The current car is not traction limited but it would be if they tried to make it quicker off the line with 235 width tires in a square setup.
The 275 tires in the rear is so they can up the torque from 0 to ~69 mph.
-
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
The 275 tires in the rear is so they can up the torque from 0 to ~69 mph.
AlanSubie4Life
Efficiency Obsessed Member
Can't it stop in less than 2.4 seconds from 60mph with 235 width PS4S? Even the MXM4s did it in 2.8 seconds. The weight transfer is different, and you have to account for the stop having better deceleration from 60mph to ~45mph which makes it look better, but still seems like a bit of margin given the ~3.3s on the current vehicle.
Last edited:
Right but 0.2 seconds faster then you are down in the 3 second mark is quite a bit quicker. We aren't taking 0.2 seconds of a 6 second time which would be less impressive.
They've already said its not a Plaid, I take that to include the Model X Plaid which is 2.5 seconds. It won't be close to that.
You are all free to believe what you like, I think you just have unrealistic expectations especially when lots of information about battery and motor power is already out there. Add in that also if to be believed we have people saying Lars said its not a Plaid and 2.9 has been mentioned multiple times.
Sellout
Member
I personally think .2 off the current one is a substantial improvement, but that might not be enough to call it ludicrous.
100% they make it slower on purpose. Motors can take a few seconds of higher torque before they reach battery and motors power limit to have much better 0-60. It's not sustainable, since it will overheat eventually, but it's just 0-60.
Sure, on m3p they had electrical current limited by circuits on the invertor. But original LR had the same invertor as m3p and torque limiter was set lower. Acceleration boost just shifting that limit.
Later they made a separate invertor for LR with less mosfets soldered, so people would stop hacking LR into P. But soldering few more mosfets costs nothing to get significantly better 0-60. Not Plaid levels since it will run out of power for that, but not far from it. Certainly, 2.5 is possible.
And if you care about 1/4 - it's 0-60 + torque drops too fast above peak power point. You can have the same power limit, but way way better real power at speeds higher than the peak power speed. M3P drops 55% of power at the top speed.
Battery limit is not the main issue for 0-60 or 1/4. It's electronically limited. It's a very short speed range where battery is the limit.
There's a lot to care about when it comes to the performance of the new M3L since it's the top performance model within the model 3 line up. Like what the other member mentioned, it looks like a Model S LR is a good fit for what you're looking for. Perhaps even better the Mercedes EQS if you want actual luxury, because you 'ain't gonna' find that in any of the Tesla models. (Fun fact, you'd be surprised how cheap a used EQS is going for in the used market.)
M3L: The battery isn't a limiting factor. If that was the case Tesla wouldn't be using it. If I remember correctly, the IONIQ 5 N also uses the LG cells and it does extremely well in track conditions.
As for the range, let's not forget the reality with how Tesla is the master of inflating their range figures vs real world range. This is the same reason why they've recently tamed their numbers on the order page due to all the flack and lawsuits surrounding the lies around the phony range figures. - Between different driving habits and ones ability to hyper-mile, you can exceed any EVs range figures to some degree if you drove in an unrealistically slow fashion. That's not the reality though.
The I5N is a car for the track with faster charging and not one designed to be a road tripper. It's designed for the purpose of being a proper EV track car to go buzz around the track without having to worry about thermal management etc... it's a brilliant piece of machinery that we have yet to see from Tesla from a production ready standpoint (a true track car). - Therefore, it doesn't make sense to used the words "road trip" when talking about the I5N, although it could, but that's not the point of this car.
Regarding HMG and Tesla Super Chargers, HMG (Hyundai Motor Group = Hyundai (IONIQ Line), KIA and Genesis) will be the first to natively get the NACS on their EVs come just Q4 of this year in N.A. - As for Europe didn't Bjorn show an IONIQ 5 charging at one of the CCS2 chargers? I'll have to dig up that video.
2.5 sec would be shocking as it would put it into the territory of the Model X Plaid. Two different class of cars yes, but in my opinion I don't think Tesla would make a $50K volume seller to match the straight line performance of their $95K X Plaid. Who knows...
If Tesla were to offer this software upgrade, from a pure performance standpoint (for most Tesla owners being straight line performance) it could add onto the fall of the S and X line for Tesla. - Keeping in mind that there are a lot of X and S owners who have stepped down to a Y and 3. It's very common.
Elon already said himself that the model S for example mainly exists for sentimental reasons. I think the S and X will barely get a refresh with maybe adding in the interior LED and front bumper camera at most? We'll know soon enough.
In my opinion, I think the M3L will be advertised as 2.9 seconds with a 1 foot roll out. This on paper is barely faster than the current M3P.
In the real world, it could easily boil down to reaction time between the M3L and M3P to 60. As I've mentioned, there are plenty of M3Ps in the low 3s already with some at 3.0 and 2.99 for the sake of numbers.
However, the M3L with it having better top end is where it'll shine and that's what I'm most excited about.
What limit may that be?
