Model 3 performance new 18 inch wheel option now avail 7/15/19

[Msjulie]

So it’s the just about same price as an awd, but with p power levels? If that’s correct it begs the question of why would anyone order a regular awd when there is a nearly free power upgrade? Or am I missing something?

They are doing the same 'annoying' thing that they did when the original Performance came out; it's 20 or 18 only. I immediately swapped to the OEM 19 because circumstances allowed; if I got a new AWD+ I'd want to do the same thing..

 

[Knightshade]

P and RWD both have the same rear motor output. AWD has less than both. That is not how binning works as you said but there is a possible scenario.

Let's say the first production run of rear motors had a 50% failure rate of meeting performance specs.

Except the RWD was in production for almost 9 months before the AWD or P came on the market.

If it had a 50% failure rate to meet RWD specs Tesla would've been in really bad shape.

Further they'd have had to revise the design to NOT have an insane failure rate- and given the upgraded part a different part number as they've done every other time they have updated or revised a part

Something that didn't happen.

 

[timk225]

The Tesla notes on the sales site say the rear motor is validated for performance use. This just means they tested it a little more. This means that any rear motor could very well meet the performance specs now, but Tesla does not know that for a fact, because they didn't run the performance tests on them.

With the improvements in Model 3 pricing, and now that the SR / SR+ is more common, I'm a little disturbed that the SR+ is getting 5.3 0-60 and my early production LR RWD is at 5.0 . There needs to either be more speed for my car or less for the SR/SR+. It'd be nice if I could get an improvement to maybe 4.5 0-60 or so and high 12's in the 1/4 mile. I'm not even asking for top speed to be increased above 140, I don't hit 140 more than once or twice a week normally. Just improve my 0-60 and 1/4 mile numbers, that's all. I'd be willing to go $500 for that.

 

[Atari2600]

Except the RWD was in production for almost 9 months before the AWD or P came on the market.

If it had a 50% failure rate to meet RWD specs Tesla would've been in really bad shape.

Further they'd have had to revise the design to NOT have an insane failure rate- and given the upgraded part a different part number as they've done every other time they have updated or revised a part

Something that didn't happen.

Don't get hung up on the 50%, it was a random number I came up with. I would say there is a chance they would use parts in production with the same part number with difference performance characteristics while the replacement part was consistent. I hope this is not the case but I can see it.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Electrek is now reporting on this now also Tesla now offers Model 3 Performance for less than $50,000 by unbundling features - Electrek

Electrek says this, BTW:

“So you still get that faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph, but you lose the other performance features, including track mode.”

I wonder if that is correct, or just bad journalism as usual. My guess is it is wrong. It’s not a Performance without Track Mode!

 

[Knightshade]

Don't get hung up on the 50%, it was a random number I came up with. I would say there is a chance they would use parts in production with the same part number with difference performance characteristics while the replacement part was consistent. I hope this is not the case but I can see it.

but that doesn't make any actual sense.

if you are putting the same PN on parts that both pass, and fail, the requirements to handle RWD output, then you risk putting a failing replacement part into a RWD car.

So I can't see that at all.

If you have a part that hits target A and another part that can't hit target A, you don't put the same PN on both if you ever need a replacement that MUST hit target A.

You give the lower spec part a different PN to avoid that. Which is how binning generally actually works.

Tesla did not do that- all motors got the same PN. Because they're the same motors capable of the same output.

They just software limit it in the AWD non-P.

 

[Schroeder0202]

but that doesn't make any actual sense.

if you are putting the same PN on parts that both pass, and fail, the requirements to handle RWD output, then you risk putting a failing replacement part into a RWD car.

So I can't see that at all.

If you have a part that hits target A and another part that can't hit target A, you don't put the same PN on both if you ever need a replacement that MUST hit target A.

You give the lower spec part a different PN to avoid that. Which is how binning generally actually works.

Tesla did not do that- all motors got the same PN. Because they're the same motors capable of the same output.

They just software limit it in the AWD non-P.[/QUOA

Agreed, if you car goes into the shop for rear motor failure and the parts guy orders a replacement. There is no differentation between a P and a non P drive unit.

 

[dww12]

Electrek says this, BTW:

“So you still get that faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph, but you lose the other performance features, including track mode.”

I wonder if that is correct, or just bad journalism as usual. My guess is it is wrong. It’s not a Performance without Track Mode!

Yeah, I read that and thought, not again. We already beat and buried this. Also, I thought the top speed was the same on all P (I have not verified it myself).

