MASTER THREAD: 2019.36.1 update released with 5% power increase

[PNWLeccy]

I think I missed it in the 21 pages but what’s the new LR RWD 0-60 time with the power increase?

I have a LR RWD and noticed it does feel quicker. I tried a few apps to measure 0-60 but they were way off so can’t say. I don’t take my car to track or anything so not sure how else to measure it.

I’ve heard from most it’s a .1s improvement so maybe 4.9s 0-60..?

 

[kingtizzy007]

I have a LR RWD and noticed it does feel quicker. I tried a few apps to measure 0-60 but they were way off so can’t say. I don’t take my car to track or anything so not sure how else to measure it.

I’ve heard from most it’s a .1s improvement so maybe 4.9s 0-60..?

My recent track results indicate a tenth and a half or so. I went from 11.78/9 to best of 11.604. My other two runs were consistently an 11.6x

 

[WilliamG]

My recent track results indicate a tenth and a half or so. I went from 11.78/9 to best of 11.604. My other two runs were consistently an 11.6x

I assume that's 3P+ time? Not a LR RWD time...

 

[r1200gs4ok]

You’ve had this update for a few days, and the range estimate can vary by 10 miles even on a single car day-to-day. (just like on an ICE vehicle.

Most of the country also just experienced a cold snap, which by itself could easily account for such a change.

I just don’t see that there’s anything to complain/worry about.

YMMV (literally and figuratively)

I am in sunny California.......temp is about 79F the last few days

 

[ras5500]

Something to watch over but 10% loss is still well within the healthy battery range per Telsa's battery warranty.
If you researched these type of batteries prior to purchase you would know that overtime the battery will degrade and lose some range, the biggest loss is usually in the first year. Not saying you should be happy with a 10% loss but if your car is a year old, I am not sure it is that unexpected, as long as you don't continue to lose range at that rate. Hopefully you go a couple of years with little or no more loss of range from today on.

Does nobody here realize that the car shows projected range based on an algorithm. Doesn’t mean there’s been a range loss over time or that you are actually getting less range than you purchased.

Secondly, what you actually get, let’s say 10% less than rated, is more reflective of your driving style (speed etc) and driving conditions (temperature, elevation etc). To say that the car is rated at 310 miles at highway speed, and then only get 280 miles while driving uphill doesn’t mean the car is not delivering what it promised. It means that you fail to understand what rated range means.

 

[Zcd1]

Does nobody here realize that the car shows projected range based on an algorithm. Doesn’t mean there’s been a range loss over time or that you are actually getting less range than you purchased...It means that you fail to understand what rated range means.

Yep.

I also switched my display from miles to percentage after just a few days of ownership when I realized that was the more meaningful stat.

 

[tinkererguy]

...
But after a few days on 36.2.1 my experiences are mostly negative. NoA in general is one of the worst updates I've had.
Not nearly as smooth and I've disconnected it several times to keep my sanity. Approaching my regular exits has been an adventure and I have to take over much earlier then before.
...

I totally agree with your NoA observations, taking exits sharply toward barriers, correcting too late for comfort. One pedal driving is great though:

 

[pipestem]

I just want to say this is the best update yet which I just just got 2 days ago. Plus 5% power is actually noticeable and the regen brake hold is great. I love this car.

 

[SlimJim]

I love it also. but the radio stopped working.

 

[mreynolds767]

Does nobody here realize that the car shows projected range based on an algorithm. Doesn’t mean there’s been a range loss over time or that you are actually getting less range than you purchased.

Secondly, what you actually get, let’s say 10% less than rated, is more reflective of your driving style (speed etc) and driving conditions (temperature, elevation etc). To say that the car is rated at 310 miles at highway speed, and then only get 280 miles while driving uphill doesn’t mean the car is not delivering what it promised. It means that you fail to understand what rated range means.

