Model 3 "Performance Brake Calipers" just red or different altogether?

[Garlan Garner]

What is going on in this thread? So much vitriol over brakes/option package. We’re all on the same team here I thought.

As it is, even if the Performance Package is a dick waving package designed for high profit margin, then Tesla certainly isn’t unique in doing so. If it makes an otherwise stock looking Model 3 stick out from the crowd without having to source your own parts, bigger brakes or not, then for some it’s worth the money over the hassle.

Probably mulched over the same limited info to the point that without any official news this may just continue.

For what it’s worth I edited my order from a standard AWD to the Performance with the upgraded package on the basis of “cause I wanted to”. Though it’s not an incredibly expensive car, it’s not particularly cheap either, may as well do it up.

Welcome to TMC.

Nice first post.

 

[Shizzrock]

My official guess: Both performance versions will have 355mm rotors and six piston calipers, the 5k upgrade ones will be red. You will be able to put 18" wheels on either.

 

[OmahaG8]

Welcome to TMC.

Nice first post.

Ha, thanks. I’ve been lurking a few forums and this one seems to be my preferred one, been keeping tabs on this thread, and got me to join. All been there. I’m just gonna drink a few beers and wait for them VIN reports to start coming in.

That all being said I reaaaallly hope 19’s fit on whatever ends up happening with this package. Because I ordered a set from TSportline from their current sale, got some TPMS sensors from eBay, and plan on having a local place mount some winter tires when the time comes.

 

[little1er]

Sub'd

 

[Shizzrock]

Ha, thanks. I’ve been lurking a few forums and this one seems to be my preferred one, been keeping tabs on this thread, and got me to join. All been there. I’m just gonna drink a few beers and wait for them VIN reports to start coming in.

That all being said I reaaaallly hope 19’s fit on whatever ends up happening with this package. Because I ordered a set from TSportline from their current sale, got some TPMS sensors from eBay, and plan on having a local place mount some winter tires when the time comes.

I think you'll be good.

 

[Shizzrock]

My official guess: Both performance versions will have 355mm rotors and six piston calipers, the 5k upgrade ones will be red. You will be able to put 18" wheels on either.

And then the best tire would be 265/40/18 Michelin PS4S on 18 x 9" et35 wheel. Unless you like the stretched look.

 

[Garlan Garner]

And then the best tire would be 265/40/18 Michelin PS4S on 18 x 9" et35 wheel. Unless you like the stretched look.

Is the stretched look better or worse on tires?

 

[Shizzrock]

Is the stretched look better or worse on tires?

for wear? I don't think it matters. But there's definitely less sidewall protection. It could also improve cornering up to a certain point because of the stiffer sidewall. But wider tires help traction, so there's a tradeoff.

 

[Knightshade]

My real life experiences are different from these opinion.

What I wrote isn't opinion, it's physics.

It's literally impossible for "bigger brakes" to stop the car any shorter than properly working stock brakes on a single normal stop.

Your reply is even stranger since the 2 "real world" experiences you try and rebut that claim with are-

Repeated high speed stops on a track
and
Repeated stops through 5 miles of downhill mountains with a full battery

Neither of which are at all relevant to the fact of mine you were replying to.

Or did you mean my comment that the $10,000+ porsche brake upgrade also does literally nothing for a single panic stop?

Because that too is a fact, because, again, that's how physics works.

If the stock brakes can lock up the wheels (or engage ABS on modern cars)- and they can- then it's physically impossible for bigger brakes to stop you any shorter.

Car and Driver actually tested this...comparing the stock 911 brakes with the $10,000 PCCB carbon ceramic brake upgrade...their conclusion?

The 911 with the PCCB system performed about the same as the other 911 and the Vette. The average stopping distances of the two 911s were within a foot of each other (305 feet), not surprising since both cars were wearing the same tires.

The brakes don't stop the car. The tires do.

Your stopping distance is always limited by the friction between tire and road.

If you continue to think this is an opinion when it's a fact I strongly encourage you to go read the link I posted earlier the goes into detail on why this is so.

Unrelated to these observations, it seems the general irritation in this thread is not knowing exactly what comes with the “basic” performance package.

Pretty much, yeah. If you go by just what Tesla has explicitly stated it's a poor deal.

