-
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
Is the pack 350V or 400V? @ 350V we need 957A to make the AWD power requirement which would satisfy the 1000A limit that was rumored.Well there's your software lock that keeps the AWD slower than the P despite having physically the same battery motor
Bonus- those numbers seem to debunk the "500a" claims that kept being tossed around...as that's vastly less a gimp than removing 3/8ths of the rear motor power would imply.
Or to swap those into mechanical HP numbers-
RWD (rear only)= 283 hp
AWD (combined)= 449 hp
P-AWD (combined)= 480 hp
I thought the EPA originally rated the RWD at 192kW (258HP) though? It was widely reported they did anyway....
ℬête Noire
Active Member
I've not seen anything on this mentioned in the Performance test drive threads, yet.
Then in most driving the EPA range difference is smaller than what is shown in the numbers? Or do the EPA numbers include the regen differences between the cars?
Pretty small diff in rated hp... why would P get to 60 a full second faster with just 30 more hp?
EPA numbers do include regen, so they'd already reflect any regen differences. But it's possible that the RWD's regen is already strong enough to achieve the prescribed deceleration rates in the EPA tests and so stronger regen wouldn't actually help improve the ratings, but might improve efficiency in real-world (more aggressive) driving.
Last edited:
diamond.g
Active Member
Until people start playing around with the firmware I'm not sure if you'll ever get a definitive answer to that. But it doesn't really matter. If it's locked, you can't have it. And buying a car assuming that one day Tesla will magically offer some sort of unlock seems like a bad idea.
Great. I have seen a number of RWD owners saying regen can be a bit weak for fast drivers. So perhaps AWD captures meaningfully more energy during regen.
ℬête Noire
Active Member
Assuming, no. Magically? Obviously this questioning is the polar opposite to assuming "magic" at work.
clostridium
Member
I'm hoping that's the case. I absolutely love two things about my uncorked S75D - the feel off the line and the passing power. I ordered the P3D in part because I don't want to give that up. Reviews I've seen of the RWD Model 3 say the off the line feel isn't as strong as the Model S. It's notable that the RWD Model 3 has 50-70 performance nearly on par with the Model S P85D (2.8 vs. 2.6) which is likely similar to my current car so in my dreams the P3D will have highway passing power that is perhaps even better than my current car plus will at least match the off the line feel.
Today, EPA added the Model 3 LR AWD and the P to their spreadsheets. The file includes the highway dyno score and some other data. Therefore I updated the range table again. P and AWD numbers dropped by 3 miles compared to yesterday.
The motor power numbers are as follows:
An interesting detail is that the Model 3 Performance version's dyno scores were just below the required numbers to reach 310 miles EPA range. The score was going to be 308.4 miles but Tesla used an alternative multiplier (70.32% instead of the default 70.0%) to convert the dyno scores to range numbers. This way, EPA rated range turned out to be exactly 310 miles. In other words, there was some minor marketing adjustment to achieve 310 mi instead of 308.
Here is some other data:
The 2017 Model 3 LR achieved 318.2 miles highway range with 89.4 kWh electric meter consumption
The 2018 Model 3 LR achieved 311.7 miles highway range with 85.2 kWh electric meter consumption
The 2018 LR AWD and P achieved 297.2 miles highway range with 89.5 kWh electric meter consumption
I don't know why the 85.2 kWh number is lower than the other two. I don't have an explanation for that. It could be a more efficient wall connector but if that's the case, why wasn't the same wall connector used for the P version.
The motor power numbers are as follows:
An interesting detail is that the Model 3 Performance version's dyno scores were just below the required numbers to reach 310 miles EPA range. The score was going to be 308.4 miles but Tesla used an alternative multiplier (70.32% instead of the default 70.0%) to convert the dyno scores to range numbers. This way, EPA rated range turned out to be exactly 310 miles. In other words, there was some minor marketing adjustment to achieve 310 mi instead of 308.
Here is some other data:
The 2017 Model 3 LR achieved 318.2 miles highway range with 89.4 kWh electric meter consumption
The 2018 Model 3 LR achieved 311.7 miles highway range with 85.2 kWh electric meter consumption
The 2018 LR AWD and P achieved 297.2 miles highway range with 89.5 kWh electric meter consumption
I don't know why the 85.2 kWh number is lower than the other two. I don't have an explanation for that. It could be a more efficient wall connector but if that's the case, why wasn't the same wall connector used for the P version.
Last edited:
Petra
Member
The range for the RWD car was voluntarily derated to 310. The AWD/Performance car's range isn't being voluntarily derated. That's why the dual motor cars can have the same battery and be less efficient but have the same EPA range.
I was never clear on why that math didn't work, but Troy's post at #316 finally shows why. For some reason EPA used different wall values.
ℬête Noire
Active Member
I find this particularly weird because, at least in my understanding, the charging hardware is inside the battery pack? It'd be logistic backflips to designate a battery pack as P/D as it's being built in NV.
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing
- Marketplace listing