Model 3 Performance Test Drives

[brianman]

This post-drive live stream clearly mentioned absence of any Ludicrous mode.
Which is nice: no need to plan or stage anything. Just go, fast. Am sure that partly takes away the anticipation building up as you put on a production for your passengers of enabling Ludicrous or Insane modes.
But frankly, getting full performance whenever you need/want it is better. This is just a car, and it just works.

Your implication of how Ludicrous mode works on the Model S/X is incorrect.

Ludicrous mode is, and has always been for public firmware, an "always on" setting for cars that support it. I set my P85D to Insane mode at purchase, and later to Ludicrous mode after upgrade. I set my P100D to Ludicrous mode at purchase. Generally speaking, those vehicles are always in that mode. I say "generally" because I have toggled it on/off for a variety of reasons (different drivers, experiments, etc.) but Insane/Ludicrous was/is my default driving mode.

The "stage" features you're referring to are Max Battery mode, Ludicrous+, and Launch Mode. The first two (MB, L+) are "for this drive session" features you have to enable and usually require some time for battery preparation (temperature). The third (LM) is literally a "staging" activity where you have to manipulate the pedals in a certain sequence and have a limited time to "activate" once the pedal dance is done.

Lastly, and somewhat related, Elon did say Model 3 will have Ludicrous mode long ago (years ago?). Given that the published spec is 3.5s 0-60, I'm willing to "give him a pass" and say "he really meant it will be ludicrous-the-adjective but he's reserving Ludicrous branding for Model S/X." But, technically, he did say -- literally -- it will have Ludicrous mode. If he stays true to the letter of what he said, there may be more to come for Model 3 in this arena.

 

[JeffK]

If he stays true to the letter of what he said, there may be more to come for Model 3 in this arena.

I'm hoping that this has the hardware needed to accomplish that and just enable it via software update later.

 

[brianman]

I'm hoping that this has the hardware needed to accomplish that and just enable it via software update later.

I've learned not to hope or expect any product features or improvements from Tesla that aren't listed explicitly at purchase. Even some of those (features/improvements listed explicitly) are, um, "slow to arrive".

 

[Krash]

Thirty bonus points to anyone who downloads an accelerometer app on their phone, puts the phone somewhere it won't slide and measures the G force at full acceleration during a test drive. Happy to do the math to tell you the torque.

 

[Knightshade]

Thirty bonus points to anyone who downloads an accelerometer app on their phone, puts the phone somewhere it won't slide and measures the G force at full acceleration during a test drive. Happy to do the math to tell you the torque.

I've got an actual G-tech performance meter I was planning to use (ironically it's from Tesla Electronic- no relation)- but sadly haven't gotten a call about a test drive yet

 

[Runt8]

Thirty bonus points to anyone who downloads an accelerometer app on their phone, puts the phone somewhere it won't slide and measures the G force at full acceleration during a test drive. Happy to do the math to tell you the torque.

Got the name of one for an iPhone?

 

[Krash]

Got the name of one for an iPhone?

Maybe swing this one around and see if it stores max values...

‎Accelerometer on the App Store

 

[lairdb]

Got the name of one for an iPhone?

Google's Science Journal app for iPhone/iPad.

 

[MXWing]

This frankly kinda pisses me off. The more I see it, the more I feel like I paid $11k for a software update and nothing more. That's a lot of money and I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. They need to be more forthcoming with details if they're going to offer something for sale. I'm strongly considering dropping my order to AWD Non-P and saving $11k as it seems more and more this $5k package is really needed.

It could be changing one 0 in the code 1 and Tesla can charge 11k, 1k or 111k - all has zero bearing on value.

Value is willingness to pay - not how much it cost.

You want to know the cost to operate Tesla?

$9,000 per minute.

Show me a faster EV with same range, and access to a nation wide network that allows the car to complete replace a gas engine?

Tesla is about producing technology like software you write one and download 2 million times - not making a cheaper mousetrap.

