Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Model 3 Motors on the Tesla Parts Catalog

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Another interesting point if it hasn't been brought up already. Fueleconomy.gov data is showing that the 2020 Performance Model 3 with 18" wheels actually gets more range than the Long Range AWD version (I'm assuming predominate configuration is 18" wheels). Tesla artificially lowered the range of the Performance version to match the non-performance car.

Non-P Long Range AWD Range
City: 331.1 Highway: 310.6 Combined: 322

Performance Long Range AWD (18")
City: 332.2 Highway: 319.2 Combined: 322 (Combined range voluntarily lowered from 332 miles)

Source: 2020 Datafile - Download Fuel Economy Data

Potentially could be from lowered ride height (reduced aero load), different tire (not sure if they're the same in the 18" config), different rear motor, and/or power electronics. Its tough to pinpoint without the road load coefficients. EPA does not have the 2020 Tesla certification docs available yet from I can find.
 
Last edited:
  • Informative
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
Another interesting point if it hasn't been brought up already. Fueleconomy.gov data is showing that the 2020 Performance Model 3 with 18" wheels actually gets more range than the Long Range AWD version (I'm assuming predominate configuration is 18" wheels). Tesla artificially lowered the range of the Performance version to match the non-performance car.

Non-P Long Range AWD Range
City: 331.1 Highway: 310.6 Combined: 322

Performance Long Range AWD (18")
City: 332.2 Highway: 319.2 Combined: 322 (Combined range voluntarily lowered from 332 miles)

Source: 2020 Datafile - Download Fuel Economy Data

Potentially could be from lowered ride height (reduced aero load), different tire (not sure if they're the same in the 18" config), different rear motor, and/or power electronics. Its tough to pinpoint without the road load coefficients. EPA does not have the 2020 Tesla certification docs available yet from I can find.


The P3D- comes with the same suspension and same tires as the AWD so can't be ride height or tires.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
Another interesting point if it hasn't been brought up already. Fueleconomy.gov data is showing that the 2020 Performance Model 3 with 18" wheels actually gets more range than the Long Range AWD version (I'm assuming predominate configuration is 18" wheels). Tesla artificially lowered the range of the Performance version to match the non-performance car.

Non-P Long Range AWD Range
City: 331.1 Highway: 310.6 Combined: 322

Performance Long Range AWD (18")
City: 332.2 Highway: 319.2 Combined: 322 (Combined range voluntarily lowered from 332 miles)

Source: 2020 Datafile - Download Fuel Economy Data

Potentially could be from lowered ride height (reduced aero load), different tire (not sure if they're the same in the 18" config), different rear motor, and/or power electronics. Its tough to pinpoint without the road load coefficients. EPA does not have the 2020 Tesla certification docs available yet from I can find.

Thanks for the link. I noticed the difference in efficiency (which was actually visible in the up-front listing) a few weeks ago. Then they were made the same (the range was always the same 322). I've been stupidly waiting for the certification docs; didn't realize this datafile existed.

I didn't think they could sandbag the MPGe numbers though. I thought they could only voluntarily reduce the range? (For example, the 2018 LR RWD (voluntary derating) had the same range as the 2018 LR AWD but the efficiency numbers still showed the RWD to be better. I have no idea.

LR vs AWD vs Stealth P Range Differences Screen Captures

I figured that the LR AWD P had been voluntarily derated. I guess we'll (maybe) see why when those docs come out with all the coefficients. I suspect the drive unit, but who knows.

Cut and pasted from column DC (this is not new information, it's already been covered here over and over again, and these numbers perhaps seem a bit dubious (low, if looking at "crank" HP)...):

"2020 MY Model 3 AWD Long Range Carline; AWD & PERF SHARE COMMON FRONT MOTOR - 147 kW; REAR (AWD) - 188 kW; (PERF) - 211 kW"

And for completeness, copied from the same column in the 2018 data:

"2018 MY Model 3 AWD Long Range Carline ; AWD & PERF SHARE COMMON FRONT MOTOR - 147 kW; REAR (AWD) - 188 kW; (PERF)-211 kW"

So the power numbers have not been updated, nor has the verbiage, in spite of the change in the motor part number, and two 5% power increases in the interim...

I'm really hoping that these increased ranges actually are real efficiency improvements beyond the one-pedal driving (I just don't see how that could help highway results so much), and they just haven't yet been released. I also hope they apply retroactively to the 2018/2019 models. I don't care if the range number in the car doesn't get updated for the 2018/2019!

The battery capacity numbers are unchanged from 2018 - but see above that they don't update anything even if it changes, so that might not be definitive.

The highway range of the 2020 Performance is better than the highway range of the old 2018 RWD!

