Model 3P-D 0-60 prediction?

[FlatSix911]

I feel as if it will be faster than the current model 'S' P-series. After all the P100D is already a few years old. Anything in the 3's isn't exactly WOW material. The rate Telsa is improving battery range and performance is unprecedented compared to other manufactures. JM2C

 

[timk225]

The Model 3 was made to beat the BMW 3 series and Audi A4. So a performance version needs to beat an M3 and S4 in 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Not just tie it, BEAT IT.

A fair pricing structure should be as follows:

Base 3 - $35K
LR battery -$9K (expensive and overpriced, I know, but let's go with this for now).
Dual motors - $4K
Performance speed, low low 3's 0-60 - $5K

So $53K. Plus luxury interior stuff and glass roof if you require it, plus Ludicrous speed, etc.

 

[kingjamez]

The Model 3 was made to beat the BMW 3 series and Audi A4. So a performance version needs to beat an M3 and S4 in 0-60 and 1/+4 mile. Not just tie it, BEAT IT.

A fair pricing structure should be as follows:

Base 3 - $35K
LR battery -$9K (expensive and overpriced, I know, but let's go with this for now).
Dual motors - $4K
Performance speed, low low 3's 0-60 - $5K

So $53K. Plus luxury interior stuff and glass roof if you require it, plus Ludicrous speed, etc.

If "fair" means, "I wish" then yeah...

Zippy chance of that happening.

Fair is whatever the market will bear.

-Jim

 

[ratsbew]

My money is definitely on sub 3.0 seconds. That's a major barrier that the competitor can't touch.

 

[ratsbew]

In case anyone isn't following the other thread.

View attachment 302365

What exactly does "working on Model 3 dual motor all-wheel drive & performance versions" mean? It sounds like he's keeping the engineers at work late to throw together a prototype before midnight.

 

[favo]

What exactly does "working on Model 3 dual motor all-wheel drive & performance versions" mean? It sounds like he's keeping the engineers at work late to throw together a prototype before midnight.

Pretty sure he means getting together all the specs and pricing and putting it up on the web for configuring.

 

[logan]

The Model 3 was made to beat the BMW 3 series and Audi A4. So a performance version needs to beat an M3 and S4 in 0-60 and 1/4 mile. Not just tie it, BEAT IT.

A fair pricing structure should be as follows:

Base 3 - $35K
LR battery -$9K (expensive and overpriced, I know, but let's go with this for now).
Dual motors - $4K
Performance speed, low low 3's 0-60 - $5K

So $53K. Plus luxury interior stuff and glass roof if you require it, plus Ludicrous speed, etc.

I have some awful news for you if you really think a Model 3 Performance will be $53k....

 

[FlatSix911]

3.5 Seconds 0-60 MPH... $78K

 

[JeffK]

So I don't know about you, but I'm certainly disappointed by the numbers.

 

[Mayhem]

3.5. Mark it down.

This guy ⬆

 

[Ludalicious]

So I don't know about you, but I'm certainly disappointed by the numbers.

3.5 0-60.... you are kidding right. That's crazy fast.... this vehicle will slay allot of the current performance cars on the road and still look like a turtle with its head up the A$$

 

[JeffK]

3.5 0-60.... you are kidding right. That's crazy fast.... this vehicle will slay allot of the current performance cars on the road and still look like a turtle with its head up the A$$

No, not kidding, I was hoping for more of an affordable supercar, you know besides the aesthetics.

I was dreaming of a sub 3 second car that's in the realm of "possible" for us mere mortals. Even the older, much heavier, P85DL can out-perform the smaller, more nimble, lighter weight, performance Model 3. Besides the used market, they aren't selling new P85Ds, so it's not just about cannibalizing sales.

For me it's not just about price, but also size. Even if I could get a P100D (way out of my price range) or a used P85DL, the Model S is still too large for my tastes.

My only hope is that this isn't the Ludicrous Performance Model 3 Elon was talking about in his tweet years ago and is just some run of the mill performance version.

 

[MartinAustin]

JeffK as I said earlier...

we are not sure of Tesla's intentions.

Well now we do know their intentions:

0-60 times shrink over time. First it was 4.2 seconds, then 3.2 with the "D," then 2.8 with Ludicrous mode, then 2.5 with Ludicrous Plus. Tesla's AWD Performance Model 3 announced this weekend is obviously their first version and will be bettered as time goes by. This would be in order to keep the competition chasing a moving target. Also to allow price increases. [$78,000] for the initial AWD-P, another $5,000 for some super-option on top of that, and yet another $10,000 option for the super-low-volume boutique drag race oddity, for $93,000 before other options.

