Reports of slower accelleration after latest update.

[slipnslider]

Playing devil's advocate, technically you paid for the specs, if this move was still in line with the specs you bought, saves the tire tread life and reduces wear on the newer motor/inverter combo, would that be a good thing or a bad thing in your eyes?

You wouldn't have the same feelings from the other direction, if it were slower than the specs and they updated it to be closer to the specs.

The point is moot until we get actual numbers from anyone, anyone at all.

I didn't pay for the specs, I paid for the car as it was the day I handed over my check. If you want to make my car worse after it changes ownership to my hands, that shouldn't be legal. If it is legal, then some sort of refund should be expected.

Even if it was faster than the specs, that's like getting a free topping on your pizza, then the chef coming by later to take them off.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

It's kind of sad that not a single person has posted before and after numbers this far into the thread...

Never let the facts get in the way of a good story.

 

[Daniellane]

Has anyone tried this App?

Going Zero to Sixty by Randy Kirk Going Zero to Sixty on the App Store

 

[Krash]

It's kind of sad that not a single person has posted before and after numbers this far into the thread...

We have the max power and implied torque data from several months ago. Someone do a 0-60 run on the API (iOS Powertools or Android Dashboard for Tesla) and we'll lay them side by side. Personally I doubt Tesla nerfed the 3. I think owners are just getting used to their cars.

For extra credit record any performance run on the CANBus hardware. We don't have any of those.

475Nm and 250kW are the before numbers. Here Let Me Google That For You. Not having my AWD 3 yet I have to rely on you all to do the after run.

 

[Krash]

Has anyone tried this App?

Going Zero to Sixty by Randy Kirk Going Zero to Sixty on the App Store

Use this one: PowerTools For Tesla on the App Store and it will give you car reported power and distance as well. I can use that in the performance metrics. Send it over private message (zip it first) and I will strip out the GPS data after I calculate the distance. If you are nervous about giving the app your Telsa password, simply change it before you do the run and change it back after.

Again, we could really use a quarter mile run. It will almost certianly turn out that the Model 3 settings won't have recently been made any slower. But a quarter mile run will give us interesting data on the back EMF characteristics of the PM motor.

 

[JeffK]

475Nm and 250kW are the before numbers. Here Let Me Google That For You. Not having my AWD 3 yet I have to rely on you all to do the after run.

View attachment 304099

So we're back to not a single person having both before and after metrics... thanks for confirming.

I hope the next post to this thread contains more than butt feel metrics haha.

 

[nd4spd569]

Not just butt feel but neck feel...

I don’t have any before and after data but it’s not me getting used to it. Picked mine up Friday. Was updated on Saturday night and felt slower. Pretty sure it was it was on .3 software and now .13 but should’ve taken a picture.

Anyway not as much neck snap and on ramp oomph. Annnnnd now I found this thread. Hopefully if it’s true it’s rolled back. Or maybe I did get used to it in 30-40 miles.

 

[Krash]

Not just butt feel but neck feel...

I don’t have any before and after data but it’s not me getting used to it. Picked mine up Friday. Was updated on Saturday night and felt slower. Pretty sure it was it was on .3 software and now .13 but should’ve taken a picture.

Anyway not as much neck snap and on ramp oomph. Annnnnd now I found this thread. Hopefully if it’s true it’s rolled back. Or maybe I did get used to it in 30-40 miles.

Nobody will know until someone does a 0-60 run to gather the API data. Happy to walk anyone through it. Send me a PM if that is easier for you.

 

[JeffK]

Not just butt feel but neck feel...

I don’t have any before and after data but it’s not me getting used to it. Picked mine up Friday. Was updated on Saturday night and felt slower. Pretty sure it was it was on .3 software and now .13 but should’ve taken a picture.

Anyway not as much neck snap and on ramp oomph. Annnnnd now I found this thread. Hopefully if it’s true it’s rolled back. Or maybe I did get used to it in 30-40 miles.

Was the battery warmed up? What was the SoC?

Even Brooks at DragTimes got two different numbers when the battery wasn't warmed up.

 

[eigenv1]

Nobody will know until someone does a 0-60 run to gather the API data. Happy to walk anyone through it. Send me a PM if that is easier for you.

