Performance vs Dual Motor - highway speed

[1.21GW]

Based on the results of the 1/4 mile videos an many other videos posted. I believe that the regular dual motor and the Performance version have similar acceleration at highway speed 65+ mph. The major difference is in the 0-60mph range.

I’m looking forward to testing out that theory.

 

[rdunniii]

I made that assumption and that is whey the AWD is fine with me. 0-60 does nothing for me, but 70-100 does. When I want to pass someone I don't want to give them the opportunity to disagree.

Electric motors have most of their torque at lower speeds. I've not seen torque curves for the D vs the P but I would imagine the P's torque is decreasing towards the D's and might not be significantly different (less than 10% in the 70-90MPH range). Anyone have any graphs to share on this?

 

[zamboni52]

I'd be interested in this as well.

 

[Knightshade]

I made that assumption and that is whey the AWD is fine with me. 0-60 does nothing for me, but 70-100 does. When I want to pass someone I don't want to give them the opportunity to disagree.

Electric motors have most of their torque at lower speeds. I've not seen torque curves for the D vs the P but I would imagine the P's torque is decreasing towards the D's and might not be significantly different (less than 10% in the 70-90MPH range). Anyone have any graphs to share on this?

Just consider that from 0-60 the P is about 1 full second ahead of the AWD.

At over 110, end of the 1/4 mile, the P is... about 1 full second ahead of the AWD.

Only way that's really possible is if the cars are virtually identical from 60-110.


And even below that the 0-60 time isn't totally indicative of how insanely quick passing times are compared to other much more expensive cars.

From data we've seen from draggy and such on the Model 3-

30-50:
LR 1.9, LRD (AWD): 1.5, P: 1.2

50-70:
LR 2.8, LRD (AWD): 2.1, P: 1.7

How does this compare to some quick cars?


A GT-R is pretty quick, right?

30-50 is 3.8 seconds. That's slower than an AWD model 3 goes 30-70.

A Porsche 911 Turbo S (which does 0-60 in 2.7) takes 2.5 to go 50-70.

A McLaren 570s (also 2.7 0-60) takes 2.7 to go 50-70.

If you go by listed passing times (30-50, 50-70, and 30-70) the AWD Model 3 beats nearly every ICE car in the world... (for example the GT-R, the Corvette ZR1, The Porsche 911 Turbo S, the McLaren 570s, etc).

A $300,000+ Porsche GT2 loses to the AWD 30-50 by half a second.... and finally manages to beat it 50-70...by a whole 0.06 seconds.

(that said, the P beats all of these by even more... and even the RWD looks damn good, barely losing to cars costing 2-5 times as much...and it's cheating a little bit because all those passing #s in car mags are always done with the car starting in top gear and needing to downshift, while the Tesla has no shifting to do- still, pretty impressive...)

Anyway, even there though the gap from RWD->AWD is larger than the gap from AWD->P

 

[Daniel in SD]

I don't think those times include a downshift. I think they're top gear passing times and those cars have top gears tall enough to go 200+ mph.

 

[Knightshade]

I don't think those times include a downshift. I think they're top gear passing times and those cars have top gears tall enough to go 200+ mph.

For automatics they include a downshift- for manuals they don't (which is why autos generally put up quicker times, but still slow compared to teslas)...see below (bold added)

We also perform two acceleration tests, from 30 to 50 mph and from 50 to 70, in a vehicle's highest gear.

In vehicles with manual transmissions, this test measures how well a car's gearing matches the torque curve of its engine. With automatics, the test begins in top gear and then the car downshifts automatically under hard acceleration. This provides information about transmission responsiveness and actual passing times"

 

[Shizzrock]

For automatics they include a downshift- for manuals they don't (which is why autos generally put up quicker times, but still slow compared to teslas)...see below (bold added)

They're slow compared to Teslas because they start out in top gear. That's not even a relevant comparison.

 

[Knightshade]

They're slow compared to Teslas because they start out in top gear. That's not even a relevant comparison.

Of course it is.

Do you imagine everyone drives around all the time on the highway with their car in optimal passing gear rather than optimal mileage gear? Nope. That's the entire point of the test rather than a 0-60 test.

Highway passing will involve a downshift in an ICE vehicle. Which is slow. Teslas don't have that problem....which is why they put up supercar numbers in this real-life driving scenario.

 

[usofrob]

I agree that having these mid speeds measured would be useful. I don't think it had to be the actual top gear. But from a normal cruising gear, how long does it take to get to 20+ mph faster than your current speed is useful to know for normal drives.

 

[SSonnentag]

Well, here's my real world scenario. I traded in my Chevy Volt for my Tesla.

Here are the Volt stats:

Zero to 60 mph: 7.5 sec
Zero to 100 mph: 24.8 sec
Rolling start, 5-60 mph: 7.7 sec
Top gear, 30-50 mph: 3.2 sec
Top gear, 50-70 mph: 5.1 sec
Standing ¼-mile: 16.1 sec @ 85 mph
Top speed (governor limited): 102 mph
Braking, 70-0 mph: 190 ft

 

[SabrToothSqrl]

Does anyone have an excel sheet with 0-30, 0-60, 30-60, 45-60, 30-90 of the
3, AWD3, and Perf 3?

I love my wife's 3, it's super fun to drive, but lets me down in the 50-90MPH department. When I'm already on the highway and want to just book it, it doesn't have that high end GO that my S had. Does the AWD one or do I need to go perf for that? 0-60 in her car is fine, just the last... 50-100 area.

thanks.

 

[Knightshade]

Does anyone have an excel sheet with 0-30, 0-60, 30-60, 45-60, 30-90 of the
3, AWD3, and Perf 3?