 

[clostridium]

This frankly kinda pisses me off. The more I see it, the more I feel like I paid $11k for a software update and nothing more. That's a lot of money and I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. They need to be more forthcoming with details if they're going to offer something for sale. I'm strongly considering dropping my order to AWD Non-P and saving $11k as it seems more and more this $5k package is really needed.

I can see both sides of this: on one hand I understand why you’d be upset if turns out to be all software however ultimately isn’t it all about the car’s performance? If it performs as advertised how much does it really matter how it gets there? This is not the first car where they didn’t get the absolute max performance out of each config and instead depended on detuning or the equivalent for an EV.

In some ways these cars are fundamentally different from most cars out there. I walked into an SC last fall and my S75D dropped a second in the 0-60 time and added 80-100 hp and ft-lbs of torque. After a tech hooked a laptop up to it for a little while. And it was all free.

Where I’m going with this is I initially had the same reaction as you and then someone pointed out it’s all about getting the performance they promised. Don’t focus on the details about how they get there. So far based on a few test drives it sounds they’ve delivered but we need more data to be sure.

 

[e-FTW]

Your implication of how Ludicrous mode works on the Model S/X is incorrect.

Ludicrous mode is, and has always been for public firmware, an "always on" setting for cars that support it. I set my P85D to Insane mode at purchase, and later to Ludicrous mode after upgrade. I set my P100D to Ludicrous mode at purchase. Generally speaking, those vehicles are always in that mode. I say "generally" because I have toggled it on/off for a variety of reasons (different drivers, experiments, etc.) but Insane/Ludicrous was/is my default driving mode.

The "stage" features you're referring to are Max Battery mode, Ludicrous+, and Launch Mode. The first two (MB, L+) are "for this drive session" features you have to enable and usually require some time for battery preparation (temperature).

Yes, that is what I was referring to. Thanks for clarifying.

The third (LM) is literally a "staging" activity where you have to manipulate the pedals in a certain sequence and have a limited time to "activate" once the pedal dance is done.

Am thinking that may come to the Performance 3, as a further improvement. Uninformed assumption here.

Lastly, and somewhat related, Elon did say Model 3 will have Ludicrous mode long ago (years ago?). Given that the published spec is 3.5s 0-60, I'm willing to "give him a pass" and say "he really meant it will be ludicrous-the-adjective but he's reserving Ludicrous branding for Model S/X." But, technically, he did say -- literally -- it will have Ludicrous mode. If he stays true to the letter of what he said, there may be more to come for Model 3 in this arena.

He did say more performance may be coming OTA. We shall see!

 

[JeffK]

He did say more performance may be coming OTA. We shall see!

I don't know

Elon Musk on Twitter

emphasis on "might" and "not promising anything".

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

This frankly kinda pisses me off. The more I see it, the more I feel like I paid $11k for a software update and nothing more. That's a lot of money and I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. They need to be more forthcoming with details if they're going to offer something for sale. I'm strongly considering dropping my order to AWD Non-P and saving $11k as it seems more and more this $5k package is really needed.

I certainly agree that they should be more forthcoming with the details.

Even now there are still people asking for details on the brake upgraded, and suspension upgrade. It's a bit late for us to still not know exactly what were getting. Not just more detail on the brakes/suspension specs, but also the performance aspects of the brakes.

To me I see the $11k+$5K upgrade as a track centric car. That's absolutely great and something quite a few people will want. But, it's hard to justify that without knowing it's actual track performance.

I don't believe there are ANY hardware upgrades with the $11K package. I know there is screening of motors to determine which ones can handle it, but I don't know enough about the actual motors/design/yield to really see what I'm paying for. As in why one motor can handle a lot more power than another motor of the exact same design/build-process.

There might be some difference in the inverters, etc to handle that extra power.

The cost breakdown is probably

A few hundred for upgraded electronics (inverter, motor screening, etc).
Unknown amount to cover additional warranty claims as a result of harder acceleration, track use, etc.

