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

[gearchruncher]

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.

In a new video from Engineering Explained, Jason Fenske points out that in Motor Trend testing, the Tesla Model S Plaid is listed as accelerating from 0-60 mph (97 km/h) in just 2.28 seconds on an unprepared surface, whereas it goes from 60-0 mph in 2.38 seconds. Moreover, it accelerates to that speed in just 98 ft (30 meters), whereas it stops in 104 ft (32 meters).

Sorry, I'm using the data from Jason. Up to you to quote your source of 2.17s instead of 2.28. Note the UNPREPPED surface used here for both accel and braking.

Plus, as I say, this is purely because of the tire mismatch, and the braking of the S is not great, and the 3 is already better. To have accel and braking balanced on a Model 3 you're going to need to run faster than the Model S can brake- which is 2.38 seconds, with NO ROLLOUT. The M3L will flat out not be a 2.3 second car without rollout, and comparing 1 ft rollout in acceleration to braking to a full stop is just pointless random mixing of numbers.

All of this is super, super pointless to compare on cars with larger rear tires than fronts as well. I can make almost any 400+ HP car accelerate better than it brakes by putting narrow tires on the front. Increasing braking distance does not cause me to be impressed with your acceleration capabilities.

Does the Plaid still out accelerate the brakes when the track pack is used with stickier tires? Then I'd be impressed.

 

[FastLaneJB]

Here is calculated m3l 0-60 timings when we don't know torque limit, but only power limits and take into account air resistance:

Right but we do know this because Tesla had to report this data in Europe. So assuming @eivissa is telling the truth and he’s a very good track record, it is all known and your going to be extremely disappointed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776265244374892561

Battery Power Limit

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776128009449177548

 

[milesr3]

A simple question: does the M3P inverter provide maximum available current from the battery to the rear motor from 0 mph?

IME the 235 section rear tyre already has more grip than is demanded by 100% throttle from standstill. It's only when cold/wet that traction is lost. A wider section tyre will not improve this.

Also the repeatability of 0-60 runs in identical times across a range of battery SoC and temperature suggests that there is a software/hardware limit to the torque that is comfortably below the limits of grip. This has previously been raised twice I believe by OTA updates over the lifetime of the M3P, which suggests it is a software limit but will be dependent upon what the battery, inverters and motors (etc) can reliably achieve.

 

[FastLaneJB]

A simple question: does the M3P inverter provide maximum available current from the battery to the rear motor from 0 mph?

IME the 235 section rear tyre already has more grip than is demanded by 100% throttle from standstill. It's only when cold/wet that traction is lost. Also the repeatability of 0-60 runs in identical times across a range of battery SoC and temperature suggests that there is a software/hardware limit to the torque that is comfortably below the limits of grip. This has previously been raised twice I believe by OTA updates over the lifetime of the M3P, which suggests it is a software limit but will be dependent upon what the battery, inverters and motors (etc) can reliably achieve.

I’m not an expert on this but the power output of the car is a mixture of what’s at the front and rear motors. As you accelerate and weight transfers to the rear the front becomes less useful. That was why the Model S Plaid with less power could out accelerate the Lucid Air Dream because Lucid had less power at the rear and more at the front. They fixed that with the Sapphire.

My thinking here is that Tesla have increased the power of the rear motor so they can put more power to the rear and less to the front. The battery cannot run both motors at full power because its battery limited but it’ll be able to put more power where it matters which is at the rear in 0-60 times.

That is what I think buys them the 0.2 second better time. It might not actually be making much to any more power than the outgoing model because of the battery limits but it’ll be able to better utilise the power it does have.

Then with the higher speed before the new rear motor tops out, that should help with higher speed acceleration and quarter miles times. Still just getting into high 10’s.

 

[eivissa]

Also the repeatability of 0-60 runs in identical times across a range of battery SoC and temperature suggests that there is a software/hardware limit to the torque that is comfortably below the limits of grip.

Yes, exactly that. Even across 3D1, 3D6, 4D1 you can see power increase at the same level and peak torque be identical until around 70kph. Only at low soc you see that this low speed behaviour is dropping. So there is an artificial limit, that Tesla can raise.

 

[FastLaneJB]

Yes, exactly that. Even across 3D1, 3D6, 4D1 you can see power increase at the same level and peak torque be identical until around 70kph. Only at low soc you see that this low speed behaviour is dropping. So there is an artificial limit, that Tesla can raise.

