Model 3 specs

[Knightshade]

To add more confusion, WSJ claims 450 HP for Performance.

that WSJ article has... let's politely call it ...a few errors of fact. Often appearing to be copy/pasting from a review of the RWD into that "review"

450, FWIW, is basically what the EPA rated the non P AWD motors at.

 

[FlatSix911]

can anyone explain the equivalent horsepower and torque ratings that the model 3 performance will have compared to AWD non P
thanks in advance

No. Until someone gets their hands on em and tests them (or hacks into them) we can't really know that.

We can make random guesses based on the limited info we do have, but they'd only be guesses since we also don't know the gearing or a number of other details.

For example there's kw output of the motors in the recent EPA data- but it's obvious from how close the AWD and P are that they don't reflect peak output #s (the EPA data shows ~450 hp for AWD and ~480 for the P)

Agree the EPA reported kW numbers are likely not representative of performance.
Couple thoughts:
Gearing only matters if you care about motor torque/ HP vs wheel.

The similar peak numbers could be due to pack limits and the difference in the binned drive unit efficiency (more power to the road). P drive units could have much higher current limits allowing higher power at lower speeds.

Here are the max rated motor HP numbers ... not the power output of the battery and actual HP to the wheels

Tesla Model 3 - Wikipedia

 

[Knightshade]

Here are the max rated motor HP numbers ... not the power output of the battery and actual HP to the wheels

Tesla Model 3 - Wikipedia

View attachment 319021

Those #s are wrong (Wikipedia being wrong? SHOCKING!)

The RWD #s are based on the old 2017 EPA numbers... the 2018 ones rate RWD and P rear identically at 211kw.

Nor do those #s make much sense regarding AWD vs P, since there's a net 31 hp difference, nowhere near enough to account for the 1 second difference in the 0-60 time...especially when those #s show the AWD having over 190 more hp than the RWD and only being 0.6 seconds quicker 0-60.

So, again, we're not going to know "real" power output to the wheels until folks get their hands on some and take em to a dyno.

 

[FlatSix911]

Those #s are wrong (Wikipedia being wrong? SHOCKING!)
The RWD #s are based on the old 2017 EPA numbers... the 2018 ones rate RWD and P rear identically at 211kw.

Nor do those #s make much sense regarding AWD vs P, since there's a net 31 hp difference, nowhere near enough to account for the 1 second difference in the 0-60 time...especially when those #s show the AWD having over 190 more hp than the RWD and only being 0.6 seconds quicker 0-60.

So, again, we're not going to know "real" power output to the wheels until folks get their hands on some and take em to a dyno.

The software will determine the max output. The torque values will also impact the 1-second performance difference.
Take a look at the Model S numbers for a similar example ... Tesla Model S - Wikipedia

Here are the max rated motor HP numbers ... not the power output of the battery and actual HP to the wheels

Tesla Model 3 - Wikipedia

​

 

[FlyNavy01]

The numbers posted above are not "max rated hp" numbers. Those are just pulled from the EPA report that someone pasted onto wikipedia.

The LR Model 3 has been dyno tested at ~250-255kW at the wheels by multiple sources. The rear motor can theoretically output 296kW (396hp) at 100% efficiency, which is of course not going to happen in real world scenario.

 

[eladts]

The numbers posted above are not "max rated hp" numbers. Those are just pulled from the EPA report that someone pasted onto wikipedia.

The LR Model 3 has been dyno tested at ~250-255kW at the wheels by multiple sources. The rear motor can theoretically output 296kW (396hp) at 100% efficiency, which is of course not going to happen in real world scenario.

Dynos are not very reliable with modern traction control systems, especially with AWD cars. It is much more accurate to simply derive the power from measured mass, speed and acceleration during launch.

How to Calculate Power Based on Force and Speed

 

[systemBuilder]

Nor do those #s make much sense regarding AWD vs P, since there's a net 31 hp difference, nowhere near enough to account for the 1 second difference in the 0-60 time...especially when those #s show the AWD having over 190 more hp than the RWD and only being 0.6 seconds quicker 0-60. So, again, we're not going to know "real" power output to the wheels until folks get their hands on some and take em to a dyno.

Horsepower in a regular car is a function of the inputs and waste-removal system (Fuel delivery system, air intakes, exhaust)
Horsepower in an EV is apparently measured unconstrained by the power delivery system.

The P models deliver power using Silicon Carbide inverters. Silicon Carbide is currently Mankind's highest power semiconductor, used for both power transistors and the 5w and 10w LEDs in your CREE flashlights, and in those streetlights overhead. The RWD and AWD cars probably have regular inverters which are probably is power-limited in software because the inverters would probably burn up if you put the maximum amount of power through it all at the same time.