You’ll need before and after with similar SoC and weather conditions for finer mph than 0 - 60. If the software increases the time for 0 - 30 and decreases 30 - 60, the 0 - 60 could be identical but the initial jerk would be reduced. My take on the qualitative complaint in this thread is less jerk. Find someone who took their car to the track prior to the software update and compare that to the time slip after the update for a day with similar weather. Or, you could Tweet Elon...

 

[Krash]

Yeah, temperature, altitude, and other variables make a difference, but as long as state of charge is above 80%, it should be obvious if the car changed. We aren't looking at the 0-60 time. We are deconstructing the API data into separate torque, max power and other components.

I dont tweet Elon. The guy deserves a break from any more distractions. Plus if nobody is willing to do the run with the software to gather the data, the question can go unanswered.

 

[bro1999]

Not suggesting this, but just as a point of trivia:

There was a time when mfr's made ringers for magazine test reviews. The motorcycle or car you bought was not as quick as the magazines would report. It's not done much anymore.

It would not make sense for Tesla though on the M3LR. Potentially increased warranty costs including battery life, and metrics that were too close to the flagship models would not help money-wise. And Tesla did not release many (if any) MFR plate cars to the press for full instrumented test reviews.

You might just be seeing a change in 'abuse control' aka torque management that only affects the car at very low speeds. Actual passing performance could be identical.

Just a thought.

Maybe Tesla saw signs that the "unofficial" increased performance from published specs would become a warranty concern down the road, so they slightly nerfed off the line performance to decrease wear and tear.
Pretty shady if they made the change without any kind of notice to owners. What the Elon giveth, the Elon can taketh away with a push of the OTA update button.

 

[Electroman]

Pretty shady to keep the car within specs?

 

[McRat]

Pretty shady to keep the car within specs?

I don't disagree with Tesla's ability to derate the driveline. It has only a PR effect, and no negative effect on range or emissions.
It's within their rights.

But advertised specs are a joke. The first 762HP Teslas that ran 10.9's actually put out somewhere in the 600's and ran 11.2.
Enhanced Auto Pilot was sold with no Enhancements whatsoever. In fact, it didn't operate.

To save on battery warranty costs, Tesla could increase the buffer zones (reduce range) and reduce DCFC peak rates on Teslas tomorrow. What percentage of owners would write Tesla a Thank You letter the same day?

 

[diamond.g]

The community got numbers pretty quick to back up Tesla nerfing the Performance S's. Shouldn't be long till we have numbers to prove this one way or another...

 

[AWDtsla]

475Nm and 250kW are the before numbers. Here Let Me Google That For You. Not having my AWD 3 yet I have to rely on you all to do the after run.

View attachment 304099

So 4kW more going from 90% to 98%, with unknown pack temperature? Nothing to see here, so far.

 

[AltLogic]

So it seems everyone is feeling less neck snap. This is probably due to your body and mind learning what to expect. The longer you drive the car the more you will naturally anticipate what happens when you floor it. DragTimes on YouTube dynoed and ran the quarter mile with a Model 3 with Vbox data. I am sure they could get get the info you desire.

 

[AWDtsla]

Yeah, temperature, altitude, and other variables make a difference, but as long as state of charge is above 80%, it should be obvious if the car changed. We aren't looking at the 0-60 time. We are deconstructing the API data into separate torque, max power and other components.

80% is not good enough, especially because where 80% is in real SoC moves around, but also pack temperature often dominates the available power output over SoC. If you guys aren't controlling for that, means nothing. Of course, no Model 3 owner has a battery heat button, so good luck guaranteeing peak power battery temp.

 

[Kenriko]

I also noticed the slowdown. I can guarantee you it's there, by how much? IDK I've not timed a 0-60 post update but I'll try a run later today to see what I find.

 

[Kenriko]

So it seems everyone is feeling less neck snap. This is probably due to your body and mind learning what to expect. The longer you drive the car the more you will naturally anticipate what happens when you floor it. DragTimes on YouTube dynoed and ran the quarter mile with a Model 3 with Vbox data. I am sure they could get get the info you desire.

I generally floor it from every light because I have Nitto NT555 tires which the car can't spin at all. It was a sudden and noticeable difference off the line post update, maybe they just tweaked the torque curve and it's the same 0-60 IDK but it certainly is different.