View attachment 1036627

They might be doing this also for battery longevity. The Performance Models degrade their batteries faster than a Long Range and there’s a warranty they offer around that.

 

[milesr3]

So there is an artificial limit, that Tesla can raise.

Second question: is the power below 70kph sufficient for maximum (rated) torque? IIRC I've seen your graphs previously showing a flatline of torque around 720NM from just above 0 kph.

 

[terranx]

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.

It’s an undeserved reputation. Its braking distances are about the same as any other high end sedan with a similar weight. The difference compared to other cars is that it accelerates about as quickly as it brakes. But you can’t break physics. Turns out you actually have to plan your maneuvers when your wielding 1000hp

 

[eivissa]

Second question: is the power below 70kph sufficient for maximum (rated) torque? IIRC I've seen your graphs previously showing a flatline of torque around 720NM from just above 0 kph.

I've done a rough projection of 30% torque increase, if Tesla were to use Ludicrous mode as in the MS/MX in the past:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1772926663518511274

 

[Lets go Plaid]

So if they do this what 0 to 60 time is possible?

 

[mpgxsvcd]

Sorry, I'm using the data from Jason. Up to you to quote your source of 2.17s instead of 2.28. Note the UNPREPPED surface used here for both accel and braking.

Plus, as I say, this is purely because of the tire mismatch, and the braking of the S is not great, and the 3 is already better. To have accel and braking balanced on a Model 3 you're going to need to run faster than the Model S can brake- which is 2.38 seconds, with NO ROLLOUT. The M3L will flat out not be a 2.3 second car without rollout, and comparing 1 ft rollout in acceleration to braking to a full stop is just pointless random mixing of numbers.

All of this is super, super pointless to compare on cars with larger rear tires than fronts as well. I can make almost any 400+ HP car accelerate better than it brakes by putting narrow tires on the front. Increasing braking distance does not cause me to be impressed with your acceleration capabilities.

Does the Plaid still out accelerate the brakes when the track pack is used with stickier tires? Then I'd be impressed.

It is 2.17 with stock Plaids on the street on Dragy. I was asked not to post Dragy results in this thread so I can’t post the screenshot.

You’re misunderstanding my point. My point wasn’t that the Model 3 Ludicrous would have exactly the same braking as acceleration down to the hundredth of a second. That is why I said “close to the same as it can decelerate”.

My point was that the acceleration for the current Model 3 Performance is vastly slower than it can decelerate while other cars like the Plaid can accelerate quicker than they can decelerate.

I contend that the deceleration of the Model 3 Ludicrous won’t improve over the current Model 3 Performance because like you said the front tires are unchanged.

Tesla is putting full emphasis on acceleration with the Model 3 Ludicrous and the significant stagger only helps the car accelerate. It does nothing to help deceleration or handling for that matter. You have even said that in the past.

I don’t think the Model 3 Ludicrous will be the road course or autocross monster out of the box that some people are hoping for. I think it is going to be a solid drag racing car(~10.5 1/4 mile) and not much more. I believe you have said the same thing in the past if I am not mistaken.

 

[milesr3]

I've done a rough projection of 30% torque increase, if Tesla were to use Ludicrous mode as in the MS/MX in the past.

Did Ludicrous mode in the MS/MX increase the torque to 130% of the rated motor output? I don't know how motor ratings are arrived it, but it's probably safe to say that 100% is not 100%. There will be some headroom and probably nonlinearity above "100%" whereby 130% torque may need (say) 150% current/power, which in-turn causes 200% drivetrain wear. Hence needing a special mode, with some warnings rather than everyday torque being reset to 130%.

Also your torque graph shows that the rear motor of the M3P-P3L (blue and green lines) is already at 100% torque from 0 Km/h. The torque does not ramp up, like the battery discharge power. Torque is the force that causes acceleration. If the motors are run at "100%" torque then there's little improvement over the 3D6 (but the US M3L will get a decent upgrade from the CAT 1 3D1 DU used so far).

 

[mpgxsvcd]

Also the repeatability of 0-60 runs in identical times across a range of battery SoC and temperature suggests that there is a software/hardware limit to the torque that is comfortably below the limits of grip.

