-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Let's discuss Dual Motor range
- Thread starter ModelNforNerd
- Start date
JeffK
Well-Known Member
I couldn't do it. The blue dye from my jeans even stains my hands after a long day.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Yes, but 2 things:
1) Elon stated the P could be made faster. Which would require a decent bit more than 1200 anyway.
2) Napkin math also says you can't have a 1200A max battery and both an 800a rear motor and a 500a front motor.
So if we pretend the (continually unsourced) claim the AWD is set to 500 front and rear is valid, then either they raised 1200 to 1300 for the P, or the AWD front is actually pulling more power than the P front is.
On the other hand if you raise the max to 1300 all the rest of the math works perfectly.... RWD 800 rear, no front, battery limit 50% higher than it can even use right now... AWD 500 (software limit) on the rear, and 500 front, also lower than the max the battery can supply right now... and P 800 rear, 500 front with max raised to 1300.
And since Elon stated the P can also go faster that 1300 isn't a real max either just a software limit they could raise...it suggests both motors can go higher than the 800/500 the P would be running them at now and the 1300 on the battery can go higher too.
Leaving all 3 configs uncorkable to go faster with just a software update- like they've done on the S and X in the past.
My shoes are white, and they always have a blue-ish stain on the back where the pant leg touches the shoe. No way would I want a white interior. A friend of mine has a Model X with a white interior, and he said the stain from his jeans gets all over it.
Easy solution. Then just stop wearing blue jeans and wear khakis instead. No need to be addicted to blue jeans. PLENTY of other options.
Interesting the date of manufacture hasn’t happened yet. Says 07/2 and is cut off. So it will be finished next week?So this was posted to reddit. 116 MPGe for 310 mi range.
Petra
Member
My wife and I don't even own any jeans... people get hung up on odd things *shrug*
As excited as everyone is about their blue jeans, I'm even more interested in this thread's topic, Model 3P range.
This is great sleuthing by JeffK on the 116 MPGe EPA figure.
The 3LR tests out at 126 MPGe and 334 miles. So, a decent guesstimate for the 3P would be 116/126ths of 334 = 307 miles ... pretty much spot-on the 310 figure.
Wonder if the 3D will be about the same ...
This is great sleuthing by JeffK on the 116 MPGe EPA figure.
The 3LR tests out at 126 MPGe and 334 miles. So, a decent guesstimate for the 3P would be 116/126ths of 334 = 307 miles ... pretty much spot-on the 310 figure.
Wonder if the 3D will be about the same ...
@ForeverFree,
You’re spot on...it IS in fact an MPGe of 116 for the P3D....a photo of the card was just posted (Reddit) with an interior shot of the white....116 it was. First P3D for test drives at an SC...no it wasn’t divulged where.
Ski
Remember, the MPGe numbers are rounded. So, if the LR was really 125.5 and the P was 116.4, the result would be 310 (309.8, rounded).
Still, it's a pretty big hit, especially if it holds for non-P AWD.
Of course, that would show that the quality of the thinking of many TMC members on this topic has been spot on: Keeping the same rear motor and adding a less-efficient front motor is not likely to improve efficiency.
I guess that many of us, conditioned by the different numbers (and different scenarios0 for S and X AWD had been holding out hope for a different answer ...
Still, it's a pretty big hit, especially if it holds for non-P AWD.
Of course, that would show that the quality of the thinking of many TMC members on this topic has been spot on: Keeping the same rear motor and adding a less-efficient front motor is not likely to improve efficiency.
I guess that many of us, conditioned by the different numbers (and different scenarios0 for S and X AWD had been holding out hope for a different answer ...
ℬête Noire
Active Member
What? Sure you can. Having a motor sized as capable of handling more marginally more current you pass through it at a given moment is fine....if not outright desirable.
I've not read about any fancy distribution for traction control that the Model S/X Ds do but having modest shifts between front and rear in AWDs as a means of handling traction issues is a thing. If the Model 3 is trying to do such things during maximum acceleration then having the total of the power capability of the front and rear drive units paths being slightly above the total output of the battery makes a lot of sense.
What? Where does this come from? I don't understand this. I'm just going to eject on trying to follow the rest of the post because I lack confidence without understanding where this comes from. I don't have any confidence in this assertion at all.
Easy solution. Don't care about the shoes. After all, they are generally covered by the blue jeans anyway. But I do care about the interior of my car. And no, I won't be changing my clothing style for a car. That's ridiculous.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
ℬête Noire
Active Member
Yeah, as soon as the the motor configurations info came out I switched into the mode from hoping for less modest increase compared to what the Model S saw going to D to just hoping it'd keep close to even.
Not sure how this will work out here. I don't know enough about the eMPG test so will be reading up now.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Here's the orignal post (in this thread) mentioning it-
But it has come up in a bunch of threads on here.
Each time I saw it I mentioned that made no sense except as possibly a software limit- since it'd make no sense to make a physically different rear motor just for the non-P AWD.
But that didn't stop some folks from thinking there's an actual hardware difference, like this post-
How will the P3D get 3.5 0-60?
Anyway, back to the 1200 limit with an 800/500 motor pair... since you said the P needs all 1200 to hit 3.5, and Elon said the P could be made faster, that would require more than 1200 from the battery, would it not? (and potentially one or both motors handling more than 800/500 too)
ℬête Noire
Active Member
It's always software limited, the only question is if that's the only difference.
I probably misunderstood that if I wasn't explicitly about thinking it was nonsense to split that way, given the motors. What makes sense is to have the front/rear motor current (AKA power) balance roughly the same as the P, because it's very close to the same weight distribution and putting more of the current balance through the less efficient motor strikes me as having no upside and obvious downside. What happens then is that the AWD functions exactly the same as the Performance vehicle except that the range of the current used is capped when the pedal is pressed far enough.
EDIT: What probably happened is I read it and interpreted it differently because interpreting that way lead to nonsense in my mind.
Yeah, that post makes no sense to me either.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing
- Marketplace listing