I would also not feel bad if the Model 3 AWD-P time was 3.5 seconds. Because as we can be certain of, this is the first iteration out of the gate... Tesla are like a cat playing with a mouse. When they truly sink their teeth in, the 0-60 time could be less than 3 seconds.

I would go with Model 3 LR AWD doing 0-60 in 4.5 or maybe even lower, near to the original S-P85 time of 4.2.

Where I was wrong was this -

The range of that car will be the astonishing number... and could get within 4% of the current S-100D. As I said in another thread, this development may cause a new release in the Model S with more range.

The range of all three of these cars is 310 miles:

RWD non-performance
AWD non-performance
AWD performance

That is clearly flddling with the numbers... it just doesn't make any sense from a physics first principles that the variations in equipment and specs between those three variants has no effect on range.

I expect the EPA test figures to bear this out, when they are announced.

 

[JeffK]

I'm holding out for this:

 

[Ben D]

Yes please, 3.5 sec is a nice start, but over the air upgrade for performance model 3 with ludicrous, real world 2.9-3.0 sec 0-60, please. Pretty please... And a decent friction brake package for track work too, thanks. Sounds like the 3 will already do multiple laps without overheating the inverters, so hopefully its just the horsepower and brake package that need tweaking now.

 

[eigenv1]

And a decent friction brake package for track work too, thanks. Sounds like the 3 will already do multiple laps without overheating the inverters, so hopefully its just the horsepower and brake package that need tweaking now.

Elon tweeted this evening both larger brakes with sport pads and painted red.

 

[JeffK]

Elon tweeted this evening both larger brakes with sport pads and painted red.

I saw that, it's going to be great... now just need confirmation of better suspension and hoping they can still make it a bit quicker (under 3 seconds to 60 mph).

 

[Swampgator]

Jeff,
Advertised at 3.5 means the car will actually pull around 3.1. Tesla always under promises on those numbers. I have never driven a car that fast. Have you? That is as fast as an Audi R8 with a v10

 

[JeffK]

Jeff,
Advertised at 3.5 means the car will actually pull around 3.1. Tesla always under promises on those numbers. I have never driven a car that fast. Have you? That is as fast as an Audi R8 with a v10

I have not, but there are folks with BMW M5s which advertise 2.8 seconds 0-60mph (confirmed by car and driver). Granted the M5 is far more expensive than the Model 3, there's just something about bragging rights in an EV vs an ICE that go a long way, even if I, personally, rarely use that kind of power. Mercedes AMG E63 S around the same price point also has about 600 HP and claims 0-60 in 3.3 seconds, again quicker than the advertised Model 3 time even though the Model 3 might beat it in real life.

Performance Model 3 plus EAP+FSD after tax is already going to be $93k. I'm certainly uncomfortable with that number but I feel worse that for relatively a little more I can get less car with an M5 (feature-wise) but it'll be quicker to 60 mph.

Imagine a ludicrous launch and you're passed by a BMW <-- sad face

I'll admit it's 100% about bragging rights at these acceleration times.

 

[GatorGuy]

I have not, but there are folks with BMW M5s which advertise 2.8 seconds 0-60mph (confirmed by car and driver). Granted the M5 is far more expensive than the Model 3, there's just something about bragging rights in an EV vs an ICE that go a long way, even if I, personally, rarely use that kind of power. Mercedes AMG E63 S around the same price point also has about 600 HP and claims 0-60 in 3.3 seconds, again quicker than the advertised Model 3 time even though the Model 3 might beat it in real life.

Performance Model 3 plus EAP+FSD after tax is already going to be $93k. I'm certainly uncomfortable with that number but I feel worse that for relatively a little more I can get less car with an M5 (feature-wise) but it'll be quicker to 60 mph.

Imagine a ludicrous launch and you're passed by a BMW <-- sad face

I'll admit it's 100% about bragging rights at these acceleration times.

The advertised 0 to 60 for the BMW is 3.2. The 2.8 is only possible under ideal conditions with the engine at proper operating temperature. Even then it is not easy to replicate, they start spinning the rear wheels and then engine the front and launch. Normal launch modes aren't practical on the street much less a BMW launch.