New Model 3 SR+ with rear motor 3D5 instead of 3D1

[pl8dlikafiddle]

I'd be upset if most people on the forums were getting 5s 0-60 and thats what I expected out of the car but what i get is 5.5s even though thats what Tesla advertised. Its all about expectations. If there is no performance hit, then this is a non-issue but if the new motor version is slower, I wouldn't be a happy camper. In fact, I wouldn't take delivery of the car and cancel the order. There is no basis for a lawsuit but the buyer can speak with his/her wallet.

Yes - that’s what exactly the consumer should do, speak with the wallet. Don’t buy it.

Lots of ifs - for those complaining about it, show the 0-60 results already.

Again, the power limiting factor in these cars is the battery, not the motor.

 

[lbowroom]

I can’t believe all this arguing over what ifs that don’t even apply.

The 990 motor is more than capable of 5.2s 0-60. It can handle anything the smaller battery throws at it. It’s not limiting the performance of the SR+. The 980 is over qualified.

It’s nothing like swapping a 335 engine for a 340. I guess these concepts are above a lot of people heads?

 

[Venyo]

Most of the SR+ buyers focus on the cost and range which probably aren't impacted by the switch.

Well I focused on performance (and efficiency and generelly wanted a car that has a good adaptive cruise control and is a nice place to be in). I wanted an electric car with high performance and the SR+ price is the limit I am willing to pay. Every alternative does not nearly offer the performance of a Model 3. So I wouldn't say, SR+ buyers don't care about performance if that was the conclusion.

Am I supposed to be upset because someone else got free Supercharging, even though my car didn't?
Or should I sue because I saw a Model 3 in silver that I can't buy right now?
Or - my personal favorite - frunk hooks. Oh, the humanity!!!!

It seems impossible for you to understand this, but we are not talking about peanuts like frunk hooks or things that can be changed relatively afterwards easy like the color. We are talking about this engine change:

"100kw to 88kw (maximum 30min power) and the maximum net power from 239kw to 208kw"

I can’t believe all this arguing over what ifs that don’t even apply.

So you imply the above numbers are not going to change anything? Including the power output on the Autobahn / on longer drives / with higher speed?
I can't believe Tesla is this intransparent about their product.

 

[Knightshade]

It seems impossible for you to understand this, but we are not talking about peanuts like frunk hooks or things that can be changed relatively afterwards easy like the color. We are talking about this engine change:

"100kw to 88kw (maximum 30min power) and the maximum net power from 239kw to 208kw"

And if the software was already limiting your output to 208kw or lower, there's no actual difference to the owner.

Go ask all the LR AWD owners who have P rear drive units how that works, given their cars are no faster than the LR AWD owners who later got the downgraded 990 units you're so concerned about.

So you imply the above numbers are not going to change anything?

Do you have any evidence whatsoever that it has changed anything?

 

[Venyo]

That sounds promising that really nothing has changed - but could Tesla just inform transparently about these changes and confirm that it won't change anything about the car (if that is true) instead of secretly changing things?

Edit: and wait, the drop on maximum 30min power must have a real world effect.

 

[john5520]

That sounds promising that really nothing has changed - but could Tesla just inform transparently about these changes and confirm that it won't change anything about the car (if that is true) instead of secretly changing things?

If acceleration is software limited, and you're getting the performance advertised, then there's nothing in terms of the DU Tesla needs to be more transparent about. And rather than speculate about the possible differences in acceleration, at least test them side by side first while keeping in mind that other factors can affect the numbers from one car to the next: battery SOC, wheel size etc.

 

[Knightshade]

That sounds promising that really nothing has changed - but could Tesla just inform transparently about these changes and confirm that it won't change anything about the car (if that is true) instead of secretly changing things?

Why would they inform you about a change that makes no difference?

They rev/change parts constantly

Go look at the parts catalog- you'll often see a letter on the end like XXXXXXX-G.

That means it's been through revisions A, B, C, D, etc and they're up to G now.

They don't put out a press release every time they rev a part. Why would they?

Edit: and wait, the drop on maximum 30min power must have a real world effect.

Why?

That spec is the max the physical motor can output run at 100%.

It tells you literally nothing about the amount it is actually outputting in a specific configured car because that's controlled by software.

If Motor A is capable of 100 units of output, but software limited to only putting out 50... and they replace it with Motor B which is capable of 80 units of output...but the car is still limited in software to putting out 50... where's the difference?

 

[lbowroom]

Why can’t BMW and Mercedes be transparent about their ECU tuning, provide the fuel and boost maps, and tell me how much boost is safe to run on my turbos?

 

[lbowroom]

Really? This entire thread was based on a paper exercise and a misunderstanding about EV drivetrains?

