How will AWD perform?

[Rountad]

Zero - 60mph

Model S
75: 4.3s
75D: 4.2s
100D: 4.1s

Model 3
Standard: 5.6s
Long Range: 5.1s

I'm really torn on what to order when my turn comes up. As a line waiter in Texas, I might be able to get the full tax credit on an AWD Model 3 if the order time happens in June or earlier vs the July onward that Tesla.com is now indicating. If not, that makes AWD even more expensive...

Dual Motor All-Wheel Drive
Choice of 220 or 310 mile range

Jul - Sep 2018

I'm mainly interested in acceleration and the minor increase in range, although wet traction improvement is nice, too.

Knowing that this is speculation...

1) How do you think AWD will perform in the standard battery size?
2) How do you think AWD will perform in the long range battery size?
3) Was the under 4 seconds quoted by Elon Musk previously only for Ludicrous?
4) Why do you think there is 0.5 sec difference in standard vs. long range 0-60, but only 0.1 in the 75D v 100D?

 

[Knightshade]

1) I doubt it'd be different at all. Maybe .1 difference at best. Cheapest battery on cheapest car isn't where they're trying to attract anybody looking for performance.

2) Regular large battery? again maybe .1 faster like the 75 to 75D. There WILL be a P3 after all.

3) What quote is that? My thinking is the P3D (performance AWD model 3) is going to be around 4.5 0-60... because they don't want to get in the way of Model S sales so it's GOT to be at least a little slower than the slowest current-offer S. Believe me, I really wanted a quicker 3 too, but eventually decided between that limitation and not wanting to lose the credit it wasn't worth waiting vs the large battery RWD model.

4) Because they want to encourage people to buy the P100?

 

[Rountad]

2) Regular large battery? again maybe .1 faster like the 75 to 75D. There WILL be a P3 after all.

3) What quote is that? My thinking is the P3D (performance AWD model 3) is going to be around 4.5 0-60... because they don't want to get in the way of Model S sales so it's GOT to be at least a little slower than the slowest current-offer S. Believe me, I really wanted a quicker 3 too, but eventually decided between that limitation and not wanting to lose the credit it wasn't worth waiting vs the large battery RWD model.

4) Because they want to encourage people to buy the P100?

2) Yes. Whatever the large battery is for 310 mi now.
3) I am having trouble finding it. I found several rumors and this:
Tesla Model 3 exclusive leaked specs: 0-60 under 4 sec fast and 300+ mile range options (Update: Base 6 sec 0-60 and 215 mile range)
but I am having trouble with the quote. Maybe it was in last year's reveal...

 

[thelastdeadmouse]

I'd always planned to get the the battery upgrade and AWD, not sure if I'm still going to with the wait being long than I though plus tax credit uncertainty. I'm hoping that long range + AWD is 4.X. I'd be perfectly happy with 4.8 or 4.9.

Stock 5.6
Long 5.1
Long AWD 4.9
P3D 3.9

 

[3mp_kwh]

1) & 2) We don't know new motor specs, but likely same one will be for AWD small/large battery, front and back. Teslas get less battery-limited with each couple years increase in cell count. That said, if the chosen motor is small it will make little difference. If, OTOH, it is big, than the larger battery might offer more juice the motor can use. Otherwise, just like Model S, bigger batteries tend to offer better highway roll-on acceleration and less of the "EV effect", of spending progressively less acceleration as the mph's tick by.

4) Motor limits. The 85D and 75D share front/back smaller motors. 85D had an update enabling ~4.0 0-60, after a number of months production. I am not certain of this, but it is logical to conclude that, since battery size wasn't the limiting factor, a larger battery wasn't going to offer more than .1 second (whether going from 75, to 85 or 100KWh). The .5 difference may, again, suggest motor and/or battery limits of the ~55KWh battery. It could also just be marketing. My mind has cob webs, but I think the Model S was known to be .5 seconds quicker than adversised, originally.

 

[Knightshade]

I'd always planned to get the the battery upgrade and AWD, not sure if I'm still going to with the wait being long than I though plus tax credit uncertainty. I'm hoping that long range + AWD is 4.X. I'd be perfectly happy with 4.8 or 4.9.

Stock 5.6
Long 5.1
Long AWD 4.9
P3D 3.9

I think your P3D is very very very optimistic....why would anyone ever buy an S75D if you can get a cheaper, faster, 3? Just for the 2 tiny rear facing seats?

The long AWD guess might turn out right- but I don't think 5.1->4.9 is worth like 8 grand (~$4000 option plus losing $3750 tax break)

(now if you're also buying because you drive in road conditions where AWD makes sense that's different math- I'm talking just for performance purposes)

 

[Bebop]

I think your P3D is very very very optimistic....why would anyone ever buy an S75D if you can get a cheaper, faster, 3? Just for the 2 tiny rear facing seats?

