For six thousand dollars, you could afford to add TWO red underlines.Guys, this is easy. Get the LR with acceleration boost and add a red line underneath the dual motor emblem.
It sounds like you value performance in your cars so you might as well get it from the start.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Going to order a new Model 3 performance. Should I consider the long range AWD?
- Thread starter Blacktes24
- Start date
I've always ordered the performance version of cars and tracked a lot of cars I've owned (BMW M3, GT-R, GT3) but for the Model 3, I didn't think the Performance was worth the 8K. I hate the look and weight of the 20" uber turbines, the performance brakes still aren't good enough for track (have to go aftermarket) and the suspension is more or less the same. The only thing that's hard to replicate aftermarket is track mode but I'm not planning to track my model 3 so I went with the LR and will add acceleration boost.
I had originally ordered a performance but later switched to a LR. I just didnt want to deal with the hassle of removing, selling and buying a new set of wheels and tires. Those factory 20" look great but are range killers, have a high probability of cracking or blowing tires. And finally summer tires dont cut it in my climate. I will be immediately purchasing acceleration boost tho.
Sorry to toss a wet blanket on this…….if you are buying the P model, then you say it is OK to speed. I see idiots on the road who are weaving in and out with friends and traveling at high speeds. It is dangerous for them and others on the road. These cars are fast to begin with. It is not OK to being 100 in a 65.
TomT
Technical Maven
MaskedRacerX
Member
Replying to this with an edit so that I can agree, and yes, that's true, and I do concur.
However, that's absolutely independent from the car. As the owner of vehicles like a Z06, a ~750HP Supra, and currently, an M3P, I have never done the above - yet, I have seen that behavior by people driving cars that were not performance vehicles by any stretch of the imagination.
roblab
Active Member
Yep. I've done over a hundred in a Hillman Minx. I've done over a hundred in a Dodge Van. I've done over a hundred in lots of weak-kneed cars. It's the driver, not the car. Now, if you talk doing 167, well.... Tesla is mighty smooth at speed.Replying to this with an edit so that I can agree, and yes, that's true, and I do concur.
However, that's absolutely independent from the car. As the owner of vehicles like a Z06, a ~750HP Supra, and currently, an M3P, I have never done the above - yet, I have seen that behavior by people driving cars that were not performance vehicles by any stretch of the imagination.
For sure a fast car can sometimes let an irresponsible driver get themselves into trouble quicker than a slow car. But in that sense M3P and M3LR are practically the same...their acceleration really isn't all that different. M3LR is PLENTY quick to do very stupid, irresponsible things with the Go pedal.
MaskedRacerX
Member
<raises hand>Hands up, who had to lookup Hillman Minx?
Seems like that Hallman Minx was even less powerful than my first car, which was rated for 85hp when it was new. 85mph is about the quickest I ever drove it, and at that speed it started to feel like the car might shake itself apart. I don't know if it could've reached 100mph without help from gravity. If it could have I'm not sure it or I would have survived to drive again!
I do think having that little power in my first car was good for me. My next car had 162hp. That was enough for me to drive like the teenage idiot that I still was. Doesn't take M3P power for that. Thankfully I never crashed that car or hit anyone or anything with it...but I definitely wasn't a shining example of safe driving in traffic either.
Each car I've bought has been quicker than the last. That's not a requirement to me, just cars in general keep getting quicker and quicker. Many times (really every time) I could have bought something even faster, and didn't, because that was never the top priority for me. Mainstream performance cars like the M3P are honestly way way quicker already than I feel any need for, I was ready to buy something slightly slower than our S P85 this time. Wife didn't want to go any slower though!
Driving a Tesla has totally spoiled her vs what she used to drive. If I ever get a just-for-fun sports car as a weekend or track toy, it's almost certainly going to be much slower than the M3P. And that's just fine!I'll take more range over performance any day IMO. The launch in the LR is more than enough for me-and I personally prefer the more modest look (I think it would make for an even greater surprise for those would try to test me off the line). I think the Aero wheels give the car a bit more of an abstract/futuristic look too, which you cannot get in the performance unless you get smaller wheels after market.
