Piney999
Member
What is the consensus? Will there be an AWD / P-model unveil? Or will it just show up on the website with some Elon Tweets? I keep hoping for an unveil, but probably not enough to say about it.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
M3 AWD vs M3 AWD P 0-60 times
- Thread starter PhaseWhite
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Model 3
stayfocus18
Member
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Folks keep mentioning performance and range as reasons to get AWD on the Tesla...
S75 vs S75D is 0.1 seconds faster 0-60, and 10 miles more range adding AWD. Can't see how that's worth thousands of bucks... (and that's on a car putting more power to the wheels than the non-P 3 is- since it's significantly quicker while being much heavier)
Now for winter weather I could see it- assuming you're already planning to run 2 sets of tires, since in most cases tires > drivetrain... but performance and range? Not unless it's vastly different from how the S works.
S75 vs S75D is 0.1 seconds faster 0-60, and 10 miles more range adding AWD. Can't see how that's worth thousands of bucks... (and that's on a car putting more power to the wheels than the non-P 3 is- since it's significantly quicker while being much heavier)
Now for winter weather I could see it- assuming you're already planning to run 2 sets of tires, since in most cases tires > drivetrain... but performance and range? Not unless it's vastly different from how the S works.
ryanjm
Tesla Podcast Host
I doubt there will be any fanfare; trumpeting a Performance Model after the delay of the $35k car wouldn’t go over well with a lot of folks, IMO.
I think it’ll just show up on the Design Studio one day and word-of-mouth will, as usual with Tesla, get it covered by media outlets everywhere.
But the performance model is simpler to test really than the plain AWD. You just put a small motor in front. For the plain AWD you have to put a small motor in front AND test a new small motor for the back. Especially aince the LR battery doesn't change.
I don't suppose there is an easy way to tell if the AWD test mules driving around really have small motors in back? It isn't like you can weigh them.
Also does Tesla really have to crash test every combination of LR RWD, LR AWD, SR AWD and Performance? Or can you just crash some superset? Would you have to crash test a SR RWD for example? Interesting that there is no RWD 100S but there is a LR RWD 3. Makes one wonder if the current rear 3 motor is the small motor and Tesla haven't tested the large P 3 rear motor yet. Anyone think that P could just be a software difference from the plain AWD?
I don't suppose there is an easy way to tell if the AWD test mules driving around really have small motors in back? It isn't like you can weigh them.
Also does Tesla really have to crash test every combination of LR RWD, LR AWD, SR AWD and Performance? Or can you just crash some superset? Would you have to crash test a SR RWD for example? Interesting that there is no RWD 100S but there is a LR RWD 3. Makes one wonder if the current rear 3 motor is the small motor and Tesla haven't tested the large P 3 rear motor yet. Anyone think that P could just be a software difference from the plain AWD?
Last edited:
Things people have told me that won't go over well with a lot of folks:
-Not starting with the base 35k car
-Making some options standard on the first cars to drive the price up
-coming out with AWD before the base car
-selling to other countries (Canada) before selling the base car
-revealing another car, before the M3 production issues are solved. (Roadster 2)
-letting people that reserved the base car slip out of the full tax credit (Not sure if that actually will happen, but it looks like 200k will be hit in 2018 Q3, to end by the end of Q4 and I have heard some base reservations are now set for Q1 2019.)
Now since all of that has actually happened, I'm not so sure if that particular argument still counts.
The performance version will bring in lot's of cash and deserves a big fanfare. Also, they love to put on a show, especially with fast cars.
As a later reservation holder (probably looking at a SR AWD), none of these things bother me at all. The one thing that drives me nuts is how some people are worked up with the fact that they are working on the Semi/Model Y/Roadster 2 instead of getting M3 production ramped up.
Tesla is a fairly large company. It can focus on more than one thing at a time. Moreover, engineering can be fairly specialized. So the Engineers working on designing new vehicles are probably not the same engineers focused on building the manufacturing lines and likely don't have the expertise in that area to help even if they wanted to.
Sure those other things to cost money, but probably a drop in the bucket compared to the ramp up.
To add to that, the Semi and Roadster probably helped with model 3 production issues given the huge cash flow
@Krash I think testing of the pack endurance at various power levels is tough. Recall the issue with P90D pack failures, Tesla in retrospec realized they had been too aggressive with current limits.
I'm not so sure they will replace the rear motor with a smaller version this time instead of just simplifying the process by keeping the rear the same and adding the smaller front motor. I do think there's a good chance that the biggest difference between AWD and AWD P versions will be software. We probably are not talking about insane current limits like the P100D has which require exotic materials since I'm skeptical the 75KWh pack could reach that high anyways.