5k for brakes useless off a track, 20s I don't want (but tires I DO want, but on the 18s, which Tesla won't sell me), a spoiler I don't want, and aluminum pedals I can get for massively less elsewhere seemed like an awful deal.

11k for a software unlock to take the car from 4.5 to 3.5 0-60 (plus the "option" to pay another 1500 for a white interior I don't want) while still riding on the stock suspension likewise seemed a poor deal for the money. I've owned cars that run 3.x 0-60, the number of times that matters in real life compared to 4.5 is pretty low, especially if they're not giving me a high-end suspension to go with.

Hence my order's for an AWD non-P.

Now if they're secretly hiding magnetorheological shocks, big sways, and PS4s on the 18s without telling anybody (let alone upgraded brakes without the extra 5k) they're costing themselves at least my extra money and I'm sure that of many others.... since I'd hope the company isn't that dumb I've got to think all you're getting it what's on the label.

 

[Knightshade]

Elon said that the performance version will handle better than the BMW M3 and beat anything in it's class. Good luck doing that with the current brakes, suspension and tires that are equipted on the LR model 3. And we know what happens with those brakes at the track.

Right.

Elon also pointed out those brake upgrades won't make any difference outside of a track.

You know, like folks have been saying for a while now and people keep trying to disagree with him

 

[juanmedina]

Right.

Elon also pointed out those brake upgrades won't make any difference outside of a track.

You know, like folks have been saying for a while now and people keep trying to disagree with him

I take my car to the track that's the difference . That's why I got the performance version.

 

[FlatSix911]

You'd have to go ask the 99% of people who buy such cars and never take it to a race track I guess?

Seriously- almost nobody goes to a race track, compared to the number of "performance" car buyers...and most of the ones who do are going to a drag strip where stock brakes are just fine for a single stop from 1/8th or 1/4 mile speeds.

That's why the sales pitch for the P is 3.5 0-60, not "drops 2 seconds off your lap time at Laguna Seca"

Many Tesla enthusiasts track our cars at Laguna Seca ... you don't speak for us Please take a seat.

 

[Knightshade]

I take my car to the track that's the difference . That's why I got the performance version.

Right- also why I repeatedly mentioned upgraded brakes are a good idea for anybody going to a (non drag) track, regardless of how quick the car in question is. It was the myths that "quicker" cars specifically need them, or that they're useful in "regular" driving because the car is 'so powerful' I was debunking.

Many Tesla enthusiasts track our cars at Laguna Seca ... you don't speak for us Please take a seat.

View attachment 315366

I mean, I was pretty clearly doing the opposite of that, so you can imagine what I'd suggest you do with your own advice

Congrats on being in that 1% though!

 

[brianman]

Many Tesla enthusiasts track our cars at Laguna Seca ...

Indeed.

 

[eigenv1]

What I wrote isn't opinion, it's physics.

It's literally impossible for "bigger brakes" to stop the car any shorter than properly working stock brakes on a single normal stop.

Your reply is even stranger since the 2 "real world" experiences you try and rebut that claim with are-

Repeated high speed stops on a track
and
Repeated stops through 5 miles of downhill mountains with a full battery

Neither of which are at all relevant to the fact of mine you were replying to.

Sigh. I hope you are never limited to a single normal stop to be safe in your Tesla.

You said braking 50 times. I said after 3 applications of the brakes (a far cry from 50), and with 5 minutes waiting in line between runs, the brakes failed to slow the wheels, so the tires could not do their job. In the second case, without regenerative braking, the Tesla brakes and pads better be up to the task on non-track conditions on long downhill stretches if the battery gets to a high SoC.

We have some data points about the stock Tesla brakes on the 3 under hard braking. Consumer Reports failed to recommend the car initially because after 1 hard braking, the stop distances increased and were deemed unsafe. I know, Tesla changed that in software to make it about average braking distance. That was on the RWD 135 mph version. Now we’re talking heavier AWD car with higher top speeds. I’m hoping my AWD P on order is up to the task of stopping the car safely under the conditions I mentioned (applying the brakes more than once). If not, we can start a thread on better brake pads to stop the wheels from rotating, so the physics relating to the tires can be applied.

 

[kbM3]

My take is the following:

You have to get the Performance package with the 20” wheels/tires to get the upgraded brakes.

The clue is the fact that Elon stated better brakes provide zero benefit because regen with dual motor is powerful enough to ride the tire traction limit of non performance tires.

So there would be no benefit on the Performance with 18’s, unless the buyer were to switch tires. I suspect Tesla is not worried about this case. There may be an edge case with a full battery and repeated panic stops, but it seems unimportant.

I believe this also means that regen will be blended into the brake pedal.

Elon always looks to the future and friction brakes themselves are a very outdated concept. I can’t imagine cars 20 years from now will have them.

 

[mongo]

Agree with everything but this:

I believe this also means that regen will be blended into the brake pedal.

Why do that verses give 100% regen with accelerator? By putting it on brake, it decreases regen efficiency (some mechanical braking) and makes the braking performance dependant on pack SOC.

Elon always looks to the future and friction brakes themselves are a very outdated concept. I can’t imagine cars 20 years from now will have them.

Again, in the case of full (or dead) pack or drive unit failure or need for more braking than regen provides, friction brakes are needed.
Also needed for ESC/ traction control unless they go to one motor per wheel.

 

[Knightshade]

Sigh. I hope you are never limited to a single normal stop to be safe in your Tesla.

You said braking 50 times. I said after 3 applications of the brakes (a far cry from 50), and with 5 minutes waiting in line between runs, the brakes failed to slow the wheels, so the tires could not do their job.

You also said you were at a drag strip.

Can you explain any normal non-track situation, ever, you'd be stopping from north of 100 mph more than 3 times in about 15 minutes?

In the second case, without regenerative braking, the Tesla brakes and pads better be up to the task on non-track conditions on long downhill stretches if the battery gets to a high SoC.

We have some data points about the stock Tesla brakes on the 3 under hard braking. Consumer Reports failed to recommend the car initially because after 1 hard braking, the stop distances increased and were deemed unsafe. I know, Tesla changed that in software to make it about average braking distance.

This is factually false.

You are not understanding what CR actually reported, nor what the fix was.


CR found that there was a problem with the ABS programming, such that if you made a hard stop at all it might confus the computer to put it in a degraded state permanently

Even after letting the brakes sit and testing them ice cold they got the "problem" results.


This has nothing whatsoever to do with the brake hardware and nothing whatsoever to do with brake fade.

You can tell because it was fixed with a software update, which would be impossible if it was a hardware problem.

I’m hoping my AWD P on order is up to the task of stopping the car safely under the conditions I mentioned (applying the brakes more than once).

If you mean in normal street use then yes, literally every production car made in recent years can do that, including every car Tesla makes.

If you mean on a racetrack where you're repeatedly stopping from triple-digit speeds over and over in a relatively short span of time, then maybe or maybe not. That would of course be the one place brake upgrades are actually useful.

But they'd be equally useful on the non-P version, or again literally any other car driven on a race track.

And they'd never make the car stop shorter the first time than the stock brakes did.


That's the point.

Bigger brakes don't stop cars shorter- ever. They physically can't.

The only thing they can do is maintain that same stock stopping distance over a greater number of repeated stops from speed- a condition that is pretty much exclusive to race tracks (and the chase scene from Bourne movies).



So to sum up:

Don't track the car? (ANY modern car, regardless of performance level)- the stock brakes work just as well as any upgraded brakes would.

DO track the car? (ANY modern car, regardless of performance level)- a brake upgrade might well help you with things like fade resistance while on the track.

And on any car better tires are the only thing that can actually reduce minimum stopping distance. They have loads of other benefits too. Which is why it's such a shame Tesla won't offer non-crap tires on any wheel other than the 20s (especially when they don't bother making the 20s any wider than the 18s or 19s so they're just uselessly adding weight to no real benefit).

 

[Wooloomooloo]

Can you cite that "good reason" using actual physics?

Because actual physics disagrees with you.

Once you switch from acceleratin to braking, the power of the car makes literally no difference

A 200 hp car and a 600 hp car, with no difference other than power, will stop in exactly the same distance in a panic stop all else being equal, because both are, always, limited by the tires, which are the things that actually stop the car

I'm not going to address your intense pedantry blow by blow... but on this very first point, which the rest of your lecture is based upon, you're wrong. Physics (which doesn't actually have an opinion) supports what I and others who are more concerned with driving than math, have been saying.