I agree with you 100%. - I too have seen a lot of numbers being thrown around like it's nothing, when in reality shaving a half a second is a big deal when talking car times. I honestly don't think the M3L will be anywhere near 2.5 sec. That's just fantasy and hey if for some crazy reason we're wrong about that, then that would be a great problem - to have been wrong.
Tesla, please get rid of the 1-foot roll out nonsense. Just give it to us straight. (I get it though..marketing mumbo jumbo.)
Any day now... we'll know soon enough. Exciting...
Last edited:
I'd happily get a Model S Plaid over a Model 3 but they don't make them in RHD as I've said before so it's impossible. A EQS is nothing like a Model 3 and a completely different kind of car. Not a fan of it at all personally.
They are using it because it's what they have and it's what the Long Range uses. It is a limiting factor because the figures Tesla put into their submissions to the EU show as much, the motors have more power than the battery can supply. Check the thread, all this information is in here hidden in 1,000's of off topic posts in this thread.
The Ionic 5 N isn't a track car. It might be quite good on the track but they absolutely will mostly sell them to people that will never take them on the track. It's a road car for most buyers and range will factor into decisions to some degree.
Yes some Tesla Superchargers are open to other EV's and as everything is CCS2 here now pretty much they all have the same plug already. It won't be ideal though as it's a 800 volt car onto a 400 volt charger. Better to charge them on proper 300kw+ 800 volt chargers.
Agree, I'm not sure how long Model S and X will last. Could be for a good while but not sure they'll do a refresh to the level of the last S and X refresh. Too much cost vs too little sales. It's already dead to me anyway as they gave up on RHD.
Absolutely. I can see many being unhappy but don't think they are being realistic. It's still their most budget performance model. They could have just kept everything as it was before inside the highland package and no one would probably have complained. Instead they are improving it and if they keep the price to a simpler level, that'll be a more compelling package.
Most here keep wanting to compare it to more expensive models. We'll see what Tesla comes out with but here in the UK the Ionic 5 N is about £12k more than my wife's 2023 Model 3 Performance was.
I doubt that 275 makes any difference for 0-60. UHP compound tires like 4S are capable to hold Plaid level acceleration whether they wide or not. Contact patch is still the same and depends on pressure more than on width.
Wider tires are for corners stability, track heat dissipation and for looks. Not for 0-60.
Here is calculated m3l 0-60 timings when we don't know torque limit, but only power limits and take into account air resistance:
Grip (g) Time (s)
1.00 2.753
1.05 2.635
1.10 2.533
1.15 2.444
1.20 2.366
1.25 2.297
1.30 2.236
1.35 2.182
1.40 2.133
1.45 2.090
1.50 2.050
1.1g is a steet UHP tire.
1.5g is a race compound on a proper surface.
To clarify the EQS was just an example based on the criteria that I saw from the previous post. I get it though, they're definitely not the same class of cars.
I'll have to dig around to see what you're referring to about the battery, but again it would be extremely odd for Tesla to use a battery for the M3L if it wasn't adequate. In my opinion, based on what we know about the I5N (800v architecture w/ 641HP) and it being more than capable of handling track conditions, I don't see how there would be any limitations on the M3L, which is also rated at 600HP+. Are you referring to thermal management where the M3L won't be able to perform as good as it advertises? Just curious...
From the several reviews that I've seen so far, it appears that the new Model 3 is scratching at the surface of the S in terms of overall refinement. I think that the S and X are riding on a fine line, being close to extinction in the near future. Imagine if the new model 3 was a much more practical hatchback design like the S? Perhaps that could have been close to the last nail in the coffin for the S line?
I'm really looking forward to what the new motors in the M3L can do beyond 60MPH. I foresee some high 10s in the 1/4, maybe 10.8 - 10.9, considering the fastest current M3P can clock in the low 11s with I think 11.1 sec being the fastest to date.
Fun thoughts.
That's what is possible with power limit and different tires on 1/4 mile.
1.00 10.302
1.05 10.207
1.10 10.123
1.15 10.049
1.20 9.984
1.25 9.926
1.30 9.874
1.35 9.828
1.40 9.786
1.45 9.748
1.50 9.714
I think with Ludicrous mode it will be 1.1g limited, plus thermal limits so it might be able to make around 10.3 seconds and 10.9 in Insane mode at the release.
Love the optimism, but 10.3? That's a huge delta from 10.9. Factor in weight, wind resistance etc... I'm still banking on upper 10s, around 10.9.
But hey if you're right, this will be insane! That would mean that the next Model 3 refresh would be in the 9s lol.