 

[Atari2600]

but that doesn't make any actual sense.

if you are putting the same PN on parts that both pass, and fail, the requirements to handle RWD output, then you risk putting a failing replacement part into a RWD car.

So I can't see that at all.

If you have a part that hits target A and another part that can't hit target A, you don't put the same PN on both if you ever need a replacement that MUST hit target A.

You give the lower spec part a different PN to avoid that. Which is how binning generally actually works.

Tesla did not do that- all motors got the same PN. Because they're the same motors capable of the same output.

They just software limit it in the AWD non-P.

No, I maintain that all replacement parts always met specs for RWD and P models. Replacement parts never had subpar spec motors. Only parts used in production possibly did not meet full performance specs. In this scenario if a AWD motor fails it basically gets a better motor. This allows one replacement part number and nothing is compromised.

Edit: To help clarify - think of RWD, P and replacement motors as the binned parts. AWD is what did not meet the binning.

 

[Knightshade]

No, I maintain that all replacement parts always met specs for RWD and P models. Replacement parts never had subpar spec motors. Only parts used in production possibly did not meet full performance specs. In this scenario if a AWD motor fails it basically gets a better motor. This allows one replacement part number and nothing is compromised.

Except there's no such thing as a "replacement only" part number.

So your suggestion continues to not actually work.

Unless you think they built a special magic parts bin at the factory with a big "FOR AWD NON P CARS ONLY" and they put all the "bad" spec motors in it, and then only grab from there when building AWD non-P cars, and they did all THAT extra work instead of...ya know... just giving that part a different PN to actual keep track of it like sane people.


I'll just say that seems about 1000% less likely than "all the parts got the same PN because they're the same part and all meet the same spec requirements period"

 

[Atari2600]

Except there's no such thing as a "replacement only" part number.

So your suggestion continues to not actually work.

Unless you think they built a special magic parts bin at the factory with a big "FOR AWD NON P CARS ONLY" and they put all the "bad" spec motors in it, and then only grab from there when building AWD non-P cars, and they did all THAT extra work instead of...ya know... just giving that part a different PN to actual keep track of it like sane people.


I'll just say that seems about 1000% less likely than "all the parts got the same PN because they're the same part and all meet the same spec requirements period"

For a normal company I would agree with you but with Tesla sane rules do not seem to apply. About as unlikely as "tent assembly line" but that happened at the same time as well. Also about as unlikely as offering flat white as base paint to save money and then all the sudden end up offering premium Pearl White Multi-coat instead. Again, I hope you are correct but this is Tesla.

Who knows, perhaps they track binning by serial number.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Yeah, I read that and thought, not again. We already beat and buried this. Also, I thought the top speed was the same on all P (I have not verified it myself).

Yeah.
Pretty sure it’s just going to end up being just parts differences. It would not make sense to differentiate the software again.

Electrek was probably just trying to fill space with a few extra words.

 

[Zoomit]

Who knows, perhaps they track binning by serial number.

Would you believe a Tesla engineer that works at GF1? @GigaGrunt has already said they're "sorted by serial".

 

[ElectricLee]

Has anyone gotten their M3 LR AWD upgraded to P3D-?

 

[Knightshade]

Has anyone gotten their M3 LR AWD upgraded to P3D-?

A number of P3D- orders were filled with AWD cars at delivery that when the buyer pointed this out they flashed the car to a P3D-

But officially no such upgrade if offered by Tesla at this time.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

Yeah.
Pretty sure it’s just going to end up being just parts differences. It would not make sense to differentiate the software again.

Electrek was probably just trying to fill space with a few extra words.

Does appear that Electrek was correct. No Track Mode for you!

 

[MP3Mike]

Electrek says this, BTW:

“So you still get that faster acceleration from 0 to 60 mph, but you lose the other performance features, including track mode.”

I wonder if that is correct, or just bad journalism as usual. My guess is it is wrong. It’s not a Performance without Track Mode!

The comparison matrix shared by Tesla to someone confirms the no track mode. But it also mentions that 19" is an option.

 

[DNorris89]

Track mode changes certain aspects of how Regen works, if you don't have the bigger brakes to account for that it's probably best to not have Track mode. So im ok with that, but would still love the option to upgrade the acceleration!

 

[dww12]

The comparison matrix shared by Tesla to someone confirms the no track mode. But it also mentions that 19" is an option.

View attachment 431217

So original P3D- remain unicorns.

 

[jamessmooth007]

The comparison matrix shared by Tesla to someone confirms the no track mode. But it also mentions that 19" is an option.

View attachment 431217

Model 3 Performance w/o upgrade package and 19's is the perfect Model 3 for me.