-
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
That's going to be a real shame if Tesla sticks it with a lame battery pack.
Dragy accepts max 1% slope.
Youre very close to that downslope.
You should provide numbers from flat runs.
(I’ve used slopes as well, but in this case it should be numbers reproducible on flat ground)
This is "certification level claims". In those docs Tesla was always pretty clear:
- Panasonic = 320V (3/3C/3L)
- LG Chem = 355V (5C/5L)
- CATL = 345V
- BYD = 338V
Strange!
The nominal voltage is the one to use and it is 3.7V for the NCA cells.
Its more common for NMC to be slightly lower, like 3.6V.
If thats the case, that they call 320V for the regular Panna packs then it might still be a chance for a more high voltage pack, using the same nominal voltage per cell put us at 106-107cells in series.
First I thought I could relax again reading the LG pack in - my Plaid is not in threath
Second I realized next car after the Plaid could be a 3P again - then we need a wide power band and would like the 110S solution. Its still possible then, aiii?
Don't get me wrong. I want you to be right, but looking in the past this is how its been, so I don't think it has changed and I am 99% certain of a LG battery pack. Maybe 5L M50F 79kWh NMC and business as usual...maybe its successor with 82kWh or more and also resulting in more peak power.Strange!
The nominal voltage is the one to use and it is 3.7V for the NCA cells.
Its more common for NMC to be slightly lower, like 3.6V.
If thats the case, that they call 320V for the regular Panna packs then it might still be a chance for a more high voltage pack, using the same nominal voltage per cell put us at 106-107cells in series.
First I thought I could relax again reading the LG pack in - my Plaid is not in threath
Second I realized next car after the Plaid could be a 3P again - then we need a wide power band and would like the 110S solution. Its still possible then, aiii?
I've just put some data of the 4D2 into my tables with known motor power vs speed and it looks like at 110kph and 303kW from the rear motor the 3D3 front motor will be at around 160kW. 462kW is the unrestricted peak power of the Panasonic 3L. Probably a coincidence, but I think Fremont cars might just the the combination of an unlimited Panasonic 3L plus 4D2 motor, resulting in true 460kW at 110kph when hot and full. This would be quite a difference to the current car!
We Europeans and Asian Market will have to make due with less peak power, but still a good step up in regards to Autobahn performance.
I don’t know about LG battery cars but I am certain that the Panasonic battery Model 3 Performance cars hit peak combined(Front & Rear) HP at 55 mph or 88.7 kph. The individual motors can peak at different speeds but the combined is 55 mph.
I don’t think it would be a good thing if that peak power doesn’t come in till 110 kph even if it holds it after that. Hitting peak power earlier and holding it after that is what we really want.
If they don’t change the front motor at all then the gains will be minimal. The front motor limits the car more than anything.
I wouldn’t buy the new Model 3 if it still has the same front motor. 0-60 mph time would probably improve to just under 3.0 without rollout but the 1/4 mile time would probably still be in the low 11s. Not worth the upgrade if that is the case.
Also...Strange!
The nominal voltage is the one to use and it is 3.7V for the NCA cells.
Its more common for NMC to be slightly lower, like 3.6V.
If thats the case, that they call 320V for the regular Panna packs then it might still be a chance for a more high voltage pack, using the same nominal voltage per cell put us at 106-107cells in series.
First I thought I could relax again reading the LG pack in - my Plaid is not in threath
Second I realized next car after the Plaid could be a 3P again - then we need a wide power band and would like the 110S solution. Its still possible then, aiii?
Down to -.99% slope is the standard. All Dragstrips allow down to that slope. At the speeds these cars do it isn’t reasonable to do this on the streets. The Dragstrip is the place to test these cars for absolute max acceleration and that is where I will continue to test at.
And same lame front induction motor… in a performance EV… in 2024…
Most of the work is done by the rear motor, so the front one is fine as it is.
It's like saying the car's got lame rear brake rotors. They don't need to be any bigger when most of the braking is done on the front.
But it is true that current cars would pull much harder at highway speeds if the front motor wasn't loosing so much power with speed. The MSLR Refresh basically comes with two 2018 M3P motors and while still being power limited by the BMS, it pulls so much better at high speeds than any current M3P, due to its PM front motor.
Possibly, but with the new 'M3L' with an uprated rear motor there may not be much more power left to give to an uprated front motor.
As with all performance upgrades you just move the bottleneck around to somewhere else.
There are two distinct things here. There is absolute max HP the combined motors can put out and then there is how long can it hold that max HP value as speed increases. That max HP limit is controlled by the battery. Holding that value to much higher speeds is limited by many things like motor design and battery/motor cooling.
In the past the max combined HP has always occurred below 60 mph so it factored into the 0-60 mph. However, if they move the max HP value up to well above 60 mph it won’t affect 0-60 mph at all. Then traction will limit torque and the wider tires might help there.
However, for holding HP at higher speeds the front motor is the biggest factor. You can see from this graph below how much the front motor power falls off compared to the back motor.
Don’t get me wrong. I predict they will still be able to produce more power for 0-60 mph because the rear tires could allow better traction. However, going from 448 KW max output to 462 KW max output isn’t something to write home about if power still falls off the same as before because you haven’t changed the front motor.
Adding ~20 HP is good but if you have a single fixed gear and power still drops off you only get to take advantage of that extra 20 HP for a fraction of a second.
At the very least I predict the Model 3 Ludicrous will have a proper Dragstrip/Launch mode that will set every parameter to the optimal value for straight line acceleration. No more navigating to a Supercharger to heat the battery.
Just a bit of brake torque at the launch could drastically change the 60’ time and that will help all of the other times significantly.
Just a bit of brake torque at the launch could drastically change the 60’ time and that will help all of the other times significantly.
I'm feeling a little dissapointed already before the specs is revealed if the leaks and rumors are true.. knowing a 2022 (panasonic battery) equipped 3P lays down well above 500 hp to the wheels then a completely new version with 620ish claimed hp will not be enough to replace my car. Sure the new model will not drop power heavily from 80 ish mph but will keep on going to 100ish mph maybe.
Jeremy3292
Active Member
Oh man, what a letdown. The previous Performance was rated at 455 HP, made 520 HP at the wheels, and somewhere close to 580-600 without drivetrain losses. If the new figures are not understated, that's a 20-40 horsepower bump, the same lame front motor, and the same old battery. As I predicted, it will be just enough to get a 0-60 time that starts with a 2, and it may be a 10.90 car. Certainly quicker on paper, but I think day-to-day it's still going to feel like the old car when hustling it around on the daily commute or tracking it.