Maybe the engineering team has been working on improving the coasting of that front induction motor, rather than working on that AWD snow mode that everyone wants! That would be nearly exactly the opposite of what everyone wants...but extra efficiency is good.
 
Last edited:
I had the left rear wheel off today for some cleaning, and was surprised to see I have a 990 (Rev A) rear motor on my Dec 2018 non-P AWD. According to the DA when I took delivery, my car's birthday was 12/31/2018, so practically a Jan 2019.
 

Attachments

  • Annotation 2019-12-08 150830.png
    Annotation 2019-12-08 150830.png
    1.9 MB · Views: 185
  • Informative
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life
Thanks for the link. I noticed the difference in efficiency (which was actually visible in the up-front listing) a few weeks ago. Then they were made the same (the range was always the same 322). I've been stupidly waiting for the certification docs; didn't realize this datafile existed.

I didn't think they could sandbag the MPGe numbers though. I thought they could only voluntarily reduce the range? (For example, the 2018 LR RWD (voluntary derating) had the same range as the 2018 LR AWD but the efficiency numbers still showed the RWD to be better. I have no idea.

Yeah, I'm not sure either. Check out column 'R'. The bigger number is the MPGe and the one below (the smaller number), is the kWh/100 miles. The non-P AWD is gets 120.5 MPGe and consumes 27.9607 kWh/100 mi, where the P with 18s gets 124.3645 MPGe, and consumes 27.1018 kWh/100 mi. It appears that Tesla somehow got EPA to use the non-P AWD MPGe and consumption numbers for their FuelEconomy.gov label data.
 
Just adding this EU technical registration info here also - updated with the latest deliveries after 2019.36 upgrade.
Interesting is that the AWD now ("officially" on paper) has more hp than the Performance had in the beginning of the year (if you removed the limits).

tesla-output.png


If anybody knows of newer dyno measurements let me know. It's fun to have a comparison with the official numbers (showing mostly on the AWD being ~90hp below what is should be according to the EU registrations).
 
  • Like
Reactions: MrHopsing
It appears that Tesla somehow got EPA to use the non-P AWD MPGe and consumption numbers for their FuelEconomy.gov label data.

I assume the window stickers coming with the cars show the 299/304/322 mile ranges? Haven't seen any pictures posted here. Odd that the Tesla website still advertises 310 for the 3P+ (doesn't match any of these numbers!) with a picture of a vehicle that gets 299 (they've updated the AWD numbers to say 322 of course).

CARB UDDS Test Results for 2020 Tesla Model 3 AWD & Performance

Link above is relevant to this thread since it shows that there is an efficiency difference between the models, for sure, so this is not "speculative" based on EPA numbers (which were also not speculative but never mind...at least these are raw results which get rid of the derating factors).

Key point is that the vehicle with the 980 motor does better than the one with the 990 motor, all else apparently being equal.

Aside (no need for a discussion here about this - please move any discussion to the linked thread above...this thread is about motors...):
This is the Urban test, so aero not as big a deal. Interesting that the 19" (which would be raised and have no spoiler) does worse than the 20" on the urban cycle. Implies tires are basically similar rolling resistance, I suppose, (could also be that the brake drag differences are a factor?) and further implies that the lowering and the spoiler will hurt the highway aero (which is contrary to what some have speculated), since we know the 19" overall does better than the 20" (304 vs. 299). The EPA datafile confirms this for the highway results; the 19" is better than the 20" on the highway test...the wheels are similar design so I think would be similar for aero.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Knightshade
Another interesting point if it hasn't been brought up already. Fueleconomy.gov data is showing that the 2020 Performance Model 3 with 18" wheels actually gets more range than the Long Range AWD version (I'm assuming predominate configuration is 18" wheels). Tesla artificially lowered the range of the Performance version to match the non-performance car.

Non-P Long Range AWD Range
City: 331.1 Highway: 310.6 Combined: 322

Performance Long Range AWD (18")
City: 332.2 Highway: 319.2 Combined: 322 (Combined range voluntarily lowered from 332 miles)

Source: 2020 Datafile - Download Fuel Economy Data

Potentially could be from lowered ride height (reduced aero load), different tire (not sure if they're the same in the 18" config), different rear motor, and/or power electronics. Its tough to pinpoint without the road load coefficients. EPA does not have the 2020 Tesla certification docs available yet from I can find.

I just recently lowered my model 3 and have been noticing massive differences in efficiency on the highway. Maybe you are correct, the efficiency gain is from lowered ride height. @UnpluggedP has a study on their website which states that efficiency is increased by 8% when lowering the car.
 
  • Funny
Reactions: AlanSubie4Life