At the end of the day what you're ultimately paying for is exclusivity. This is the same as it's always been with cars.

 

[Runt8]

Weird. Her exact words from the email: “It will be the performance model. I drove it yesterday, it’s awesome!”

Not sure why I’m surprised that one of the sales people has their information wrong. I’ll find out Monday...

As expected from @zonehawk, the Model 3 I test drove this morning was not a performance model, just RWD. Still a blast though.

 

[azaz]

sorry to ask this again, but any update on if the NYC area stores have a M3 available for test drive yet? would go out to the LI stores if needed.

 

[la3541]

I test drove a fully loaded model 3 performance today in Century City, CA. It was super fast and awesome.

 

[Ulmo]

I must have been caught in the boring part of the thread where people wanted to argue about nomenclature ... here's my entry into that section. I'm awaiting the performance model test drives.

We can agree the drive units are sorted for physical ability level, and therefore the physical parts in performance cars are physically better. This also includes some other parts of the car that have higher performance oriented physical parts.

We can also agree that those performance cars (with physically better parts than regular cars have) also have their software set to use those physically better parts with more performance (than the regular car software).

We can also agree that the warrantee covers a higher performance vehicle with higher physical costs due to overall performance quality and use of parts on the car and the higher demands put on those parts by performance use.

We can therefore agree that the price is higher to cover for that increased physical cost throughout the building and warranty of the product and for increased profit margin. We also agree that the software is set up in such a way as to properly designate this allowance.

It is not "just a software upgrade".

By the way, this is something Tesla could do but will not do: sell a performance spec'd car software limited to non-performance specs. Why would they not do that? Because it costs Tesla more to do that. Upselling performance that already costs a lot more for the customer is not something likely to happen for someone after they scrimped and saved to buy the car in the first place; only the wealthy could afford the performance model, so only the wealthy will buy it, and would therefore do so in the first place.

 

[Ulmo]

This frankly kinda pisses me off. The more I see it, the more I feel like I paid $11k for a software update and nothing more. That's a lot of money and I know I'm not the only one who feels this way. They need to be more forthcoming with details if they're going to offer something for sale. I'm strongly considering dropping my order to AWD Non-P and saving $11k as it seems more and more this $5k package is really needed.

1. It is most definitely not "nothing more than a software update". It pays for: better physical parts, higher wear and tear, higher profit margin, and if you don't debadge it, higher status symbol whether you want it or not. You can drive it harder, and it won't break as often as driving a regular car that hard, which is why the software won't allow you to drive the regular car that hard. The physical parts of the performance car cost more, the wear and tear on the performance car cost more, and the warrantee coverage will pay for that wear and tear and also costs more.
   
   Also be warned that you will also tear up a performance car faster than a regular car and the performance car will be more costly to repair in and out of warranty than a regular car in and out of warranty; all experienced performance vehicle owners already know that, but I just want to reiterate that to those who don't know. It's also not a slight few % difference; it's literally many times more expensive to maintain a performance car than a regular car. I don't know how the total cost of ownership for Tesla performance cars compares to other performance cars, but in both cases, it's very very expensive.
   
   Most wealthy old men who know all this get a performance car basically for the bragging rights of owning a very expensive car and being able to afford it because it is an irrational purchasing decision, except for those whose position in which it actually isn't irrational (basically 5 people on the planet, plus or minus some orders of magnitude). Model 3 Performance merely brings that irrational decision price point under $100,000 off the shelf cost + $2,000 insurance per month + ungodly maintenance costs and annoyances for the first time in the Tesla lineup.
   
   
2. You can save $11,000.00 off the shelf and much much more later in insurance, maintenance, and possibly even resale costs by not purchasing the performance model. Since you want to be displeased by the performance model, I recommend you drop the order to not be a performance model, and putting the order on hold, until you have test driven (it's easier to raise a Tesla order to performance than drop it from performance to regular), and take a test drive. Also, never trust sales people. If you're lucky, you won't like the value you perceive you will receive for $11,000 + tens of thousands of dollars in additional costs through total cost of ownership, and you can save yourself $11,000 + much much more. The car literally won't last as long if you get the $11,000 more expensive version and drive it hard than if you get the less expensive version and don't drive it hard.
   
