The other material difference with EV acceleration occurs at part throttle application. With an EV, part throttle application tends to deliver linear accleration. In a traditonal automatic, you press the pedal a bit and today's eco transmission tuning results in the car typically staying in the current gear with only modest acceleration...so you press a bit harder until you finally get an often jolting downshift. All of this burns at least tenths of a second and sometimes considerably longer. Sure some cars have a sports mode where downshifts occur more quickly, but they often pair it with stupid things like not going to the highest gears so you sacrifice on economy, etc. In an EV, none of this is really an issue. Indeed, THIS is why an EV...as opposed to all the green and cost savings stuff...they just DRIVE better.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
I don't agree with the phrase "artificially limited". It is a design choice. The battery, drive unit, drive train components (axles, etc) all need to be designed to handle the power without breaking or wearing out. Tesla doesn't want to be replacing parts under warranty. Owners don't want to be replacing parts long term.
I can have my Cummings chipped and significantly increase the performance, but it trashes many of the other drive components on the truck. There is always going to be a weakest link.
Edit: Not sure I should mention having a Diesel truck on an EV forum. It sits in the driveway 99% of the time, while I drive my S. Probably be up for sale at some point soon.
I can have my Cummings chipped and significantly increase the performance, but it trashes many of the other drive components on the truck. There is always going to be a weakest link.
Edit: Not sure I should mention having a Diesel truck on an EV forum. It sits in the driveway 99% of the time, while I drive my S. Probably be up for sale at some point soon.
Was just reading a write up of the 2018 Mustang GT. Also a $35k car but does 0-60 in under 4.0 seconds. Faster than a $90k Porsche 911.
Disappointing that Tesla couldn't get the base times a little closer to a performance car range. Even if/when the P version of the model 3 comes out, it will likely cost at least $15-$25k more to get in that range.
At 5.6s, the base model 3 is 40% slower to 60mph. It doesn't matter if the EV torque is instant...the ICE mustang will have a faster 0-20, 0-30, etc. and will pull ahead within 2-3 seconds in track mode, certainly feeling much faster in real world driving than the Tesla.
Realize they're not really good comps (sedan vs. coupe, "luxury" vs. non-luxury) but come on...
Disappointing that Tesla couldn't get the base times a little closer to a performance car range. Even if/when the P version of the model 3 comes out, it will likely cost at least $15-$25k more to get in that range.
At 5.6s, the base model 3 is 40% slower to 60mph. It doesn't matter if the EV torque is instant...the ICE mustang will have a faster 0-20, 0-30, etc. and will pull ahead within 2-3 seconds in track mode, certainly feeling much faster in real world driving than the Tesla.
Realize they're not really good comps (sedan vs. coupe, "luxury" vs. non-luxury) but come on...
In everyday driving situations, any electric car with 1/2 the GT's power to weight will dance around it.
Why? Three things. What is necessary to ever see full output, 'area under the curve', and inertia (both driveline and air).
Full output of the Coyote is about 6,750 rpm. How much power does that Coyote make at 2000 rpm when you're actually driving? Roughly 100-110 rwhp. Nada. You need to spin the crap out of the Coyote, it doesn't make 50% acceleration until 3500rpm.
Related to that is area under the curve, or how much average horsies does it muster? Well the 10-sp trans is there for a reason. In order to keep above 75% of engine output, you need to shift a lot. Power climbs with RPM.
The inertia is because at 2000 rpm the moving parts AND the air is moving slow. You must apply power to get them to move faster. This is parasitic. The more air velocity you need to acquire and more RPMs you need to build take HP.
What happens when you add up all these factors? If you are cruising at 50 mph, and just floor in it a manual Coyote GT, virtually every car made will get to 70 mph faster, even other stick cars. 205mph ZR1 stuck in 6th at 50? Bogging at 1,500 rpm at 50, the ZR1 will hit 70mph in a leisurely 5.1 secs. The Coyote? 9 freaking seconds?????