As I speculated in OP, I think Model 3 P will likely have the same power levels as a Model S90D (~370 KW), but with half a ton less weight it will be quite a bit faster. (3.5s 0-60)
My prediction:
AWD Model 3 0-60: 4.5s
P-AWD Model 3 0-60: 3.1s
I think they are artificially limiting the current car until they can get up to mass production rates on the Model 3. They want to avoid cannibalizing Model S sales until that happens. At that time I think they will uncork the full power of the Model 3 and we could see rear will drive be in the 4.5s range with AWD around 4.0s.
By the way I put my reservation in at 10:03AM in California on 3/31 and even though I've been invited to configure already I'm still waiting for Performance. It has been my intention all along. Besides, 5.1s 0-60 is just not quick enough for me. I want to embarrass as many petrol heads as possible!
AWD Model 3 0-60: 4.5s
P-AWD Model 3 0-60: 3.1s
I think they are artificially limiting the current car until they can get up to mass production rates on the Model 3. They want to avoid cannibalizing Model S sales until that happens. At that time I think they will uncork the full power of the Model 3 and we could see rear will drive be in the 4.5s range with AWD around 4.0s.
By the way I put my reservation in at 10:03AM in California on 3/31 and even though I've been invited to configure already I'm still waiting for Performance. It has been my intention all along. Besides, 5.1s 0-60 is just not quick enough for me. I want to embarrass as many petrol heads as possible!
Agreed. Although the evidence is mounting that the current S/X drive units are nerfed for some future uncorking 2. I am anxious to compare the 3 back EMF high speed passing torque and power data.
Candleflame
Active Member
the fact of the matter is that the acceleration will be what tesla wants it to be. They can gimp it as much as they like via software.
Personally I would prefer the standard dual motor set up for the performance version and a quirky setup with a tiny and highly efficient front motor which is just designed to keep the vehicle going at 120kmh with torque sleep.
Personally I would prefer the standard dual motor set up for the performance version and a quirky setup with a tiny and highly efficient front motor which is just designed to keep the vehicle going at 120kmh with torque sleep.
I think they can only unlock performance not lock it, based on the P90 attempt and backlash.
And I don’t think the P model can torque sleep can it with a permanent magnet motor in the rear?
Candleflame
Active Member
Krash I mean the non-P variant should get a tiny front motor designed for high efficiency and maximum range.
the P version can be as before.
the P version can be as before.
eladts
Member
Elon never said there will be a P variant for the Model 3. He said there will be a Lubricous mode option. It could be a software-only option for the regular LR AWD.
And where would be the difference to us? They could call it the go-fast-long-range for all I care. There will be an AWD version and a quicker AWD version. How they call it isn’t really important, right?
Sure they could just SW limit the AWD and charge 10k for increasing the torque/voltage limit. Would that be any different, than having a different motor+inverter?
Since the AWD will be a popular option and a less powerful motor plus inverter combo would be cheaper to produce I don’t think they will do it, but could still be, that they do it.
favo
P3D+ owner
Piney999
Member
I am extremely ready to learn the specs on the AWD version even if it won't be available for another 3 months. I have been so excited about the AWD M3, for so long, I need some real data I can sink my teeth into. I would love a full unveil in June, but I will take anything at this point.
SomeJoe7777
Marginally-Known Member
Model 3 current production uses Permanent Magnet Switched Reluctance motor (PMSR), not a true permanent magnet motor. The small permanent magnets are only used to smooth out the reluctance motor's inherent torque ripple. You can torque sleep this motor, though not quite as efficiently as an induction motor.
However, PMSR motor has an additional limitation at high power levels -- magnetic saturation in the rotor. In an induction motor, if you want more torque, you can just massively increase applied frequency and/or current with the inverter. The motor temperature increase may require that you reduce power some seconds later, but for a brief period you can get massive torque.
PMSR motor can't do that -- if you drive the rotor to magnetic saturation, torque falls off and goes to zero. Additionally, PMSR motor doesn't have a very high stall torque (torque @ 0 RPM), making it less suitable for a P variant of the Model 3.
My predictions:
1. For cost reduction, AWD model uses two of the same PMSR motors as the RWD model, no smaller version needed. Performance slightly better than RWD model, but no more than 0.3 sec 0-60. Main advantage is snow/ice handling and possibly ride quality due to rumored inclusion of air suspension.
2. Performance model uses different motor in the rear -- possibly an induction motor. High torque off the line means lower 0-60, I'm going to guesstimate 3.9 sec 0-60 to compete with BMW M3. PMSR motor in front enables very high efficiency when cruising.
I just don't understand how the AWD it would not be way faster they use the same current motor on the front. Double the torque and double the power, more traction, with a few more pounds; The cars have to be software limited.
In drag racing 100 lbs is about equal to 10hp or 1/10th in the 1/4 mile.
Similar threads