The biggest difference between performance and standard brakes isn't really to increase stopping power, it's to stay cooler for longer, which in turn is to avoid fade. Braking works by transferring energy through friction to heat (the energy has to go somewhere). The larger the surface area, the more heat can be absorbed and dissipated and the longer braking can be effective.

Now if you have a car that can accelerate harder, and you actually apply that ability in general driving, then in many situations you're going to be hitting the brakes more often and harder because you're likely to be going faster at any given point where braking may be needed. Now I agree that this is not necessarily good or safe driving, but that's not the point. Cars should be balanced in a way where their brakes match their acceleration. capability. All manufacturers do this. The brakes on a Porsche 911 GTS are far larger than the brakes on a regular Porsche 911 despite it being lighter and arguably not requiring such powerful brakes according to "physics".

Your hypothetical scenario where both cars are doing 60mph and both need to stop suddenly may be academically correct, but it's entirely moot in regards to the reason your more powerful car has more powerful brakes.

Incidentally the P100D having the same brakes as the P75 an exception, not a rule. Honestly if you're disagreeing with this, you're a) not really a driver or b) just trolling.

 

[Knightshade]

I'm not going to address your intense pedantry blow by blow... but on this very first point, which the rest of your lecture is based upon, you're wrong. Physics (which doesn't actually have an opinion) supports what I and others who are more concerned with driving than math, have been saying.

I mean, it factually does not, but let's see why you think so.

The biggest difference between performance and standard brakes isn't really to increase stopping power

That's literally what I've been telling you physics says. So your claim I'm wrong seems....confusing.

, it's to stay cooler for longer, which in turn is to avoid fade. Braking works by transferring energy through friction to heat (the energy has to go somewhere). The larger the surface area, the more heat can be absorbed and dissipated and the longer braking can be effective.

That's also what I've been saying... so again I'm wondering if you're replying to the wrong person or something?

Now if you have a car that can accelerate harder, and you actually apply that ability in general driving, then in many situations you're going to be hitting the brakes more often and harder because you're likely to be going faster at any given point where braking may be needed.

Can you cite some situations where, outside of a race track, you'd be doing this fast, hard, and often enough to cause an issue with the stock brakes?

I ask because even Elon Musk said nobody would notice the P brake upgrade outside of a race track.

What do you know that he doesn't?

Now I agree that this is not necessarily good or safe driving, but that's not the point.

I mean, it kind of is....if you want to drive like a dangerous maniac enough you can likely fade nearly any passenger car brakes given enough effort.

Cars should be balanced in a way where their brakes match their acceleration. capability. All manufacturers do this.

Except, they don't "all" do that.

The Model S P100D is arguably the quickest accelerating production car in the world.

It has the same brakes as the much slower non-P models.

Oddly, we have yet to see this be a significant safety problem in non-track use.

It's almost like it confirms what I've been saying or something.

And, again, once you switch from acceleration to braking, there's no difference whatsoever in how quick you got to that speed from which you are stopping.

The brakes on a Porsche 911 GTS are far larger than the brakes on a regular Porsche 911 despite it being lighter and arguably not requiring such powerful brakes according to "physics".

Right. And that difference is entirely for track use

Funny you mention Porsche- earlier in the thread I quote Car and Driver testing a 911 with 2 different OEM brake systems, that are $10,000 apart (just the brakes).

Guess what they found in non-track panic stop testing?

Both stopped the car in the same distance.

Just as physics requires them to.

Because the brakes don't stop the car- the tires do.

Your hypothetical scenario where both cars are doing 60mph and both need to stop suddenly may be academically correct

Wait... you said I was wrong... now I'm correct? Your post just keeps getting more confusing!

, but it's entirely moot in regards to the reason your more powerful car has more powerful brakes.

I mean, it's really not.

Change 60 to 80 if you want, or even 100... which is significantly faster than any speed limit in the country, and the facts I stated are the same.

A 200 hp car and a 600hp car both doing the same speed and otherwise being equal will both stop from that speed in exactly the same distance.

"more powerful car" has nothing to do with stopping distance.

If you think it does feel free to explain the physics behind it (hint- you can't)

Incidentally the P100D having the same brakes as the P75 an exception, not a rule. Honestly if you're disagreeing with this, you're a) not really a driver or b) just trolling.

Then it's extra weird you previously claimed "all" car makers do something you apparently already knew wasn't true....