I love my wife's 3, it's super fun to drive, but lets me down in the 50-90MPH department. When I'm already on the highway and want to just book it, it doesn't have that high end GO that my S had. Does the AWD one or do I need to go perf for that? 0-60 in her car is fine, just the last... 50-100 area.

thanks.

All available evidence suggests the P and the AWD are basically identical above 60 mph (while the RWD is still measurably slower than both)

The most obvious proof of this is the 1/4 mile tests...where they finish with the same time between them that they already had at 60 mph (versus the RWD where the gap increases even further at the end of the 1/4 compared to 60mph)

 

[EfficientWatts]

wow the original point of the post was completely lost. at least when i got into arguments about badges we actually talked about badges.

hopefully somebody publishes test data soon, or someone should get a stopwatch and do some informal passes.

 

[Knightshade]

wow the original point of the post was completely lost. at least when i got into arguments about badges we actually talked about badges.

hopefully somebody publishes test data soon, or someone should get a stopwatch and do some informal passes.

We have test data.

I posted it in my very first post in the thread.

it's from the actual testing done by other forum members here using vbox, draggy, and other such data loggers, and is collected from several other threads right from here.

Here it is again-


30-50:
LR 1.9, LRD (AWD): 1.5, P: 1.2

50-70:
LR 2.8, LRD (AWD): 2.1, P: 1.7


Since the Model 3 is a 1-speed it's easy to grab this data directly from 0-speed runs unlike cars with multiple gears where behavior in "passing" is totally different from behavior in speed runs.

 

[animorph]

No shifting is just one of the benefits of being electric, and one it took me a while to fully appreciate.

t's not just that you don't have to upshift during a 0-60 run. You are also always in the perfect gear to stomp on it and pass or position the car where you want it, like in a merge. My wife's Mini Cooper S has to spool up the turbo and downshift, which seems like 2 seconds before it even starts accelerating. Thank heavens that will go away when we get a Model 3 AWD next week. Even with a manual transmission a sudden need for acceleration requires a downshift or a higher than optimum gear.

 

[Thud]

At over 110, end of the 1/4 mile, the P is... about 1 full second ahead of the AWD.

Only way that's really possible is if the cars are virtually identical from 60-110.

What the..?
You are directly comparing time-to-speed with time-to-distance. That is...not right.

The 0-60 time (divided by seconds) gives you average acceleration.

The quarter mile (divided by seconds) gives you average velocity.

You're saying that acceleration is somehow equal to velocity, when acceleration is the first derivative of velocity.

 

[Thud]

Here's some napkin math....

P3D quarter mile 11.8 @ 115, 0-60 3.5s
AWD quarter mile 12.6 @ 110, 0-60 4.5s

Therefore P3D went 60-115 in 8.3s
AWD went 60-110 in 8.1s

P3D acceleration from 60-115 averaged 6.6mph per second
AWD acceleration from 60-110 averaged 6.1mph per second

So even above 60mph the P3D is maintaining higher acceleration. The difference decreases as speed increases, but they are never equal.

 

[Knightshade]

Here's some napkin math....

P3D quarter mile 11.8 @ 115, 0-60 3.5s
AWD quarter mile 12.6 @ 110, 0-60 4.5s

Therefore P3D went 60-115 in 8.3s
AWD went 60-110 in 8.1s

Your numbers are off a bit... in the head to head race it was:

[email protected] with a 2.134 60' for the AWD
[email protected] with a 1.817 60' for the Performance

Therefore P3D went 60-113.32 in 8.263 seconds
AWD went 60-111.85 in 8.246 seconds.

That's virtually identical. Which is what I originally said.

P3D acceleration from 60-115 averaged 6.6mph per second
AWD acceleration from 60-110 averaged 6.1mph per second

Correcting the above with the real drag strip #s-

P3D acceleration 60+ averaged 6.45 (rounded) mph per second
AWD acceleration 60+ averaged 6.29 (rounded) mph per second.

That's pretty damn close to virtually identical...

Especially when you compare to the 0-60 times where 3.5 and 4.5 get you

P- 17.14 mph per second
AWD- 13.3 mph per second.

Which is a pretty large difference

 

[1.21GW]

Thanks for answering my original question. It does appear to be very close at 60+mph

It only leaves me with one question... how would it do against a GTR?


(Kidding)

 

[Thud]

Your numbers are off a bit... in the head to head race it was:

[email protected] with a 2.134 60' for the AWD
[email protected] with a 1.817 60' for the Performance

Therefore P3D went 60-113.32 in 8.263 seconds
AWD went 60-111.85 in 8.246 seconds.

That's virtually identical. Which is what I originally said.




Correcting the above with the real drag strip #s-

P3D acceleration 60+ averaged 6.45 (rounded) mph per second
AWD acceleration 60+ averaged 6.29 (rounded) mph per second.

That's pretty damn close to virtually identical...

Especially when you compare to the 0-60 times where 3.5 and 4.5 get you

P- 17.14 mph per second
AWD- 13.3 mph per second.

Which is a pretty large difference

For the real-world runs, you'd also need the real-world 0-60 times for those runs which would change the #'s again. I just used the factory #'s which don't include rollout (whereas the drag time slips do). So it's not an exact calculation of course - but the difference at 60mph would be much larger than the difference at say 105mph. That's consistent with the other real-world metrics posted earlier with the 50-70 sprint showing a larger gap between the 3P and AWD.

They *approach* the same acceleration as speed increases, but it's wrong to say they are the same above 60mph. I think you'd still notice a difference up to 80-90mph.