model 3 weight vs performance

[Twiglett]

In terms of costs it's not comparable to 15 kWh of added battery capacity. What's the cost of an extra TO-247 for example, about $1.50 I'm not so sure that kind of thing breaks the bank compared to the battery capacity which is three orders of magnitude greater cost.

If they have different inverters (and likely they will have three) it's mainly due to efficiency factors and not cost.

The main thing not to lose track of here - this car is designed for manufacturing efficiency. The cost of adding different drivetrain options to an automated production line is staggering.

 

[raysspl]

3800 lbs for Model 3 would be sweet. Ideally, 3600 lbs but anything close to that is cherry.

 

[Garlan Garner]

3800 lbs for Model 3 would be sweet. Ideally, 3600 lbs but anything close to that is cherry.

Absolutely. Tesla, lets lighten the load as much as we can.

 

[cizUK]

Can they not split the inverter between the two motors?
i.e. have 300kW split between the front and rear motors in the D and just for the rear motor in the RWD

 

[JeffK]

Can they not split the inverter between the two motors?
i.e. have 300kW split between the front and rear motors in the D and just for the rear motor in the RWD

No, I don't believe so with the way torque sleep works...
As a future owner I wouldn't want this anyway.

 

[Jayc]

I think one of the key design traits in Tesla drivetrain is placing the inverter right next to the motor so there is a purpose to the design. What are we trying to save anyway? New ideas are always welcome but we should not overly simplify or underestimate the design effort that has gone into the Tesla drivetrain.