[POLL] Untapped 0-60 performance in the LR today? With only OTA-SOFTWARE the car could...

[insaneoctane]

This is an interesting question. What do you think Tesla has hidden in the LR today? Knowing how much anti selling has happened and Tesla's need to artificially differentiate the model 3 from the model S....
Untapped potential requires a motor that has more torque and /or power than advertised, inverter capacity, battery discharge currents, etc. I am talking about making the car faster via OTA-SOFTWARE upgrade, no hardware changes. Nothing is for free, but do you think that there is a little something in reserve? If so, what do you think it will take to motivate Tesla to unleash it?

 

[erthquake]

It's possible the drivetrain is setup somewhat conservatively to ensure reliability. If everything goes well, and the drivetrains are functioning perfectly, and they've tested the higher performance settings extensively, I wouldn't be surprised to see them unlock it. Though I believe they would have already decided the higher performance does not risk Osborning the S/X.

 

[R.S]

There could be some "hidden potential", but I wouldn't count on it. My advise for everyone thinking about buying a Model 3:

Buy it for what it is, not for what you think it could potentially, maybe, surely after the anti-selling, definitely, be some time in the future.

 

[Craig9080]

With a similar battery to the base S, a more advanced motor, and similar curb weight, I really don't see how there could not be performance left on the table.

 

[ACPark]

Max battery power of a 75 kW battery is somewhere in the 330-350 HP range. With the rear Model 3 motor reportedly 258 HP, and comparing to the max battery power of the 40 kW Model S limited to 235 HP w/ 0-60 of 6.5 seconds. I'd say there's not much left from a motor limiting perspective on the Model 3.

That being said. A Model 3 dual motor could take advantage of the max battery power and likely push down to 4.2 seconds maybe lower with the vehicle being a few hundred pounds lighter.

Thoughts?

 

[JeffK]

similar curb weight

By similar curb weight, do you mean 1000 lbs less.

 

[insaneoctane]

With the rear Model 3 motor reportedly 258 HP.... Thoughts?

Key word in bold....

 

[JeffK]

Key word in bold....

exactly...
from Electrek:

Update: Tesla says the power output was for the EPA’s test and doesn’t represent their power rating.

 

[zenmaster]

This same question has been brought up a few times before on here, and no one knew then either. At the time it was merely reasonable speculation that there could be some margin for power increase. Now the question has been promoted to speculation on how much margin, but with no additional information to help the guessing game.

 

[ACPark]

Key word in bold....

With Model S's rear motor being rated at 382 HP where would you guess Model 3's sits?

 

[insaneoctane]

Unfortunately I have zero data to predict that. 258 hp or more....

 

[Craig9080]

By similar curb weight, do you mean 1000 lbs less.

2017 Tesla Model S 75 Curb weigh: 4,490 lbs

Model 3 Long Range Curb weight: 4,250 lb

 

[JeffK]

2017 Tesla Model S 75 Curb weigh: 4,490 lbs

Model 3 Long Range Curb weight: 4,250 lb

3814 lbs. (Model 3 Long Range)
Press Kit | Tesla

Model S curb weight: 4,647.3 lbs
Model S Specifications

 

[Craig9080]

3814 lbs. (Model 3 Long Range)
Press Kit | Tesla

Model S curb weight: 4,647.3 lbs
Model S Specifications

Ah, you are correct. I was reading the Test weight from the EPA report which lists the 4,250 number as the Equivalent Test Weight. The EPA actual weight of an unloaded 3 was 3,837 lbs.

 

[eSpiritIV]

I think there is definitely tapped potential since it's set up for range not power now. My question is if the standard range will have untapped potential? We have no data yet so pure speculation

 

[insaneoctane]

I am kind of surprised at these results.

• About 70% of results think that there is at least SOME hidden potentially available performance
• About 50% of results think that there is what I would call significant hidden potentially available performance

 

[mdevp]

How does having a PMAC motor affect the 0-60 times, are there any limitations on how low the time can be?

 

[mach330]

How does having a PMAC motor affect the 0-60 times, are there any limitations on how low the time can be?

wondering the same thing since this motor is different from what tesla has been doing for the s and x. haven't read enough about pmac as far as performance. Just keep reading that it's more efficient .

 

[jbcarioca]

I am kind of surprised at these results.

• About 70% of results think that there is at least SOME hidden potentially available performance
• About 50% of results think that there is what I would call significant hidden potentially available performance

If one assumes that the weight differences are the primary issue, that battery packs of the S75 and the LR 3 have similar capacity in all respects and that the generic model S and Model 3 LR weights are accurate, that aerodynamically are basically the same, and that the lower reported HP or the Model 3 is itself proportionate to needs, that PMAC makes no material difference, then:
Model 3 LR should be capable of approximately 18% quicker acceleration than is the S75 so the Model 3 LR ought to be able to accelerate 0-60 mph in about 3.4 seconds or so.

That is a decently long list of assumptions. I'd guess that the AWD version of Model 3 will probably deliver faster acceleration but that the single motor version is probably optimized more nearly for range, so some non-software changes might be needed to make it accelerate more quickly.

Of course I just made a logical process which could be seriously flawed. Truthfully I haven't a clue. if anybody actually cares I suggest waiting for the PxxD version.

 

[JeffK]

How does having a PMAC motor affect the 0-60 times,

wondering the same thing since this motor is different from what tesla has been doing for the s and x. haven't read enough about pmac as far as performance.

Consider that the fastest and quickest EVs in the world use PM.