 

[KarenRei]

All Model 3s use SiC MOSFETs. Not just the P models. Ingineerix has confirmed this (definitely recommend his teardown vids, they should be considered mandatory viewing )

 

[Knightshade]

The P models deliver power using Silicon Carbide inverters. Silicon Carbide is currently Mankind's highest power semiconductor, used for both power transistors and the 5w and 10w LEDs in your CREE flashlights, and in those streetlights overhead. The RWD and AWD cars probably have regular inverters which are probably is power-limited in software because the inverters would probably burn up if you put the maximum amount of power through it all at the same time.

Nope- they all have silicon carbide inverters- 24 650v chips per inverter from the teardowns.

 

[systemBuilder]

All Model 3s use SiC MOSFETs. Not just the P models. Ingineerix has confirmed this (definitely recommend his teardown vids, they should be considered mandatory viewing )

You are saying Ingeneerix has done a teardown of the Model P3D already? I don't believe it. Just because they all use silicon cabide, doesn't mean there aren't more parallel circuits for higher power delivery in the P models.

 

[KarenRei]

You are saying Ingeneerix has done a teardown of the Model P3D already? I don't believe it. Just because they all use silicon cabide, doesn't mean there aren't more parallel circuits for higher power delivery in the P models.

Of course not. He's torn down RWDs. And they use SiC MOSFETs. Hence rendering the claim that non-P models don't use SiC MOSFETs false.

 

[mongo]

Of course not. He's torn down RWDs. And they use SiC MOSFETs. Hence rendering the claim that non-P models don't use SiC MOSFETs false.

Up thread referenced your summary of Ingeneerix based data that included 500A vs 800A current limits for AWD vs RWD. However, the summary was from February. Given AWD and P are only shipping now, do you have a feel for whether the AWD current value pulled from SW for AWD was a final vs placeholder number? Just trying to get a feel for how reliable that data point is (esp since I didn't read all the first hand accounts).
Thanks!

 

[KarenRei]

Might want to check out his most recent video where he goes through all the numbers from the computers, it might be in there.

 

[Knightshade]

You are saying Ingeneerix has done a teardown of the Model P3D already? I don't believe it. Just because they all use silicon cabide, doesn't mean there aren't more parallel circuits for higher power delivery in the P models.

The drive unit in the P is physically the same parts as non-P models.

Otherwise the statement Tesla is lot-sorting DUs and putting the highest testing ones in Ps would make 0 sense.

If the parts were physically different there'd be nothing to lot sort.

 

[mongo]

The drive unit in the P is physically the same parts as non-P models.

Otherwise the statement Tesla is lot-sorting DUs and putting the highest testing ones in Ps would make 0 sense.

If the parts were physically different there'd be nothing to lot sort.

I'm in the "all three are the same HW" camp, but there is the possibility that AWD and P are the same (but binned) and RWD is different.

We'll know soon since AWD and P are being delivered shortly.

 

[KarenRei]

I'm in the "all three are the same HW" camp, but there is the possibility that AWD and P are the same (but binned) and RWD is different.

We'll know soon since AWD and P are being delivered shortly.

It's not. As was pointed out immediately above, Ingineerix just tore down a RWD and confirmed that RWD uses SiC MOSFETs.

This theory is over. It's wrong. RWD uses SiC MOSFETs, just like P.

 

[mongo]

It's not. As was pointed out immediately above, Ingineerix just tore down a RWD and confirmed that RWD uses SiC MOSFETs.

This theory is over. It's wrong. RWD uses SiC MOSFETs, just like P.

I'm not debating whether they all use SiC or not.

I'm saying until someone tears down an AWD or P, we can't confirm whether the dual motor rear drive unit is the same HW as the single motor. The Ingineerix data mentioned 800A limit for RWD and 500A for AWD, thus leading to some speculation that they are built differently (one option being less parallel FETs).

Having AWD and P identical fulfills the binning data point, without needed RWD to be the same.

 

[Oyster Bait]

Regarding how fast the M3 will go in reverse, I1Tesla did this test in one of his entertaining YouTubes, I believe one of his "What if" series. The answer is 15 MPH, at least for his RWD model.

 

[FlatSix911]

Interesting reading... Tesla Model 3 Performance achieves record 0-60 mph acceleration of 3.13 secs with new wheels & tires

 

[FlatSix911]

No more Metallic Silver and Black... Tesla to eliminate some paint options to increase production efficiency, gives last chance to order

“In order to increase our production, delivery and service efficiency, we will be removing Metallic Silver and Obsidian Black Metallic as paint options from our online vehicle configurators for Model S, Model X and Model 3. This will be effective on Thursday, September 13, 2018, after which Metallic Silver and Obsidian Black Metallic will be offered only as limited edition colors via special request at a cost of $2,000 only until Friday, September 21, 2018.”