-
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
diamond.g
Active Member
Someone on FB posted the full sticker!
@Nuclear Fusion The 2018 Model 3 LR RWD gets 136 city, 123 highway 130 combined.
Found this blurb via Reddit: r/teslike - Questions and Answers, Jul 2018
tl; dr; 130MPGe because of higher charging efficiency, not because of the car being more efficient in motion. (Learned something new today)
Do you mean a Model 3 with 100 kWh? The Model S 100D has way less than 400 miles of range and I doubt the cells would change that much. Even a Model 3 RWD with 100 kWh would just make it over 400 miles of range.
The Model 3 has 78 kWh usable kWh and 80.5 kWh total. So a RWD Model 3 with 100 kWh, assuming that efficiency would stay the same, which it probably won't, would have 414 miles, based on the 334 miles we assume the current one has.
So no way that a 100 kWh RWD Model S, even with the more efficient Model 3 motor, would have a range over 400 miles.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I'm hopeful that this is a result of the EPA forcing Tesla to include their ridiculous vampire drain in MPGe numbers 
I was hoping that the highway efficiency number would be closer. I wonder how much is due to the 20" wheels with summer tires.
I was hoping that the highway efficiency number would be closer. I wonder how much is due to the 20" wheels with summer tires.
Tesla currently has positive gross margins on the S and should (in Q3) have positive gross margins on the 3 as well.
Agree Tesla doesn't HAVE to fudge the numbers, but I can see how they want to keep the 100D as range king. A $49k Model 3 with 334 miles could cannibalize sales of the $100k+ Model S 100D with 335 miles range.
Jesus. An 11% efficiency drop. That's so much worse than what I thought was the worst case could be.
If I decide to switch to RWD now, it'll be anybody's guess what that will mean for delivery timelines. Now the website says I'd get RWD in 1-3 months vs 2-4 months for AWD. A week ago they had the same delivery times. (I honestly don't think I can trust anything Tesla says re: timelines anyway.)
And if I do switch, inevitably some bit of news will come out the very next day (like that the 116 MPGe figure includes vampire losses and the 130 MPGe figure doesn't, or 116 MPGe is with 20" tires, or that AWD has a larger battery) that will make me question my earlier decision.
(Still loving being kept in the dark and being fed *sugar*!)
If I decide to switch to RWD now, it'll be anybody's guess what that will mean for delivery timelines. Now the website says I'd get RWD in 1-3 months vs 2-4 months for AWD. A week ago they had the same delivery times. (I honestly don't think I can trust anything Tesla says re: timelines anyway.)
And if I do switch, inevitably some bit of news will come out the very next day (like that the 116 MPGe figure includes vampire losses and the 130 MPGe figure doesn't, or 116 MPGe is with 20" tires, or that AWD has a larger battery) that will make me question my earlier decision.
(Still loving being kept in the dark and being fed *sugar*!)
ℬête Noire
Active Member
A great time practice centering yourself w/the Tesla buyers mantra:Jesus. An 11% efficiency drop. That's so much worse than what I thought was the worst case could be.
If I decide to switch to RWD now, it'll be anybody's guess what that will mean for delivery timelines. Now the website says I'd get RWD in 1-3 months vs 2-4 months for AWD. A week ago they had the same delivery times. (I honestly don't think I can trust anything Tesla says re: timelines anyway.)
And if I do switch, inevitably some bit of news will come out the very next day (like that the 116 MPGe figure includes vampire losses and the 130 MPGe figure doesn't, or 116 MPGe is with 20" tires, or that AWD has a larger battery) that will make me question my earlier decision.
(Still loving being kept in the dark and being fed *sugar*!)
Ohm
Ohm
Ohm
Ohm
Ohm
There is something odd in the EPA data. While it lists improved HWY MPGe numbers between 2017 and 2018, it lists reduced HWY range. The explanation of higher charging efficiency is fine for the different MPGe number, but why the reduced HWY range?
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/epadata/17data.zip
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/epadata/18data.zip
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/epadata/vehicles.csv.zip
I'm hoping the 116MPGe number for the performance includes the 20" wheels, working under the assumption that the number was figured before they split the wheels into an optional package. (trying to be optimistic that the non-P AWD is more efficient than the P)
Jesus. An 11% efficiency drop. That's so much worse than what I thought was the worst case could be.
If I decide to switch to RWD now, it'll be anybody's guess what that will mean for delivery timelines. Now the website says I'd get RWD in 1-3 months vs 2-4 months for AWD. A week ago they had the same delivery times. (I honestly don't think I can trust anything Tesla says re: timelines anyway.)
And if I do switch, inevitably some bit of news will come out the very next day (like that the 116 MPGe figure includes vampire losses and the 130 MPGe figure doesn't, or 116 MPGe is with 20" tires, or that AWD has a larger battery) that will make me question my earlier decision.
(Still loving being kept in the dark and being fed *sugar*!)
Before you go postal..... Do we actually know how the EPA runs these tests? If the car has more performance to give, do they accelerate harder when the car is capable of it? It is still very possible that if you drove the AWD version exactly the same way as the RWD that efficiency would be closer than the 11% spread. Also.. range is so subjective... drive slower and your range is whatever you want it to be. Also.. the chevy bolt gets 119 MPGe .. so even with 2 motors the model 3 is still about as efficient as the bolt.
Also... are you already an EV owner? I worry for you if you aren't because non-EV owners sometimes have way more anxiety over range than they should.. 310... 334.. I'm not too worried about it, but right now I'm driving a ~70 mile range BMW i3.
I'm still perplexed by these numbers.
Wouldn't Tesla program the Model 3 to use the more efficient rear motor when cruising on the highway? In which case the only effect on highway efficiency should be the added weight of the front motor+hardware?
But a ~5-6% weight increase can't explain a ~10% increase in highway energy consumption right?
So how does one explain this? Does "torque sleep" not actually work all that well? Are they actually sending power to the front motor for some reason?
Last edited:
I really wonder if the test assumes the 20" wheels... I've heard that they have to show rate it with the tire option that they assume most people will choose. In that case; the largest and real difference in this comparison is the difference between aero tires and 20" performance sticky tires.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
There's only 1 MPGe difference between the Model S 75D and 100D so it's probably not weight.
If I read the specs on the Tesla website correct, the SR RWD Model 3 has an EPA range og 220 miles, while the SR AWD car has a range of 215 miles. Both cars are probably tested with 18" wheels. So there seems to be a reduction in range for the AWD cars even when tested with the same wheel size as the RWD cars.
The non-performance AWD cars seems to be over-powered, since they have the same motors as the performance cars, but the output is software limited. The motor setup on Model 3 seems to be perfect for the RWD and performance cars. The non-performance AWD cars should have had smaller, lighter and more efficient motors where there was no software limitation on the power output.
Maybe in the future the base AWD Model S cars will use the same motors with the same power output as the performance Model 3?
The non-performance AWD cars seems to be over-powered, since they have the same motors as the performance cars, but the output is software limited. The motor setup on Model 3 seems to be perfect for the RWD and performance cars. The non-performance AWD cars should have had smaller, lighter and more efficient motors where there was no software limitation on the power output.
Maybe in the future the base AWD Model S cars will use the same motors with the same power output as the performance Model 3?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing
- Marketplace listing