This is what happens when all 3 conspire against you at once. Poor low RPM output, poor area under the curve, the inability to get the air moving. Why is the ZR1 with tall gears any better? The inertia and area under the curve are attenuated by positive displacement forced induction.
EV have a nearly flat power curve. They punch right at 0 RPM and hold it until the PCM turns it off. Inertia of air is gone, but rotating mass is smaller too.
If an EV 'gets the move' on a 2018 Coyote, it will take awhile for the Stang to catch back up. And that's a small EV. The Model 3-220? It probably won't catch it before the 70 or higher.
But we will see.
insaneoctane
Well-Known Member
I don't know. The current LR when optioned out today is already $60K. In the future with P mode & AWD, as long as you are half a second slower than the current P100D (2.3sec +0.5sec =2.8sec) then you are probably more expensive than base model S, I think that would not cannibalize anything. Some people will buy the MS because it is bigger or faster or more optioned or more exclusive.
xmetal
Member
All of know is that my Leaf, which is pathetically slow in the 0-60 specs, (I’ve seen some publications say 10sec) will take darn near any car in city driving from a stoplight. Yes, I may be paying more attention to the lights than your average zombie driver but I’ve left all kinds of fast cars in the dust, because it’s just so easy and effortless to jump off the line in an EV.
The Model 3 is gonna smoke much faster cars in day to day driving. And I know I’ll squeal with joy every single day taking mine around town.
The Model 3 is gonna smoke much faster cars in day to day driving. And I know I’ll squeal with joy every single day taking mine around town.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
I keep hearing this- but it doesn't seem to be true.
I compared the #s of my current IS350 as tested by Road and Track since they had every 10mph step available... and compared it to the #s on a similar test from Car and Driver of an S70D (since it has the same 0-60 as the Model 3 large battery does)
The IS is slightly faster to 60 (4.9 vs 5.1) and it's ALSO faster every single step of the way getting there.
S70D:
2.1, 2.9, 3.9, 5.1 at 30, 40, 50, and 60
13.8 1/4 mile
vs the IS
1.9, 2.7, 3.8, and 4.9 at 30, 40, 50, and 60.
13.5 1/4 mile
And mine is bordering on being a 10 year old car at this point (hell, the newer ones are slower because same damn engine but they added 2 unneeded gears and porked the car out with hundreds more lbs of weight)
Well, I think that's an exaggeration (C&D quotes the MB S65 AMG as 0-60 in 4.1, with a 2.9 second 50-70 passing performance... while that S70D at 5.1 0-60 (much quicker than 5.6) only manages 3.1.
But that IS the one score I've found the S70D beats my IS350 (which only manages like 3.3... so not a huge difference, but a difference).
Then again 50-70 or 30-50 tests on EV vs regular are tricky- because a lot of them on ICE cars are done in "top gear" for some reason... giving you insanely and obviously wrong results- like a C7 corvette taking 10.2 seconds 50-70 because they did the passing test in overdrive.
Still, I think the rolling-acceleration explanation holds more water than the "faster 0-30" one for EVs feeling faster than their 0-60 #s suggest they should be.
Have you driven one yet? I don't buy the first number especially. The S70, and especially a D, would be well on its way before an automatic transmission had a chance to kick in. Could be different testing environments, drivers, etc. My 3 years of driving a lesser RWD S60 absolutely underscores the point.
shrspeedblade
Rideshare Monkey
One needs to remember that the horsepower wars of the last 20 years have made many cars rather absurd for the street, speed limits haven't gone up much if at all and on ramps haven't been shortened.
At track days some instructors are even hesitant about climbing into the passenger seat with unseasoned students with 400hp+ simply because the speeds attained and the skill needed to handle a vehicle at them increase together, modern traction and stability control present or not! One of my impressions of a Model S P90DL was it was troubling that the only price of admission was money, which doesn't necessarily come with driving skill or good judgement.