Just ordered the Model 3 Performance. Black on Black. Almost went with the used one because of FSD and cheaper. But 3 years less warranty and not many miles for warranty swayed me to new. Can't wait to get it thanks all for the help deciding!
jackmott
Member
The wheels are not the range killers, the tires are. If you can find low rolling resistance tires in 20" sizes, range will be fine (but can you? I don't know). If you doubt this we did a ton of math in the driving dynamics thread last two days =)
@BGaffigan @jackmott I think I mentioned this in that same thread, but my experience suggests the wheels are also to blame. LRR tires will increase range but generally won't grip well, there's a pretty direct tradeoff. Smaller diameter + lighter wheels will also benefit range, without any sacrifice in grip or handling (if you compare with good performance tires on each). They also benefit power steering feel, ride quality, and wheel protection/durability. There's literally no downside except for appearance. (And inability to fit larger brakes if you're building the car into a track monster....but I don't think that's applicable for anyone debating between LR and P in this thread.)
I've made both kinds of changes independently on my Teslas and I'm quite confident in stating that both matter. My guess is most people inclined to buy an M3P wouldn't be happy with MXM4 or equivalent efficiency-focused tires...they really are terrible in terms of performance. So my suggestion is to downsize the wheels and just put whatever kind of tires you want on. Eeking out that last bit of range from LRR tires doesn't seem worthwhile for anyone into "performance" cars/driving. These cars have lots of range and the supercharger network is pretty extensive these days.
Edit: Just to be clear for all of you bashing the 20" wheels, I promise you I dislike them just as much.
I think the Uberturbines look awesome but that's it, from a practical + performance + efficiency perspective they're really bad. I ditched mine ASAP and while I miss the look, there's nothing else I miss, the car is better in every way with smaller, lighter 18" wheels. And of course 18" tires are much cheaper, the wheels will eventually pay for themselves thanks to cheaper tires. I stuck with "max performance" summer tires, ones that grip better than the stock tires, and I still gained efficiency from downsizing wheels!
Last edited:
jackmott
Member
Newtonian mechanics is pretty well established, the difference that wheel mass/inertia alone can have on range is too small for anyone to measure in the field. Double check the math if you want.
There are however tons of other variables that can fool you (tire crr, inflation pressure, wind, elevation change, temperature, wheel aerodynamics, traffic, etc etc)
Stickier tires do not *always* have worse rolling resistance. The two things are not inextricably linked. Yes, if you are choosing among the universe of compounds and constructions options to maximize grip, you are unlikely to also stumble upon ones that minimize rolling resistance at the same time. But tires do exist that do pretty well at both though (Pilot Sport 4 non-S for instance). There are tire website that actually measure this so you could check the tires you changed from and to maybe.
By the way if you look at my car, you will notice it is an M3P with 18s on it. I think 20"s are dumb as hell, but I'm pedantic and will die on the hill of physics too =)
There are however tons of other variables that can fool you (tire crr, inflation pressure, wind, elevation change, temperature, wheel aerodynamics, traffic, etc etc)
Stickier tires do not *always* have worse rolling resistance. The two things are not inextricably linked. Yes, if you are choosing among the universe of compounds and constructions options to maximize grip, you are unlikely to also stumble upon ones that minimize rolling resistance at the same time. But tires do exist that do pretty well at both though (Pilot Sport 4 non-S for instance). There are tire website that actually measure this so you could check the tires you changed from and to maybe.
By the way if you look at my car, you will notice it is an M3P with 18s on it. I think 20"s are dumb as hell, but I'm pedantic and will die on the hill of physics too =)
@jackmott I hear you that rolling resistance vs grip is not a hard and fast tradeoff, it is theoretically possible that one tire manages to have a little more grip and a little less rolling resistance than another, even though on average that isn't the case (aside from special cases like winter tires generally having poor dry road efficiency due to tradeoffs needed for good snow & ice traction).
However...I'm veeerrryyyy skeptical that I reduced rolling resistance switching to these:
However...I'm veeerrryyyy skeptical that I reduced rolling resistance switching to these:
Similar threads
