There are several different sets of numbers floating around regarding the comparative power of the three currently produced versions of the Model 3.
Among these are:
Inverter Size (primarily reddit/forum "experts")
RWD - 800W rear
AWD - 500W rear and 500W front (1000W total)
AWD-P - 800W rear and 500 W front (1300W total)
HP (autoweek and other professional first drive reviews)
RWD - 271 hp
AWD - 346 hp
AWD-P - 450 hp
0-60 times (Tesla)
RWD - 5.1s
AWD - 4.5s
AWD-P - 3.5s
There is also the motor power (and resulting calculated hp) listed by the EPA, but the huge jump of the AWD compared to the RWD, and the tiny difference between AWD and AWD-P really doesn't align with any other source of data.
Soo.. given that I am still likely months away from getting my car, and having nothing better to do, I dumped them all into excel to see how well the numbers agree with each other. There are all kinds of problems with my analysis, so I would never throw around words like "scientific" or "rigorous", but it feels about right for sitting on the sofa in front of the TV.
First, I created a table with all of the information, and added curb weights to calculate a power-to-weight ratio (based on the "autoweek" hp numbers). Then, I broke out two smaller tables, each with the data normalized to the RWD values so I could easily graph them. Each of the two smaller tables gets a graph.
The first small table compares the reported hp to the idea that the RWD and AWD-P have the same rear inverter, the AWD and AWD-P have the same front inverter, and the AWD has a smaller rear inverter. Without breaking out r-squared values or other things that people who wear glasses understand, I'd say that they look pretty close! The two data sources do not contradict each other.
The second small table compares the inverse of 0-60 times to power-to-weight ratios. Are these units even comparable? Who knows. But the bars cluster together pretty nicely - if anything they make the dual motor cars look like they are sandbagging a few tenths.
In summary, I'm bored. Where is my car?
Among these are:
Inverter Size (primarily reddit/forum "experts")
RWD - 800W rear
AWD - 500W rear and 500W front (1000W total)
AWD-P - 800W rear and 500 W front (1300W total)
HP (autoweek and other professional first drive reviews)
RWD - 271 hp
AWD - 346 hp
AWD-P - 450 hp
0-60 times (Tesla)
RWD - 5.1s
AWD - 4.5s
AWD-P - 3.5s
There is also the motor power (and resulting calculated hp) listed by the EPA, but the huge jump of the AWD compared to the RWD, and the tiny difference between AWD and AWD-P really doesn't align with any other source of data.
Soo.. given that I am still likely months away from getting my car, and having nothing better to do, I dumped them all into excel to see how well the numbers agree with each other. There are all kinds of problems with my analysis, so I would never throw around words like "scientific" or "rigorous", but it feels about right for sitting on the sofa in front of the TV.
First, I created a table with all of the information, and added curb weights to calculate a power-to-weight ratio (based on the "autoweek" hp numbers). Then, I broke out two smaller tables, each with the data normalized to the RWD values so I could easily graph them. Each of the two smaller tables gets a graph.
The first small table compares the reported hp to the idea that the RWD and AWD-P have the same rear inverter, the AWD and AWD-P have the same front inverter, and the AWD has a smaller rear inverter. Without breaking out r-squared values or other things that people who wear glasses understand, I'd say that they look pretty close! The two data sources do not contradict each other.
The second small table compares the inverse of 0-60 times to power-to-weight ratios. Are these units even comparable? Who knows. But the bars cluster together pretty nicely - if anything they make the dual motor cars look like they are sandbagging a few tenths.
In summary, I'm bored. Where is my car?
