mind-blowing. 600-700 hp, however, that would be mind-blowing. (0-60 in 2.8 seconds, anyone?) I think you could fit the large motor in the back, although you might need to redesign it somewhat. I also think you would be able to fit a battery pack greater than 85 kWh, given progress on the battery tech as well as the new battery cell format. You might have the versions 70 kWh FWD, 70 kWh AWD and 90 kWh AWD Performance, for instance.

And I think that it's not a given that there will be a measurable effect on sales from the base model being FWD. In the $35k price range people aren't as consumed by RWD vs FWD. 188 hp won't be amazing whether we are talking about FWD, RWD or AWD. Some people would of course be put off, but they have the option of going for a Model S, and I think Tesla would still be supply-limited, in any case.

Can you please give logical reasons why you are all bent on this being FWD ? I believe that you are wrong and have stated many reasons as have others but you have no concrete reasons other than "I said so".

You stated that if they wanted a AWD car that the lesser version should be FWD rather than RWD but WHY? Please elaborate cause I am missing your point. I would need a REALLY good reason to pick a lesser and inferior technology. Can you list some reasons please.....

AND can you name even one car that will be in the class of the Model 3 that has 700-800 hp please. I think most people with cars this size would be VERY happy with 400 hp. Even the Model S P85D only has 691 hp and that is a MUCH larger car and has AMAZING performance.

 

[PokerBroker]

400hp in a midsize is absolutely mind blowing