The long AWD guess might turn out right- but I don't think 5.1->4.9 is worth like 8 grand (~$4000 option plus losing $3750 tax break)

(now if you're also buying because you drive in road conditions where AWD makes sense that's different math- I'm talking just for performance purposes)

My guess is...

1.) They get rid of the 75D for a 85D instead or to a 90D as the base model for the S in a few years once 3 is actually out in the masses and you can get a 3 with a month delivery time.

2.) They somehow increase the acceleration speed of the current 75D and 100D down to the 3.4-.5 second range with some kind of software update? (that would be awesome!) It has happened with other cars (like getting an upgrade to ludicrous mode or insane mode). I would be annoyed if I got a more expensive Model S and then the cheaper Model 3 can go faster than my car even if the S is a base model.

3.) They completely software limit the Model 3 to never ever go past 4 seconds 0-60 even with a performance all wheel drive model?

4.) They make the upgrade of performance on a Model 3 so so expensive that you second guess yourself and instead opt for a Model S.

 

[thelastdeadmouse]

I think your P3D is very very very optimistic....why would anyone ever buy an S75D if you can get a cheaper, faster, 3? Just for the 2 tiny rear facing seats?

The long AWD guess might turn out right- but I don't think 5.1->4.9 is worth like 8 grand (~$4000 option plus losing $3750 tax break)

(now if you're also buying because you drive in road conditions where AWD makes sense that's different math- I'm talking just for performance purposes)

You'd buy the S75D because the P3D would be nearly as expensive, and the S will be bigger, better equipped, more social cachet. 35 base + 9 battery + 4 AWD + 20 Performance = 68k vs 74.5 for the S. Obviously the AWD and performance costs are a total guess, but its 5k and 40k respectively for the S, so they're within the realm of reason. I'm guessing 3.9 because if you're going to charge a bunch extra for the performance version, its much better optics if the 0-60 starts with a different number before the decimal.

 

[JeffK]

I think your P3D is very very very optimistic....why would anyone ever buy an S75D if you can get a cheaper, faster, 3? Just for the 2 tiny rear facing seats?

the AWD version with everything included is going to be about the same price as the base price for the BMW M3 at $64,000 which is 0-60 in 4.0 seconds.

The performance version must be significantly faster than this to earn the ludicrous moniker.

 

[Knightshade]

the AWD version with everything included is going to be about the same price as the base price for the BMW M3 at $64,000 which is 0-60 in 4.0 seconds.

The performance version must be significantly faster than this to earn the ludicrous moniker.

Yes but once you option the BMW to not seem like a Honda inside it's considerably more.

I know once I equipped a 335i to be similar to my IS350 it made the BMW like 10-15k more for roughly the same performance (and considerably poorer reliability of course)

You'd buy the S75D because the P3D would be nearly as expensive, and the S will be bigger, better equipped, more social cachet. 35 base + 9 battery + 4 AWD + 20 Performance = 68k vs 74.5 for the S. Obviously the AWD and performance costs are a total guess, but its 5k and 40k respectively for the S, so they're within the realm of reason. I'm guessing 3.9

Seems like it'd be basically the same equipment, except the M3 would lack air suspension but add useful door pockets and cup holders

So again apart from a little bigger trunk and/or the 2 rear kid seats, nobody'd ever buy the S at that point...(and if you really need space more than money there's the X...)

Hell, 3.9 would make it faster than an S100 that costs over 100k... a P3D that quick for 68k would basically give nobody who didn't need to seat 7 a reason to ever buy an S other than the P100D (for insanely more $ because they just want the fastest thing out there)


I mean- I guess they could drop the 75D entirely as a car, and bump the S100D to do 0-60 in the mid-low 3s or something so there'd be a reason to buy one over the P3D that does 3.9 while still leaving space between the S100D and P100D.... but that'd be the only way you get a model 3 running 3.9 and not killed most model S sales

 

[JeffK]

Yes but once you option the BMW to not seem like a Honda inside it's considerably more.

I know once I equipped a 335i to be similar to my IS350 it made the BMW like 10-15k more for roughly the same performance (and considerably poorer reliability of course)




Seems like it'd be basically the same equipment, except the M3 would lack air suspension but add useful door pockets and cup holders

So again apart from a little bigger trunk and/or the 2 rear kid seats, nobody'd ever buy the S at that point...(and if you really need space more than money there's the X...)

Hell, 3.9 would make it faster than an S100 that costs over 100k... a P3D that quick for 68k would basically give nobody who didn't need to seat 7 a reason to ever buy an S other than the P100D (for insanely more $ because they just want the fastest thing out there)


I mean- I guess they could drop the 75D entirely as a car, and bump the S100D to do 0-60 in the mid-low 3s or something so there'd be a reason to buy one over the P3D that does 3.9 while still leaving space between the S100D and P100D.... but that'd be the only way you get a model 3 running 3.9 and not killed most model S sales

People who buy the S100D do so more generally for range vs performance. Some don't care about performance at all.

