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.
Nobody has run 10s with the current Model 3 Performance yet. Are you sure it wasn't a Model S or perhaps they were testing the Model 3 Ludicrous? Did you get any videos of it?

11.17 is the best 1/4 mile time so far with a Model 3 Performance. That is pretty far from 10s considering that was with 210 lbs of weight reduction. Not a lot more you can do without cutting out metal sections from the car.
No this was def a previous generation. This was before they even had announced anything regarding the highland ludicrous. I will have to see if bandimere happened to post any photos from the t&t but this was Oct 11th of last year
 
  • Like
Reactions: mpgxsvcd
1712941989767.png
 
I'm presuming this is sarcasm, since the current M3P also has a 162 mph top speed....

I mean, it's not bad, but it's no actual improvement.

Also, no EV is likely to have any sort of top-speed bragging rights for quite some time, if ever...
It actually wasn’t. The current MSLR has been cut back to 130 which is terrible given the fact that’s the average 1/4mi trap speed. My MS is a 22 so it still has the 145-149 top speed. I understand the difference between a performance model vs not but it’s like kneecapping a car
 
  • Like
Reactions: Mash and mpgxsvcd
It actually wasn’t. The current MSLR has been cut back to 130 which is terrible given the fact that’s the average 1/4mi trap speed. My MS is a 22 so it still has the 145-149 top speed. I understand the difference between a performance model vs not but it’s like kneecapping a car
Seeing as it's sold as a "Long Range" and putting tyres on that help give more range at the expense of top speed it makes perfect sense. Efficiency matters more to most who don't buy the Performance models than being able to go over 130mph.
 
It actually wasn’t. The current MSLR has been cut back to 130 which is terrible given the fact that’s the average 1/4mi trap speed. My MS is a 22 so it still has the 145-149 top speed. I understand the difference between a performance model vs not but it’s like kneecapping a car
Seeing as it's sold as a "Long Range" and putting tyres on that help give more range at the expense of top speed it makes perfect sense. Efficiency matters more to most who don't buy the Performance models than being able to go over 130mph.
You can still buy tyres that increase range and do 162 mph 👍

View attachment 1038079
Not when the car limits the top speed to 130mph :p

Not checked but assume Tesla is just going for cheaper versions with lower top speed rating.
 
Seeing as it's sold as a "Long Range" and putting tyres on that help give more range at the expense of top speed it makes perfect sense. Efficiency matters more to most who don't buy the Performance models than being able to go over 130mph.
There was probably a contingent who felt 670hp and a quarter mile of 130 was plenty fast and didn't want to spend the extra $15k for what amounts to bragging rights.

Though I guess for Tesla, if the reduced top speed convinces a few people to go Plaid, that's still a net win for them.
 
What DOES constitute one?

AFAIK most car mags for years and years used a Racelogic Vbox... which when tested against a Draggy it's generally found to be less accurate than the draggy when compared to timing lights at a drag strip.
Measurements on a real track would be what I consider to be valid. If a GPS and accelerometer based app must be used, I would want to see the average of the runs in both directions.
 
  • Like
  • Funny
Reactions: mpgxsvcd and Adam3
Measurements on a real track would be what I consider to be valid. If a GPS and accelerometer based app must be used, I would want to see the average of the runs in both directions.


But there's tons of actual testing showing Draggy results are within a couple hundreds of a second of the results from a real track.

So why, specifically, do you doubt them?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mpgxsvcd
But there's tons of actual testing showing Draggy results are within a couple hundreds of a second of the results from a real track.

So why, specifically, do you doubt them?
Because it's too easy to fake. Dragy will allow slopes to generate a valid result. And you can skew that further by having the slope steeper where you're trying to fudge the numbers. @mpgxsvcd seems to place a lot of his self worth in having a fast M3P. He's the only one putting out such ludicrous (pun intended) numbers on a supposedly stock M3P. Everyone else runs roughly what Tesla and the various magazines say it will get.
 
Because it's too easy to fake. Dragy will allow slopes to generate a valid result. And you can skew that further by having the slope steeper where you're trying to fudge the numbers. @mpgxsvcd seems to place a lot of his self worth in having a fast M3P. He's the only one putting out such ludicrous (pun intended) numbers on a supposedly stock M3P. Everyone else runs roughly what Tesla and the various magazines say it will get.
You have no clue what you are talking about. You think that any negative slope at all would disqualify a run. Bless your heart.

Drag strips are specifically designed to allow down to -1% slope. The Dragy also allows down to -1% slope for that very reason.

You just keep spouting off things that you have no idea about.
 
You have no clue what you are talking about. You think that any negative slope at all would disqualify a run. Bless your heart.

Drag strips are specifically designed to allow down to -1% slope. The Dragy also allows down to -1% slope for that very reason.

You just keep spouting off things that you have no idea about.
And that makes it useless for an actual measurement. Of course you're going to throw the most optimistic conditions possible to please your ego and have a nicer looking number.

Even Tesla which uses every trick in the book to make their cars sound better than they are doesn't resort to quoting 0-60s downhill.
 
And that makes it useless for an actual measurement. Of course you're going to throw the most optimistic conditions possible to please your ego and have a nicer looking number.

Even Tesla which uses every trick in the book to make their cars sound better than they are doesn't resort to quoting 0-60s downhill.
It is so obvious now that you literally don’t understand how any of this works. You don’t know how the magazines test. You don’t understand what is allowed and what isn’t.

I have shown exactly what the car can and can’t do and you just spout off whatever makes you feel better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Yelobird
It is so obvious now that you literally don’t understand how any of this works. You don’t know how the magazines test. You don’t understand what is allowed and what isn’t.

I have shown exactly what the car can and can’t do and you just spout off whatever makes you feel better.
I know how magazines test. I know what is and isn't allowed. I also know that going downhill is cheating.

But hey, if it helps you sleep at night thinking your car is faster than every other model 3 performance or that you're so much better at pressing a gas pedal than everyone else, have at it.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: mpgxsvcd
Measurements on a real track would be what I consider to be valid. If a GPS and accelerometer based app must be used, I would want to see the average of the runs in both directions.
It isn't an app, it's a standalone unit that attaches to your dashboard that interfaces with an app. It shows if it's valid or not based on numerous factors. I've had runs that were connected to as many as 13 satellites show Invalid for not being connected to enough sattelites. Accuracy is is almost to the thousands.