It's still not dawning on me why comparing the performance of a >$100k vehicle to a <$60k vehicle is supposed to make us disappointed in the <$60k vehicle. A more appropriate comparison would be to the $90k Plaid or, and this will sound out of left field, the >$100k Cybertruck.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Model 3 Highland Performance/Plaid Speculation [Car announced 04.23.2024]
- Thread starter Daniel L
- Start date
I think that's precisely the point. It gets people taking pictures, posting them online, and hyping the overall product. The camo is pretty much a marketing tool these days.
I've just checked and aircraft carriers can launch jets 0 - 120mph in around 2 seconds, why on earth aren't we considering multi million dollar jets when we go way off topic?
I agree, what's a Hummer or a Cybertruck got to do with a Model 3 Performance / Ludicrious.
Yeah you are no doubt right I guess. It's popping up quite a bit now and in many different countries so feels like it's got to be really close now.
In the spirit of getting back on topic and actually discussing relevant M3P matters, how many perforations do you guys think the new bucket seats will have?
I'll kick things off by saying based on my educated guess and all the leaked footage, 1683 perforations.
I'll kick things off by saying based on my educated guess and all the leaked footage, 1683 perforations.
oreobbq
Member
whoosierdaddy
FSD Supervisor
More amps, but may not hit peak tq in the vehicle due to battery current limits. Possibly front tire traction as well.
The real interesting part would be holding power at higher speeds.
Motors are not rated by battery limits. Motor ratings are what the motor itself can do given full electrical power.
Also, the battery only cares about power, not motor amps. So as long as the power is lower, the battery can do it. Hence my question of how power can be unchanged with more torque.
Tesla is certifying drive units so the inverter and any software limits will be respected. Artificial torque curves are common on many modern ice vehicles. I will definitely be testing one on our AWD chassis dyno at some point.
cptnslo
Member
This would put it at less hp but slightly more torque than the model s LR front correct?
So you're saying that the motor could do 430nm, it just never will. because the software won't let it?
Here's the problem- the current motor already does 542nm of torque, despite what it's rated at, because the current rating is at peak power, not peak torque. Here's a graph of front torque from this thread: MYP HP and torque charts.
Notice that "159kw" (213 hp) and 400 nm (300 lb ft) doesn't look impressive against the current motor. The only thing that this motor might actually do better is holding the torque at higher RPM, which would be very nice to have, but this motor does not have more peak torque or power than before, nor does it really have a different torque curve below 5K rpm (68 kmh/42 mph).
whoosierdaddy
FSD Supervisor
Could the switch from Induction to Permanent Magnet (plus some other small efficiency tweaks) be responsible for a gain like this?
No, this is a physics issue. Power = Torque * RPM
You can't keep your power the same yet double your torque. It's impossible.
As I pointed out above, the change here is that the old motor was rated in torque at the peak power, while new motor is rated at peak torque. Old motor's peak torque was actually over 500. This motor might actually have less torque. But if it has a flatter power curve, that will be good.
I really thought they would change both motors so it surprised me when the rumors said just the rear motor would change.
The car doesn’t need a ton more peak power. It just needs to maintain that peak power for much longer in both the front and rear motors.
This car is going to shakeup what people think is possible for about $55k brand new off the lot. Kind of like how the Plaid did for the $120k+ category.
Mid to perhaps low 10s is entirely feasible for the Model 3 Ludicrous.