461kw power limit
Grip AvgHP_ 0-60 60-130 60' 330 1/8_ 1000 1/4__ 1/8MPH 1/4MPH
1.00 504.43 2.75 5.85 1.93 4.62 6.82 8.71 10.30 114.12 142.87
1.05 510.28 2.64 5.85 1.88 4.54 6.73 8.62 10.21 114.39 143.02
1.10 515.43 2.53 5.85 1.84 4.47 6.65 8.53 10.12 114.62 143.15
1.15 519.99 2.44 5.85 1.80 4.40 6.58 8.46 10.05 114.80 143.26
1.20 524.05 2.37 5.85 1.76 4.35 6.52 8.40 09.98 114.96 143.35
1.25 527.68 2.30 5.85 1.73 4.29 6.47 8.34 09.93 115.09 143.42
1.30 530.93 2.24 5.85 1.69 4.25 6.42 8.29 09.87 115.19 143.49
1.35 533.85 2.18 5.85 1.66 4.21 6.37 8.24 09.83 115.29 143.55
1.40 536.49 2.13 5.85 1.63 4.17 6.33 8.20 09.79 115.38 143.59
1.45 538.88 2.09 5.85 1.61 4.13 6.29 8.17 09.75 115.44 143.64
1.50 541.05 2.05 5.85 1.58 4.10 6.26 8.13 09.71 115.50 143.67
415kw power limit and 95% efficiency
Grip AvgHP_ 0-60 60-130 60' 330 1/8_ 1000 1/4__ 1/8MPH 1/4MPH
1.00 442.28 2.83 6.93 1.93 4.69 6.99 8.97 10.65 108.84 135.94
1.05 446.52 2.73 6.93 1.88 4.62 6.91 8.89 10.56 109.03 136.01
1.10 450.24 2.64 6.93 1.84 4.56 6.84 8.82 10.49 109.18 136.12
1.15 453.52 2.56 6.93 1.80 4.50 6.78 8.76 10.43 109.32 136.22
1.20 456.45 2.49 6.93 1.76 4.45 6.73 8.70 10.37 109.46 136.27
1.25 459.05 2.44 6.93 1.73 4.40 6.68 8.65 10.32 109.54 136.33
1.30 461.40 2.38 6.93 1.70 4.36 6.63 8.61 10.27 109.56 136.34
1.35 463.49 2.34 6.93 1.67 4.32 6.60 8.57 10.23 109.71 136.38
1.40 465.37 2.30 6.93 1.64 4.29 6.56 8.53 10.20 109.72 136.46
1.45 467.10 2.26 6.93 1.62 4.26 6.53 8.50 10.16 109.78 136.44
1.50 468.66 2.22 6.93 1.60 4.23 6.50 8.47 10.13 109.82 136.46
Here is updated table in a more readable format. Real numbers are slightly worse since torque is not unlimited and power limit from the speed is not the same.
But other than that - wind, weight and rolling resistance is taken into account.
But it's mostly to show that it's not a battery or maximum power limit for 0-60 and within that power limit 1/4 would be seriously different if power wouldn't be dropping like on m3p.
The main difference from power would be trap speed and 60-130.
60' of m3p is 1.8 which would be 1.15g, but after the jump it drops the torque tremendously and later runs out of breath.
2.5 is possible. Low 10th are possible. At least 10.5. But not in the Insane mode.
Last edited:
The Model S Plaid can accelerate way quicker than it can stop. The Model 3 Performance can stop WAY WAY quicker than it can accelerate.
The Model 3 Ludicrous will probably be able to accelerate close to the same as it can decelerate.
Good stuff, thanks for formatting it. I'll be very happy to be wrong in this case. It'll be fun to see what it does here very soon.
I keep visualizing in my head the difference in what a second gap looks like at the end of the 1/4, which isn't monstrous, so in that regard with the new M3L having a better top end, looking at it from that perspective, it's definitely more tangible.
If I was one of the early access press guys for the M3L that just occurred, I would have brought a Dragy for sure. Heck maybe someone did and if so we could have some GPS validated confirmation here any day now. (However, I wonder if they were told that they couldn't do a 1/4 mile run. Maybe the agreement had a limit of a 0-60 only. Who knows?)
Really looking forward to it.
The first clip in the video below shows my 11.17 run vs. a 10.45 run from a highly modified Hellcat. My expectation is that a Model 3 Ludicrous would make this an extremely close race instead of getting obliterated like I did.
Plaid does 0-60 (no rollout) in 2.28. It does 60-0 in 2.38. This takes 98 feet and 104 feet respectively.
Not sure I would call that "way quicker". Especially since plenty of cars can stop from 60 in around 90 feet and this poor braking is a reflection of the larger tires in the rear than the front, a clear non-performance setup. Slap square tires on the plaid and it out-brakes acceleration.
Model 3 already out-brakes a Plaid at about 99 feet. This would require a 0-60 time of about 2.35 seconds. Not happening.
Thank goodness the Model 3 doesn't take 2.8 seconds to do 60-0, that would be about 125 feet which is more like a pickup truck.
Plaid does 0-60 mph in 2.17 or 1.99 with rollout subtracted. That is way less than a 2.38 60-0 mph.
As far as the Model 3 goes I was comparing 0-60 mph with rollout subtracted to the 60-0 mph. I understand that this is not apples to apples but I believe the Model 3 Ludicrous will hit 0-60 mph in right at 2.50 seconds with rollout subtracted and it does 60-0 in close to 2.40 seconds. That is relatively close. MUCH much closer than it is now.
Plaid brakes and abs are famously not good. If they are fixed - braking and acceleration equally limited by tires so the same time and distance. On the same compound proper brakes have the same brakes performance between cars.