I'm not sure when people will get it through their heads that S and 3 are not competitors. As Elon alluded to in the call today. Interest in S/X have only increased since Model 3. Having a super quick Model 3 version will not tank Model S sales.

 

[brkaus]

Once they have the factory capacity to build more cars, they shouldn't care if the 3 is faster than an S. Just price the thing high, even higher than the S to maintain the profit.

Sure, some (many) will complain it costs to much. But some will pay anything for performance.

Not going to build a "everyone" car with luxury & high performance.

 

[Saghost]

I don't think they'll hold the 3 back artificially to keep separation from the S.

Having said that, even the 75 pack seems to have some limits on how fast it can supercharge relative to the current S/X packs, which likely means limitations on how fast it can discharge - maybe related to the 2170 cells or the thermal management solution.

I think it's likely that the P3D will be designed to take as much power as the pack can deliver, and I'd bet on it beating the M3 and AMG C class and S4 by a significant margin - that's one of the tools Tesla has consistently used to sell cars.

I'm going to guess they'll end up falling somewhere in the 3.5 second 0-60 range for the fastest 3 of this generation, using 350-400 kW at peak draw.

By the time that car comes out, they'll probably have found a way to push the S just a little faster (though they need new tires to make any real improvement now.) Maybe a 120 kWh pack from 2170 cells and dual rear motors for that added bit of traction (and the ability to adjust handling by differential torque,) making it a P120T?

 

[JeffK]

Having said that, even the 75 pack seems to have some limits on how fast it can supercharge relative to the current S/X packs, which likely means limitations on how fast it can discharge - maybe related to the 2170 cells or the thermal management solution.

If measuring by miles per minute, Elon mentioned today that Model 3 charges more like an S100D or P100D than the 75D.

 

[Saghost]

If measuring by miles per minute, Elon mentioned today that Model 3 charges more like an S100D or P100D than the 75D.

I'm not surprised - the 3LR has the higher pack voltage like the big battery cars from the shots we've been given. But the numbers they gave us suggest that the pack can't take the full power an 85/90/100 can - which is why I'm suspecting it won't be able to handle the full 1300-1600A of a Ludicrous S/X either. I don't know enough of the details to make an intelligent guess about why that is yet.

 

[JeffK]

I'm not surprised - the 3LR has the higher pack voltage like the big battery cars from the shots we've been given. But the numbers they gave us suggest that the pack can't take the full power an 85/90/100 can - which is why I'm suspecting it won't be able to handle the full 1300-1600A of a Ludicrous S/X either. I don't know enough of the details to make an intelligent guess about why that is yet.

To be the same C rate it'd be 75% the current at the same voltage or something like that. Question is, how fast can you accelerate a vehicle weighing 1000 lbs less. It'd require far less power.

 

[Saghost]

To be the same C rate it'd be 75% the current at the same voltage or something like that. Question is, how fast can you accelerate a vehicle weighing 1000 lbs less. It'd require far less power.

Of course, the P3D won't be quite as light, with the dual high power motors, but overall a valid point.

Lots of questions we don't have answers to - I'm doing the best I can to make sensible speculations from the little data we do have.

 

[JeffK]

Of course, the P3D won't be quite as light, with the dual high power motors, but overall a valid point.

Lots of questions we don't have answers to - I'm doing the best I can to make sensible speculations from the little data we do have.

You're right, It might add 70-100 lbs

 

[Knightshade]

People who buy the S100D do so more generally for range vs performance. Some don't care about performance at all.

Well, then they could just buy the non-P model 3 with the bigger battery... whose range (once AWD comes around) won't be much less than the S100, but you can buy two of them for one S100

I'm not sure when people will get it through their heads that S and 3 are not competitors.

Then it's odd Tesla is killing the RWD S75 in order to put a little more pricing space between the 3 and S....



But the one suggestion I've seen that might make sense would be to simply add a P100D-like ridiculous upcharge for Lud mode on the P3D...

It's back to If the P3D, whose range probably won't differ a ton from the S100, only costs 60-70k why ever buy an S100 at over 100k?

I mean- air suspension is nice- it ain't 30-40k nice.

 

[voip-ninja]

I'd always planned to get the the battery upgrade and AWD, not sure if I'm still going to with the wait being long than I though plus tax credit uncertainty. I'm hoping that long range + AWD is 4.X. I'd be perfectly happy with 4.8 or 4.9.

Stock 5.6
Long 5.1
Long AWD 4.9
P3D 3.9

AWD will be faster than that. Assuming long range version has about 320 horsepower equivalent then it's close to being traction limited with RWD. On my car the difference between RWD and AWD is more like .5 seconds.