Handling In Lrawd Vs P

[putmeinachair]

I have only driven a P but I’m taking delivery of a long range AWD next week. No VIN yet so I can still get the P if I want.

I found the P to be really solid and grippy while slowing down fast into a corner. It did not exhibit any boat like behavior like my F30 BMW.

How much worse is the handling on the P? General comments on difference between the two for the purpose of reckless driving?

I initially was not getting the P because of concerns about 20” rims making the ride too hard, so much so that I might have to hop out and walk the boulevard. Is this really an issue? I can get either, it’s just comfort vs cornering and blastoff

 

[1.21GW]

You won’t be able to tell much difference in handling in anything short of a track environment.

The P has stickier tires that will wear out faster (I have yet to exceed the traction limits of my 19” sport wheels/ tires on a public road)
20” wheels do have a slightly rougher ride
Larger brakes will resist fade during track use
Track mode - great for the track

The major reason to buy the P is the 0-60 improvement and track use. Otherwise the AWD will be the same. I wish I waited and got the P, but that is solely for the acceleration.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I have only driven a P but I’m taking delivery of a long range AWD next week. No VIN yet so I can still get the P if I want.

I found the P to be really solid and grippy while slowing down fast into a corner. It did not exhibit any boat like behavior like my F30 BMW.

How much worse is the handling on the P? General comments on difference between the two for the purpose of reckless driving?

I initially was not getting the P because of concerns about 20” rims making the ride too hard, so much so that I might have to hop out and walk the boulevard. Is this really an issue? I can get either, it’s just comfort vs cornering and blastoff

You can replace the tires on the AWD with PS4S and the grip will be pretty similar to the P.

The issue is the power distribution. I have heard @Daniel in SD complain that the AWD feels like a Subaru AWD system - due to the rear motor power limits in the AWD, it may have a somewhat higher proportion of the power sent to the front than with the P. This (allegedly) makes it feel a bit more “scrabbly” blasting out of corners.

So, it is possible when flooring it out of a corner you might prefer the feel of the P.

However, personally, I have only had a chance to drive the P in a performance-oriented way. I’ve driven both, but the AWD drive was a brief one.

All that being said, I think the AWD is overall the more sensible choice, assuming you won’t be planning to track it.

Both cars are extremely capable when cornering - but you’ll want performance tires on it if you want the AWD to handle similarly to the P. The advantage with AWD is that you can put those tires on 18” wheels, which are more durable, tires are cheaper, and you can also use the aero covers if you want. Aero covers not an option with the P, and fitting aftermarket rims is more annoying with the P due to the much-discussed “lip” and the bigger calipers.

Practically, the biggest issue for the P is the limited range due to the tires and lack of aero covers. Probably chops 30-40 miles off the range relative to the EPA estimates. It’s basically limited practically to somewhere around 250 miles, and potentially less for very high speeds. To some extent this can be addressed with a second set of “range” wheels.

 

[putmeinachair]

I got the P. Want more rear power weight and silly acceleration.
Range hit isn't that bad if you drive like a grandma on long trips.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I got the P. Want more rear power weight and silly acceleration.

Congrats! Enjoy!

Range hit isn't that bad if you drive like a grandma on long trips.

Just keep in mind the range hit vs. the AWD is mostly not dependent on your driving style - it is nearly entirely due to fixed rolling resistance increases (thus can be solved by using different tires), which are independent of driving style. A portion of the range hit IS due to the lack of aero covers (so that will improve things if you drive more slowly), but that is a relatively small contributor. On the flip side, the P is slightly lower and has the spoiler, and it's possible that both those things VERY marginally improve efficiency (there is a claimed extremely small positive efficiency effect from the spoiler) at speed.

 

[kdphan]

Just did a 400+ miles trip today with the P.

For a long stretch I avg 78mph and I was getting about 70% of rated range.

188 miles stretch I used up around 260 miles of range.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Just did a 400+ miles trip today with the P.

For a long stretch I avg 78mph and I was getting about 70% of rated range.

188 miles stretch I used up around 260 miles of range.

Seems about right, for that speed on the flat I'd expect range of 230 miles with something like 310Wh/mi trip meter indicated usage.

For the AWD for the same drive, you'd probably get a little over 250 miles. But the difference between the two expands a bit as the speeds reduce as aero becomes a smaller proportion of overall losses.

 

[kdphan]

Seems about right, for that speed on the flat I'd expect range of 230 miles with something like 310Wh/mi trip meter indicated usage.

For the AWD for the same drive, you'd probably get a little over 250 miles. But the difference between the two expands a bit as the speeds reduce as aero becomes a smaller proportion of overall losses.

My avg was 334wh/m

But once traffic hit I was getting around 240wh/m going under 50mph avg

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

My avg was 334wh/m

But once traffic hit I was getting around 240wh/m going under 50mph avg

I believe it. I went slightly low with my estimate. And it's possible you had a few mph headwind. Or it was slightly uphill.

Wasn't sure which of your numbers to use. 70% of the range, 217mi, implies 328Wh/mi - basically exactly what you saw. (The AWD would probably get closer to 238mi for that drive.)

But 188mi using 260 rated miles implies 318Wh/mi. (Sounds like it was an average of two different speeds, which explains the difference.)