The Model 3, especially the "R" (I said it first!
) will be fast enough for anybody and faster than most everything available a mere 25 years ago. If anyone is honest with themselves any faster is mere extravagance and temptation towards disaster.
But not to worry, I'm sure the P75DL will be just about as absurd as its big brother, there is just too much money to be made for it not to be!
At track days some instructors are even hesitant about climbing into the passenger seat with unseasoned students with 400hp+ simply because the speeds attained and the skill needed to handle a vehicle at them increase together, modern traction and stability control present or not! One of my impressions of a Model S P90DL was it was troubling that the only price of admission was money, which doesn't necessarily come with driving skill or good judgement.
The Model 3, especially the "R" (I said it first!
) will be fast enough for anybody and faster than most everything available a mere 25 years ago. If anyone is honest with themselves any faster is mere extravagance and temptation towards disaster. But not to worry, I'm sure the P75DL will be just about as absurd as its big brother, there is just too much money to be made for it not to be!
Your IS data is just splits of a track start (powerbraked) 0-60mph run. Nothing to do with throttle response or RPM gain whatsoever.
I show the 2017 IS350 Automatic taking 4.2 seconds to climb from 50 to 70 mph in a real passing situation: 2017 Lexus IS350 F Sport RWD Test | Review | Car and Driver Not bad for a 306 HP car which is 12.5 lb/hp.
But that's a whole bunch slower than the 3.5 secs it takes a 200 hp Chevy Bolt EV to do the same pass in the same conditions. 20% slower but against an EV that is a whopping 18 lb / hp??
ie - A M3-220 would take a IS350 on the road. Why? Because a Bolt will cream it, and the M3 is going to quicker.
Concerning the performance of the AMG $250k supercar? It's 4.1 second time is misleading. It traps 120 mph in the 1/4, but only clocks a 12.3 ET??? It's not able to put the power down until it's rolling.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
So you think Car and Driver is just lying about their S70 testing?
Which makes more sense-
A) Your "feeling" is totally accurate and correct... and C&Ds scientifically measured tests were edited to make Tesla look...slightly less great than a totally different car from years earlier...because....REASONS!
or
B) C&Ds scientifically measured tests are correct, and your totally "how it feels to me" guess about acceleration is not.
(Hint- it's B)
Why?
It's not like the automatic starts in neutral. It starts in 1st gear.
Nor is it like testing an auto is rocket science these days either- as long as the car isn't traction limited (and the IS isn't with excellent tires on a clean dry road) you floor it and it goes.
As the #s objectively show in testing.
Well, not really... in the old days with carborated ICE engines and crap transmissions? yeah.
But modern cars know what the air temp is. While cold air will still help, it's nowhere near the factor it used to be- especially for quick testing like this (versus say doing 50 back to back drag pulls)
And again- driver is irrelevant if you're not traction limited. Literally you put it in D, mash the pedal, wait till the test is over. Done.
With the tesla you're even LESS caring about air temp since it's not burning a fuel/air mixture.
How many times in that 3 years did you measure your acceleration times on professional-grade, calibrated, equipment like C&D and R&T did?
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
... what?
First- you don't need to power brake to get those times (I've personally knocked off measured 5.0s in my IS in southeastern US warm weather).
Second- how does a 0-60 or 1/4 mile run have nothing to do with "RPM gain"?
Third- I ALSO included a 50-70 test- the one place the Tesla (barely) beat the IS.
Right- I already mentioned the new model is much slower than my 2008.
All the #s I quoted you are for the 2nd gen- not the pig heavy new one they left the engine from 2005 in.
The point wasn't even about one speciifc car- it was that ICE cars with similar 1/4 mile times are faster the entire way- thus debunking the idea EVs are misunderstood because they may do the same 0-60 but they're magically SUPER fast 0-30.
Almost certainly not, since the significantly quicker S70 barely beats it 50-70, and loses 0-anything...
That's true of most 4 second 0-60 cars- it was just the first one google gave me 50-70 times for.
