-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
How will the P3D get 3.5 0-60?
- Thread starter TheLocNar
- Start date
It will be there by a couple of technological steps.
Step 1, update software with the acceleration removed in FW 18.19 for all Model 3 owners
Step 2, update software with additional acceleration only available to buyers of P models.
Step 1, update software with the acceleration removed in FW 18.19 for all Model 3 owners
Step 2, update software with additional acceleration only available to buyers of P models.
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
In their previous launch optimiziation program they would select a mode where the driveline would be preloaded with torque to reduce shock and maximize launch. Could also warm/cool the batteries to allow maximum output.
Believe that the standard mash the pedal would be plenty quick enough for most people, but when you are in a competitive condition, like at a drag strip, a pre torqued launch with pre preped battery, may make the difference of victory.
Believe that the standard mash the pedal would be plenty quick enough for most people, but when you are in a competitive condition, like at a drag strip, a pre torqued launch with pre preped battery, may make the difference of victory.
TexasTeslaRacing
Member
I'm hoping Launch Mode will be enabled in the performance dual motor. I don't believe there is a lubricious mode yet. A possible upgrade later.
No, it uses the full 800A inverter on the rear PM motor of the RWD plus the addition oft the induction motor up front. The AWD 3 uses a 500A inverter in the rear and the RWD uses 800A in the rear. It's not a "software" update.
Not likely but if so it would be different. The Rear PM motor is pretty much at ti's max output of 800A.
Krugerrand
Meow
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Source?
Because it'd be really weird if they spent money and made a physically different rear drive unit only for the AWD non-P, when they can easily limit the current using just software for free.
Added bonus- it gives them the option to do a free uncork later like they did on the S (or sell one, as they've also done on the S)
But they're not going to uncork - the motors are being sorted based on various criteria, and doing double the burn-in testing. They're being rated for a higher output. Unless they have too many motors that tested on the high-end, but they dried up on P orders, and just have to use them so they aren't stockpiling for no reason, then the motors won't be capable of the sustained output from a reliability standpoint. And no way does Tesla want to have to replace motors under warranty because they sold some uncork on a motor that couldn't handle it.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Why wouldn't they if competition requires it?
Same as they did on the S/X (ironically due to the 3 as the competitor).
Same time they announced the 0-60 of 5.1 on the LR 3 they made the slower S/Xs, which were just slightly slower than that 5.1, significantly faster via software update- for free- because the performance would've looked bad in comparison otherwise.
With more EVs coming to market they'll likely do the same with the 3 eventually. Elon even said the P likely could be made faster- which means all of them can since it's the same battery and DU in all of em.
The front motors are.
The rears are the same ones going into the RWD car.
Which are already running and rated for 800a and have been since the first RWD rolled off the line.
So it'd make 0 sense to invent a new lower-amp part for the AWD non-P, rather than just use software to limit output for free.
And then they can unlock it back to 800a later at zero risk because they know every rear DU they make can handle that.
I think you're grossly overestimating the amount of variability in electric motors. More likely out of every batch of drive units they're taking the top X% (with X=rate of P ordering compared to AWD) and putting them in the P just to say it's "more" than a software unlock, and the difference between the best and worst unit is single-digit % in output, if not closer.
If the battery is limited to 1200a max output... and the rear is already capable of 800a in even the RWD (both of which we know as facts in the current SW) then the front would be limited to 400 max in AWD or P, because 1200-800=400.
After that- everyone is guessing.
The current guess in other threads (with again no apparent source) is that somehow the AWD is doing 500 rear and front.
This is confusing because if the rear on the P is 800 it'd mean the front on the P is less powerful than the one on the AWD. (400 vs 500)- pretty weird since we know the fronts are the same physical parts just bin sorted.
Which is why it's kinda frustrating every time someone makes that 500/500 claim then can't show a source for it since the math doesn't make any sense.
What makes way MORE sense is the 1200a rating was also software limited on the RWD car at time of testing...and they found they can safely make that higher. Let's say they bump it to 1300a for now.
Now the math is easy. And actually adds up.
RWD= One rear DU, software limited to 800a (maybe capable of more).
AWD= exact same DU rear as the RWD, software limited to 500a.... and a front DU limited to 500a (maybe capable of more).
P= exact same DU rear as the RWD, software limited to 800a.... and the exact same front DU limited to 500a.
Now all the math actually works- and you only need one physical part for the rear DU across all models... and only one physical part for the front one too- making manufacturing and supply chain and repair/replacement stuff vastly simpler and cheaper.
They'll bin sort the front ones to make people feel better about paying 11k for a software unlock- and also because if they put the ones that score 3% better in the P it will indeed reduce warranty a touch since they'll expect those to be run harder- even though they're set for the same output in SW.
Plus, since Elon said the P can likely be made a bit faster, that'd mean they believe that 1300 is a software not hardware limit and can be made higher later.
So uncorking becomes simple... if the rear can handle more than 800 you just bump the RWD and P by however much that is- and the AWD as well (since we know that one has 300a of "free" overhead already)
Again this doesn't make any sense.
The RWD cars are already coming with 800a motors. That means Tesla believes the rear motor is dead reliable at 800 a.
Given what we know about the battery limits the front motor is going to be (likely) 500a in both AWD and P.
So if they're really software throttling the rear motor to 500a on the AWD non-P they can literally flip a switch to make it 800 (or 600 or 700) and it costs them absolutely 0, and doesn't change reliability at all compared to the RWD cars or the P.
They'd just need to insure they still keep it slower than the P (or bump the P by a similar amount).
They uncorked the MS and MX so it did not compete with the M3. Why would they uncork the M3 to be as fast as the MS now? I agree, it can probably be done, and is likely ho happen from a 3rd party tuner.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
If they're willing to uncork when their own products require it why wouldn't they do so when the competitions products do?
Not to mention they also made some cars faster just because they found a way to do it...Jan 2015 for example Elon announced an OTA update to knock 0.1 off the P85D 0-60 because they improved the inverter algorithm.
They don't have to knock a full second off like they did with the S/X (and almost certainly can't with the RWD or P)... but they could certainly add at least a few tenths to any of em, based on Elons own words (where he said the P could be made faster later- and since the P uses the same rear as the RWD, and the same front as the AWD, there's room for all of em to be faster).
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Article