   
3. You will occasionally read reviews from people who love the fastest cars they can afford. They literally live for that. They are not most of us. They will enjoy the Model 3 Peformance because it is lighter than the P100D.
   
   
4. You might be lucky enough to occasionally read reviews from people who live in the mountains on very nice roads that debadged their cars and don't complain because they scored big financially and can afford it. You can expect to see those units sit in garages or go on sale used after a "fun" period, and buyers will probably be greeted either with the next "fun" car or the next iteration of EV in the driveway of the seller when they go for the private sale buying (more likely, it will be a trade in and none of that will be seen). They will enjoy the Model 3 Performance because it is lighter than the P100D, or they might have skipped the P100D and very much enjoy a few months of the Model 3 Performance.
   
   I'm already thinking: what % of Roadster 2020 Founder Edition reservists ($250,000 deposit made long ago for a car far far from now) already ordered their Model 3 Performance car? Probably a healthy #, like 3 or 4 buyers or so, plus or minus some orders of magnitude. They will enjoy the Model 3 Peformance because it is lighter than the P100D that they likely are already on their 3rd or 4th (a couple Model S P100D's and a couple Model X P100D, plus maybe some prior P models to wet their apetite).

As someone who isn't that wealthy myself, if I had the budget for a Model 3, I think I would go for the Dual Motor Model 3 and find that quite reasonable in the mountain roads and in the commutes. Once in a blue moon I'd notice the speed difference here or there, and realize that I saved myself tens of thousands of dollars that I don't have to spend on that anyway.

 

[ℬête Noire]

We can agree the drive units are sorted for physical ability level, and therefore the physical parts in performance cars are physically better.

It's unclear this is true in a meaningful way. It isn't unreasonable to doubt this is the case.

 

[Knightshade]

We can agree the drive units are sorted for physical ability level, and therefore the physical parts in performance cars are physically better.

I'm not sure we can.

It's entirely possible they plan to take the top 10% scoring motors of each batch and put them in Ps (replace 10% with whatever % of all orders are Ps)

Which means in any given batch motor 10.01% that goes in an AWD might actually score better than motor 9.99% in the last batch that went in a P.

It's also entirely possible, arguably even likely, the differences are so small as to not make any material difference regarding "ability level"

This also includes some other parts of the car that have higher performance oriented physical parts.

...like what, specifically?

We can also agree that those performance cars (with physically better parts than regular cars have) also have their software set to use those physically better parts with more performance (than the regular car software).

Also no? Based on EPA motor output it seems what the software is doing is actually running the P rear the same as the RWD rear, and the P front the same as the AWD front... the only difference seems to be a software nerf of the rear non-P AWD motor.

The 0-60 tells us there's more being done for AWD vs P, but it appears to be entirely due to software, not hardware.

We can also agree that the warrantee covers a higher performance vehicle with higher physical costs due to overall performance quality and use of parts on the car and the higher demands put on those parts by performance use.

Absolutely. I've said from the start you're paying for both software unlocks and higher warranty costs.

By the way, this is something Tesla could do but will not do: sell a performance spec'd car software limited to non-performance specs. Why would they not do that? Because it costs Tesla more to do that. Upselling performance that already costs a lot more for the customer is not something likely to happen for someone after they scrimped and saved to buy the car in the first place; only the wealthy could afford the performance model, so only the wealthy will buy it, and would therefore do so in the first place.

... what?

AWD vs P is less than a 20% price bump... that's hardly a difference "only the wealthy" can afford.

Plus of course peoples finances change, it's not at all unreasonable a guy who decided he couldn't spare 11k today decides he CAN spare a little more than 11k to "unlock" his AWD to a P in a couple years after he got a raise, or some investment paid off, or he otherwise came into a few extra bucks.