This is not accurate. SOC is largely irrelevant for 0-60 mph until very low SOCs. However, battery and motor temperature are extremely important for 0-60 mph without rollout subtracted.

I did 9 separate 1/4 mile runs on the same lane of the same track without recharging at all. I went from 97% SOC down to 81% SOC but more importantly I changed battery and motor temperature after the first 6 passes.

With a hot battery you will gain about .1 seconds on your 40-60 mph time over a warm battery. However, your 0-40 mph time is unaffected by battery temperature but motor temperature can affect your low speed(~0-20 mph) time.

My 0-60 mph times varied by as much as .17 seconds(3.27 to 3.44) over the 9 passes. Yes, the 97% SOC was the quickest and the 83% SOC was the slowest. However, you have to dig deeper than that to know exactly what is going on.

My slowest 0-10 mph time was on my second and third passes when SOC was well above 90% but my motors were still hot from heating the battery and especially from hot lapping. It took .14 seconds longer to accelerate from 0-10 mph when the motors were hot regardless of what the SOC was.

However, from 40-60 mph I gained as much as .1 seconds when the battery was hot.

0-60 mph is only consistent when you keep battery and motor temperatures consistent. SOC is almost irrelevant for 0-60 mph until you get to very low SOCs.

 

[mpgxsvcd]

I've done a rough projection of 30% torque increase, if Tesla were to use Ludicrous mode as in the MS/MX in the past:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1772926663518511274

Wasn’t the MS/MX Ludicrous mode able to increase torque for both the front and rear motors? Are we expecting the Model 3 Ludicrous to increase torque to the front motor by 30% with the same motor and tires?

I would think that the rear motor torque could increase by 30% with the new motor and vastly wider tires but not the front motor torque.

 

[mpgxsvcd]

So if they do this what 0 to 60 time is possible?

With the same diameter tire and assuming the gearing is the same the 30% torque increase would be directly proportional to the increase in force. However, this may only be 30% more torque at the rear wheels since nothing has changed at the front.

A 30% increase in torque to the rear wheels would be massive. Easily 0-60 mph in 2.5 seconds or better. A 20% overall increase in torque would get you to 2.5 seconds.

 

[milesr3]

With a hot battery you will gain about .1 seconds on your 40-60 mph time over a warm battery.

Yet others are claiming that the battery is not limiting performance. Yours is the full-fat, made in US, real-deal, Panasonic 3L too!

 

[Mash]

Right but we do know this because Tesla had to report this data in Europe. So assuming @eivissa is telling the truth and he’s a very good track record, it is all known and your going to be extremely disappointed.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776265244374892561

Battery Power Limit

https://twitter.com/x/status/1776128009449177548

We know advertised power limit and voltage. We dont know for sure power curve before and after maximum power speed. We.can guess that the front motor would be similar to m3p, but even that is not certain, since you can drive the same motor differently.

Power before and after will be lower than maximum power, sure. But I'm showing that if we don't know how much lower - we massively don't know 0-60 or 1/4. Those things are just not limited primarily by max power today.

 

[FastLaneJB]

We know advertised power limit and voltage. We dont know for sure power curve before and after maximum power speed. We.can guess that the front motor would be similar to m3p, but even that is not certain, since you can drive the same motor differently.

Power before and after will be lower than maximum power, sure. But I'm showing that if we don't know how much lower - we massively don't know 0-60 or 1/4. Those things are just not limited primarily by max power today.

Well lets just hope it comes out today or at least this week to put all of this to bed.

 

[Mash]

It’s an undeserved reputation. Its braking distances are about the same as any other high end sedan with a similar weight. The difference compared to other cars is that it accelerates about as quickly as it brakes. But you can’t break physics. Turns out you actually have to plan your maneuvers when your wielding 1000hp

Weight doesn't influence braking distance if brakes are not overheating in a single stop.

Only pavement, tires and abs system defines the minimum stopping distance.

Wrong suspension geometry can make things worse, but it's a rare thing.

 

[Lindenwood]

Yet others are claiming that the battery is not limiting performance. Yours is the full-fat, made in US, real-deal, Panasonic 3L too!

It’s limiting peak power draw, not “performance” overall, as described in several different ways, including the below.

I've done a rough projection of 30% torque increase, if Tesla were to use Ludicrous mode as in the MS/MX in the past:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1772926663518511274