But ok- lets go with a less traction limited AWD vehicle... the ICE powered Audi RS3
0-60 in 3.9-4.1 depending who tests...(12.2 in the 1/4, but only at 113
) and price-wise it's about the same as a fully loaded model 3 will be....and I find testing having it doing 50-70 in 4th gear in 3.1... same as the S70, so for sure quicker than the M3-220... but again that's using the wrong gear too- they ALSO tested 40-70 with optimal gear use... and it's actually 2.8.So driven correctly the RS3 is quicker 40-70 than the S70 Tesla is 50-70. About 10% quicker. And cheaper. And faster in every measure I can find.
Audi #s from here
http://www.automobile-catalog.com/performance/2017/2534360/audi_rs3_sportback.html
voip-ninja
Give me some sugar baby
This entire conversation is kind of stupid.
The AWD Ludicrous version of the Model 3 does not exist yet and might not even come until sometime next year... or later.
That car should be turning in very respectable performance but will be priced accordingly. I would expect that it will be $5,000 for AWD and another $7500 for ludicrous mode and it will probably be a car that is only a very small touch away from the Ludicrous P100D to keep the more expensive car on top... perhaps 3.8 0-60 times.
I really don't understand the obsession about how the 0-60 times compare with similarly priced cars. My BMW 340xi does 0-60 in about 4.5 seconds or so. It is the fastest car I have personally ever owned and feels like a rocket, but is slower than cheaper Japanese or Korean imports, especially if the owners dump a little bit of cash into tuning them.
A pointless comparison. I bought my car because it blended high performance with all the other things important to me, such as offering a very quiet ride, being super comfortable for longer trips and having plenty of room for four adults and a bunch of full sized luggage.
Different strokes for different folks.
The AWD Ludicrous version of the Model 3 does not exist yet and might not even come until sometime next year... or later.
That car should be turning in very respectable performance but will be priced accordingly. I would expect that it will be $5,000 for AWD and another $7500 for ludicrous mode and it will probably be a car that is only a very small touch away from the Ludicrous P100D to keep the more expensive car on top... perhaps 3.8 0-60 times.
I really don't understand the obsession about how the 0-60 times compare with similarly priced cars. My BMW 340xi does 0-60 in about 4.5 seconds or so. It is the fastest car I have personally ever owned and feels like a rocket, but is slower than cheaper Japanese or Korean imports, especially if the owners dump a little bit of cash into tuning them.
A pointless comparison. I bought my car because it blended high performance with all the other things important to me, such as offering a very quiet ride, being super comfortable for longer trips and having plenty of room for four adults and a bunch of full sized luggage.
Different strokes for different folks.
Yes, reasons. I'm not a spring chicken and have owned and driven cars way faster than all discussed above. Let's not put Car & Driver too high on a pedestal, please.
I'm assuming you haven't driven a Tesla, otherwise we would not be having this conversation.
Model 3 is quicker than any gas car with a comparable or even same 0-60 time due to it's instant torque.
Model S 85 has pretty much the same 0-60 as Model 3 and the standard 85 is very quick so there is nothing to complain about.
And in real life everyday driving its 0 to the speed limit so if you're in any Tesla you will smoke all cars off the line to the speed limit and thats all that matters.
Model S 85 has pretty much the same 0-60 as Model 3 and the standard 85 is very quick so there is nothing to complain about.
And in real life everyday driving its 0 to the speed limit so if you're in any Tesla you will smoke all cars off the line to the speed limit and thats all that matters.
Bingo. The only reason Tesla is limiting Model 3 right now is that to cannibalize Model S at this point in their production ramp would be suicide. After they get to 25% gross margin why would they not rather sell 5X as many Model 3 at similar margin to Model S and let Model S sales trail off some. The Model S would then be reserved for those who want a bigger more feature laden car. At that point expect the full performance potential of Model 3 to be unleashed.
Similar threads