 

[ElectricIAC]

If it makes the car cheaper to produce and that is reflected in the price tag, then bravo.

 

[lbowroom]

It also could improve efficiency and power in that case because the internal components can be lighter as it won’t see the current and heat load the 980 has to deal with in the performance.

 

[Venyo]

Why would they inform you about a change that makes no difference?

They rev/change parts constantly

Go look at the parts catalog- you'll often see a letter on the end like XXXXXXX-G.

That means it's been through revisions A, B, C, D, etc and they're up to G now.

They don't put out a press release every time they rev a part. Why would they?

I absolutely have no idea why anyone would compare minor revisions with an engine change, is that some kind of hobby in this forum?

This time the engine was changed. The COC changed. The maximum power output changed. The type code number (not sure if that is the correct English word) changed, so we need new "General Operating Permits" (not sure again) for parts, eg. rims. We get different insurance prices...

I ******* want to know if that is really all for nothing and I don't believe it until I heard it from Tesla (they do not seem to like tot talk about the fact that the promised power output is only available for a certain amount of time and it may be irrelevant in most countries, but not in Germany).

Edit: I really hope it turns out that the Model 3 got lighter that way and a heat pump was installed or something - but why would that be kept secret? Just so Musk can casually say "oh and when are we going to build in the heat pump? Since June" just for the sake of surprise?

 

[Knightshade]

I absolutely have no idea why anyone would compare minor revisions with an engine change, is that some kind of hobby in this forum?

What is your evidence the engine change isn't minor?

Do you have any?

At all?

Also, that "A, B, C...G" revisions thing? they do that for the motors too

Again- check the parts catalog.

There's been at least least half a dozen different versions of the 980 motor for example- nobody cared.

This time the engine was changed.

...and?

If the max output for that config was already software limited to well below the max of either drive unit, what difference does it make?

I ******* want to know if that is really all for nothing and I don't believe it until I heard it from Tesla (they do not seem to like tot talk about the fact that the promised power output is only available for a certain amount of time and it may be irrelevant in most countries, but not in Germany).

You again appear to be confused between 'Max possible output on a certification document' and 'Max output the cars software ever called for'

It's possible to reduce the first one without changing the second one at all depending on the specific numbers.


Again this exact same DU change happened on the LR AWD in early 2019.

It did not change the performance or output of the actual car at all

Because the output is software limited, not hardware limited.

- but why would that be kept secret?

Not sure what you think was "kept secret"

If it was secret how are we discussing the fact it's documented in public papers?

 

[lbowroom]

It’s not an engine, its a motor. it’s not producing the power. The power (VI) fed to it determines the output.

If you put the appropriate voltage to achieve a 50W output on a lightbulb rate at 100W and one rated at 75W. How much light do you get? Does the 75 W bulb overheat or have less light?

damn, I hope my example is sound here....

 

[ebmcs03]

Interesting.... these discussions happens every time Tesla makes a change. From Glass roof to frunk space to motor.

There will always be changes every manufacturer. They source from different people. Make changes to cut cost. Yes the standard Range motor doesn’t need to be THAT beefy. So why use it?

 

[MasterC17]

Wow, such a heated discussion over speculation.

Also, BMW pulls stuff like this quite often. The N54 originally had forged pistons. Then in 2010 they changed to cast pistons. In theory, the earlier build engine could handle more power. You could argue it was a whole different engine!

Did they tell anyone? No. Did customers lose their minds? No. Did it save BMW a lot of money? Yes.

Pretending like this doesn't happen in the automotive industry is silly.

 

[ebmcs03]

Wow, such a heated discussion over speculation.

Also, BMW pulls stuff like this quite often. The N54 originally had forged pistons. Then in 2010 they changed to cast pistons. In theory, the earlier build engine could handle more power. You could argue it was a whole different engine!

Did they tell anyone? No. Did customers lose their minds? No. Did it save BMW a lot of money? Yes.

Pretending like this doesn't happen in the automotive industry is silly.

Agree!

 

[Apprunner]

Its only an issue if the power output changed with the switch. If all the earlier cars are running 4.9s to 60 and the new one only does 5.2 to 60, that would be annoying as you didn't get the product you thought you were going to get. Yes Tesla says 5.2 but all the other available information says 4.9, then I thought i would be buying a 4.9s car. If new one runs 4.9s to 60 same as the older motor, then nothing to see here.

 

[Threader]

Tesla Model 3 Standard Range Plus breaks 5 second 0-60 barrier in impressive 1/4 mile run [Video] - Drive Tesla Canada

According to his dragy app, his 0-60mph time was an even more impressive at 4.99 seconds

 

[Venyo]

AAZ is slower than AAQ. 0-100 kph in 5.9 while Tesla is still advertising 5.6 on their HP: