Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model 3 Highland Performance/Plaid Speculation [Car announced 04.23.2024]

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Thankfully those days are gone. It was a pain in the a** to have a 250 mile range and 50 kw charging. Now it's drive for 4-5 hours and then charge for 15-20 minutes.
4.5 hours at 65 MPH is 293 miles. Which at 65 MPH is basically 100% of the battery of a Model 3.

No Tesla in the world can charge 100% SoC in 15-20 minutes. Even Tesla only advertises 175 miles in 15 minutes, and that's if you hit exactly the right SoC's to replace 50% in that time. A full 100% is basically an hour. So you're not replacing 4.5 hours of driving in 15 minutes, nowhere close.

You realize if you could do 100% in 15 minutes on a Model S, that would require a 400kW charger or 325kW on a Model 3.
 
Man, everyone focusing on the price vs performance when my main point was that even trucks and SUV's are doing 2 second 0-60, so if Tesla doesn't make the M3P go deep into the 2's, it's a very interesting decision in 2024.
It's unfortunate that a car's performance capability has been reduced to such a narrow metric: 0-60. It's a shame.
 
4.5 hours at 65 MPH is 293 miles. Which at 65 MPH is basically 100% of the battery of a Model 3.

No Tesla in the world can charge 100% SoC in 15-20 minutes. Even Tesla only advertises 175 miles in 15 minutes, and that's if you hit exactly the right SoC's to replace 50% in that time. A full 100% is basically an hour. So you're not replacing 4.5 hours of driving in 15 minutes, nowhere close.

You realize if you could do 100% in 15 minutes on a Model S, that would require a 400kW charger or 325kW on a Model 3.
You don't do 100 percent at the first charging spot. You get another 200 miles and then go to the next charger, because that's the fastest part of the curve.

No problem hitting 255 kw in my Plaid.
 
Judging by their current pricing model across 4 trims of R1, one could suspect the tri motor to be near 70.

CCS chargers in the Central Valley of ca are regularly 50-67kW, in 2023. Areas of Oregon and Washington too.
Sadly, the days of mismanaged charging networks have not been put behind us.
That's a bummer. I haven't charged at 50kW since 2017. It's all 250 kW here at superchargers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: phantasms
It's unfortunate that a car's performance capability has been reduced to such a narrow metric: 0-60. It's a shame.
We're talking about a mass market commuter car that can do 125 MPH, 0-60 in 4.2 seconds, and the quarter in 12 seconds. Numbers that were supercars 10 years ago. What logical company would give up efficency to be able to go 140 MPH instead? What other performance metrics do you want on a commuter sedan? Are you annoyed Honda doesn't out R-Comps on a base Civic so that it can corner better?

We do remember that this is the Highland Performance Thread, right? And like I mentioned, the GOOD thing here is that because it's only the tires limiting top speed in the base cars, there's no reason the M3P can't have a much higher top speed when equipped with performance tires. If this was Aero, suspension, or safety, those things would all apply to the M3P.
 
Now it's drive for 4-5 hours and then charge for 15-20 minutes.
You don't do 100 percent at the first charging spot. You get another 200 miles and then go to the next charger, because that's the fastest part of the curve.

Ahh, so it's Drive for 3.5 hours (at 65 MPH) so you arrive at about 15%, charge for 20 minutes, then drive for 3 hours, then charge for 20 minutes, etc.
That's pretty different than what you said, which given you were replaying to someone talking about refilling an ICE, would assume you mean you can drive for 4.5 hours and then FULLY charge in 15-20 minutes, which is completely false.

No problem hitting 255 kw in my Plaid.
Yes, for the early 25% of the charge. For less than 100 miles of the range of the car. That is my point. Beyond that it is much slower, and it's a disservice to EV adoption to miselad about what charging on trips is really like.
 
Ahh, so it's Drive for 3.5 hours (at 65 MPH) so you arrive at about 15%, charge for 20 minutes, then drive for 3 hours, then charge for 20 minutes, etc.
That's pretty different than what you said, which given you were replaying to someone talking about refilling an ICE, would assume you mean you can drive for 4.5 hours and then FULLY charge in 15-20 minutes, which is completely false.


Yes, for the early 25% of the charge. For less than 100 miles of the range of the car. That is my point. Beyond that it is much slower, and it's a disservice to EV adoption to miselad about what charging on trips is really like.
Beats me man. I don't charge longer than 15 minutes. If it's more than 500 miles, I'm going to fly.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: buckets0fun
Beats me man. I don't charge longer than 15 minutes. If it's more than 500 miles, I'm going to fly.



Exactly this.

Any trip I'd actually want to use my car from home for rather than an airplane is gonna take 1, tops 2, short 10-15 minute supercharger stops... (or potentially 1 10-15 min one, and a longer one just because I want a sit down meal)-- so no different than the time and # of stops I'd have in an ICE vehicle for drinks/bathrooms/food.
 
For anyone wondering how big an impact lowering the 0-60 mph and 60’ would have check this out.

Car & Driver tested the CyberBeast and it did 0-60 mph in 2.6 and the 1/4 mile in 11.0 @ 119 mph.

My best run was 0-60 mph in 2.83 seconds(the way they measure it) and 1/4 mile in 11.17 @ 120.0 mph.

They can easily hit that 2.6 0-60 mph number with a Model 3. I dropped .2+ seconds on my 0-60 mph with weight reductions alone. With better traction they can make that launch MUCH more aggressive.

Then if you factor in the extra power at higher speeds it would decrease the 1/4 mile time dramatically.

Mid 10s is completely doable for the Model 3 Ludicrous without many changes at all. They are telling the truth when they say they left a lot on the table.

This is a 6,900 lb vehicle hitting some outstanding 0-60 mph times. There is no reason they can’t do this with a 4,050 lb vehicle.

Whenever they finally announce the Model 3 Ludicrous it will impress everyone I believe.

IMG_2903.jpeg
IMG_2904.png
IMG_2905.jpeg
IMG_2906.jpeg
 
They can easily hit that 2.6 0-60 mph number with a Model 3. I dropped .2+ seconds on my 0-60 mph with weight reductions alone. With better traction they can make that launch MUCH more aggressive.
I agree with this as I think the wider rear tyres will help quite a bit with grip to get it off the line faster and keep it putting down power at speeds where they probably need to hold it back to stop it spinning the wheels.

Tesla's traction control is godly in my experience. Obviously those of you in the US will have more experience with this but I did drive a LHD Model S Plaid in the UK on a test drive. The way I'd describe how it felt was like all 4 tyres were just about to light up and start smoking but it kept it perfectly right on the edge but never actually letting that happen. These were rolling acceleration.

They just seem to be able to really maximise acceleration when grip could be a problem. My 905hp Eletre R is a mess under heavy acceleration from slow speeds, it doesn't control the power well at all.
 
Tesla's traction control is godly in my experience. Obviously those of you in the US will have more experience with this but I did drive a LHD Model S Plaid in the UK on a test drive. The way I'd describe how it felt was like all 4 tyres were just about to light up and start smoking but it kept it perfectly right on the edge but never actually letting that happen. These were rolling acceleration.
Yeah that sounds about right. Datalogging my car, I can put out 950+ hp on a mid 30 degree (Fahrenheit) day with no slippage. Which is kinda insane if you think about it