Depends what you are talking about

If you mean either the range meter as you drive or the actual miles driven you are correct

If you mean the capacity and miles shown after charging you are incorrect, that figure has nothing to do with how you drive, the temperature or similar factors

That figure may not always be accurate due to other issues so there are other better ways to gauge battery health with other programs.

 

[TMThree]

I have a LR RWD and noticed it does feel quicker. I tried a few apps to measure 0-60 but they were way off so can’t say. I don’t take my car to track or anything so not sure how else to measure it.

I’ve heard from most it’s a .1s improvement so maybe 4.9s 0-60..?

Depends on your SoC. If you are at 95%, people are seeing 4.5 seconds.

If you are at 70%, it will be around 5 seconds.

source:

 

[pipestem]

Well that's no good. I had that happen once last week, before the update, so I "rebooted" Tess which partially fixed the sound and then 5 minutes later it worked itself out and has been fine since. Weird.

 

[Xevex]

Depends on your SoC. If you are at 95%, people are seeing 4.5 seconds.

If you are at 70%, it will be around 5 seconds.

source:

So it's now almost as quick as AWD non-p? That's impressive..

 

[TMThree]

So it's now almost as quick as AWD non-p? That's impressive..

Not really surprising given how much more hp the LR RWD produces over the AWD version on the rear wheels. On the other hand, AWD makes more total hp, and both front and back produce less power than the LR RWD rear motor, which means less stress on the motors.

You'd also have to weigh that against the AWD pulling more power from the battery than the RWD, so that means a bit more stress on battery while having less stress on the motors.

 

[Knightshade]

So it's now almost as quick as AWD non-p? That's impressive..

No.

It's almost as quick as the original AWD non-rollout number, before any power updates.

The AWD non-P is doing 3.86 with rollout now, ~4.1 without it.

 

[Xevex]

No.

It's almost as quick as the original AWD non-rollout number, before any power updates.

The AWD non-P is doing 3.86 with rollout now, ~4.1 without it.

Wow, my car got that much quicker now? Greeat

 

[r1200gs4ok]

Does nobody here realize that the car shows projected range based on an algorithm. Doesn’t mean there’s been a range loss over time or that you are actually getting less range than you purchased.

Secondly, what you actually get, let’s say 10% less than rated, is more reflective of your driving style (speed etc) and driving conditions (temperature, elevation etc). To say that the car is rated at 310 miles at highway speed, and then only get 280 miles while driving uphill doesn’t mean the car is not delivering what it promised. It means that you fail to understand what rated range means.

I understand tis and my driving is very conservative....but the car is only 5 months old and has only 3400 miles

Edit: also, I just woke it up and it sounds like an 777 APU has just been turned on

 

[jebinc]

No.

It's almost as quick as the original AWD non-rollout number, before any power updates.

The AWD non-P is doing 3.86 with rollout now, ~4.1 without it.

Where is the 3.86/4.1 come from? One member reporting it? Reputable news article? I haven't seen many reports for new 0-60 LR AWD times, but perhaps I'm not looking in the right place.

 

[Knightshade]

Where is the 3.86/4.1 come from? One member reporting it? Reputable news article? I haven't seen many reports for new 0-60 LR AWD times, but perhaps I'm not looking in the right place.

Draggy verified results from an AWD owner....you can look at the leaderboards there if you have an account, or it's been posted a few places here with the results

Here's a post of it-

Model 3 AWD 2019.32 vs 2019.36 Peak power up 7.5%, Peak torque up 1%, 0-60 mph down 0.1s

4.08 without rollout, 3.86 with rollout for 0-60
1/8 mile best was 7.98
1/4 mile best was [email protected]

 

[jebinc]

Draggy verified results from an AWD owner....you can look at the leaderboards there if you have an account, or it's been posted a few places here with the results

Thanks. So, one data point. Wish there were more (data points), including times from a real track, vs. a $150 GPS based device. In any case, I hope ~3.86s turns out to be a common number reported by owners. Surprised there aren't more reports by now.