And then I tried to be slightly optimistic and went with 230 miles for a full discharge. But realistically at that speed it might easily be less than 220 miles.

Just using the 230Wh/rmi constant here for these calculations. At this point I'm pretty confident in that number based on data points from two different AWD/P cars.

 

[ZOMGVTEK]

Does the P have noticeably better low end than the AWD, or is it mainly a bump in peak power?

 

[kdphan]

Does the P have noticeably better low end than the AWD, or is it mainly a bump in peak power?

Both torque and HP figures are more in the P so yes it does have better lower end.

 

[ZOMGVTEK]

Stated figures are for peak power and torque, which isn’t achieved at the same speed nor typically at 0MPH.

Basically, I’m curious if they changed the peak phase current into the motor, the battery current, the motor bias, or some combination thereof.

Based on the dyno for the AWD, I would assume it’s most likely they dialed the phase current back a touch, and clipped the peak battery current considerably. This would be easier to verify with a dyno of both cars, but it really needs to be done without traction issues from 0 mph with both cars on the same dyno and high SOC.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Stated figures are for peak power and torque, which isn’t achieved at the same speed nor typically at 0MPH.

Peak torque is reached before 5mph in both vehicles. Torque is then constant in both vehicles up until about 45mph (around 5000rpm). So HP and battery current ramp roughly linearly until that speed/time (speed and time linearly proportional until that point). The P has about 20-25% more torque up to 45mph, based on measured times to a given speed.

HP is dropping by around 60mph (not sure the exact speed) in both vehicles.

Above 60mph the differences in HP at a given speed between the two vehicles is less significant. I don’t have the a vs. t plots for both but if you search here you’ll find them.

The stated speeds where things happen in this post are approximate. And may not be 100% correct since I don’t have the plots in front of me. But gives you a rough idea.

I’d ignore what is in most Dyno plots below about 2000-3000 rpm; it is garbage data for whatever reason.

Just look for instrumented acceleration vs. time plots that people have done on VBOX, Dragy, and their own phone accelerometers (which are surprisingly good). That’ll give you the info about the low end.

 

[Lunares]

Basically for my P3D to increase range I have 18" winter tires (for driving to ski mountains). I don't do enough long distance summer driving to care.

You will notice a very little bit of roughness 20" to 18", but I honestly couldn't really tell. The only thing I noticed was my 20" tires were slightly quieter than my 18" ones.

One thing to note is that if you want to track it, the P3D will handle better and of course perform better but you will need to get aftermarket tires anyways. the normal 20" ones disintegrate at the track. It's harder to get wheels for a P3D

 

[WilliamG]

Congrats! Enjoy!



Just keep in mind the range hit vs. the AWD is mostly not dependent on your driving style - it is nearly entirely due to fixed rolling resistance increases (thus can be solved by using different tires), which are independent of driving style. A portion of the range hit IS due to the lack of aero covers (so that will improve things if you drive more slowly), but that is a relatively small contributor. On the flip side, the P is slightly lower and has the spoiler, and it's possible that both those things VERY marginally improve efficiency (there is a claimed extremely small positive efficiency effect from the spoiler) at speed.

I would genuinely love it if Tesla released Aero wheel covers for the Performance 20" wheels. Or if that's not possible, some Aero wheels for the P3D+. I mean, why not?

 

[dfwatt]

I would genuinely love it if Tesla released Aero wheel covers for the Performance 20" wheels. Or if that's not possible, some Aero wheels for the P3D+. I mean, why not?

Get get the UP spoiler and drop the car by an inch or so with either one of the MPP coilover kits. You'll more than make up for the lack of Aero covers.

 

[WilliamG]

Get get the UP spoiler and drop the car by an inch or so with either one of the MPP coilover kits. You'll more than make up for the lack of Aero covers.

I have the factory spoiler which helps, and dropping the car by an inch is never, ever happening. Seattle driveways are nuisance enough as it is! Yes, there are other ways to make up mileage, but I'd be interested in seeing wheel mods for the P3D+.

 

[N54TT]

I initially was not getting the P because of concerns about 20” rims making the ride too hard, so much so that I might have to hop out and walk the boulevard. Is this really an issue? I can get either, it’s just comfort vs cornering and blastoff

I don’t find my p3d+ any harsher than my e90 335i, oem sport suspension and 19’s. IMO the oem 18’s with runflats was actually harsher.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I would genuinely love it if Tesla released Aero wheel covers for the Performance 20" wheels. Or if that's not possible, some Aero wheels for the P3D+. I mean, why not?

What typical speed do you drive on the freeways up there? Seattle freeways seem pretty slow. If you spend a lot of time at 45-65mph and surface streets I think there is more to gain from just getting different tires. Even at high speeds, say 70mph, the Aeros seem to be closer to a 10Wh/mi improvement. You’ll get more than that from tires, and at all speeds. Obviously there are downsides to handling and safety of such a change.

 

[dfwatt]

I have the factory spoiler which helps, and dropping the car by an inch is never, ever happening. Seattle driveways are nuisance enough as it is! Yes, there are other ways to make up mileage, but I'd be interested in seeing wheel mods for the P3D+.

The UP spoiler is in the front and it doesn't drop your ground clearance by that much.