SR now 215 mile range, 0-60 in 5.1 (AWD?)

[JPUConn]

Lol right?

Just make the darn SR RWD please. I will still pay $46,000. I just don’t need the long range battery for my driving habits/needs. (Also would stretch me more thin financially to have to pay $3375-$5250 (adjusted after tax credits) extra for LR)

If you’re looking for that spec I’d seriously consider the LR that you can order now. $9k for 95 additional miles range becomes $5,250 for that much more range. The LR should easily demand a $5k resale difference over the SR in future so if you can swing it now it’s a wash.

On the S it’s $19,500 to get 76 miles more range 75D to 100D. Model X is $16,500 to get 58 miles. Factoring the additional $3,750 by getting it this year it makes the LR model 3 quite compelling if you’re already planning to get premium interior and AWD.

Atleast this was my thought process that convinced me to config a LR AWD instead of waiting in SR AWD.

 

[banned-66611]

$5k for 95 miles range is reasonable, in line with other manufacturers. The S and X have always been cash cows for battery size.

 

[ChrisH]

If you’re looking for that spec I’d seriously consider the LR that you can order now. $9k for 95 additional miles range becomes $5,250 for that much more range. The LR should easily demand a $5k resale difference over the SR in future so if you can swing it now it’s a wash.

On the S it’s $19,500 to get 76 miles more range 75D to 100D. Model X is $16,500 to get 58 miles. Factoring the additional $3,750 by getting it this year it makes the LR model 3 quite compelling if you’re already planning to get premium interior and AWD.

Atleast this was my thought process that convinced me to config a LR AWD instead of waiting in SR AWD.

Yeah I wish I could. Based on info early on I had always planned to get an SR in the spring based on our finances and work situation and such. Want to be smart even if my heart and brain are telling me to order an LR now.

 

[gregincal]

It said 215 at the time of my posting. They updated it to 215-220 which appears to be RWD vs AWD

That's a big assumption. I figured it was 18 vs 19" wheels.

 

[Knightshade]

Also one important factor here, all of them measure with 1 foot rollout, which can easily mean .3s on a 0-60 time. Even a car with an initial average acceleration of 1.2g it takes 0.23s for the first foot. And that's already P100D territory (which takes 0.24s for that first foot).

Since most car manufacturers don't use the foot rollout, when giving 0-60 and even Tesla only really uses it for their top vehicles, I wouldn't call 5.1, instead of 4.9 and a bit, too much sandbagging.

Sure, being below 5 might make the AWD car seem even more attractive, than "just" being 10% quicker, but still that's cosmetics.

Yeah that's why I wasn't surprised by the 4.8 Motortrend got... that's pretty consistent with a 5-5.1 second no-rollout result.

Whereas the 4.4 was pretty obviously shaky testing.

The P, if Tesla is consistent with their S/X specs, will be 3.5 with rollout- meaning nearer 3.7-3.8 without it.... and if they stay consistent for the AWD (that is, they don't use rollout except for P) that means you're looking at 4.2-4.3 with roll out.

We won't know till the pro testers get their hands on both though.

 

[Thomas Edison]

Flat road, single male driver, average weight (approx. 175 lbs), loves long walks on the beach and Michael Bublé .

 

[jsmay311]

334 miles range, down-rated (at Tesla's request) by EPA to 310 miles range.
The AWD and Performance models probably reduce range by 8 miles.

If it's only reduced by 8 miles I will be pleasantly stunned.

The adjusted city cycle test results had AWD with a city range of 318.7 miles (455.3*0.7). That's 28 miles less than the RWD city cycle range. (495-455)*0.7=28
Model 3 AWD / Performance - lower UDDS Range!

In order for the AWD combined adjusted range to be only 8 miles less than RWD, AWD will have to be MORE efficient than RWD on the highway cycle by ~5%, which seems unlikely based on what we know.

( If AWD combined range = 326 miles, then 326 = 318.7 * 0.55 + AWD_Highway * 0.45 --> AWD_Highway = 335 miles. And RWD _Highway = 318 miles)

 

[turtlesz]

If you’re looking for that spec I’d seriously consider the LR that you can order now. $9k for 95 additional miles range becomes $5,250 for that much more range. The LR should easily demand a $5k resale difference over the SR in future so if you can swing it now it’s a wash.

On the S it’s $19,500 to get 76 miles more range 75D to 100D. Model X is $16,500 to get 58 miles. Factoring the additional $3,750 by getting it this year it makes the LR model 3 quite compelling if you’re already planning to get premium interior and AWD.

Atleast this was my thought process that convinced me to config a LR AWD instead of waiting in SR AWD.

Totally agree with with advice. If your looking for a loaded 3, do not skip LR. With the full federal tax rebate you are basically getting a discount and the resale of the LR would be better even years down the line. If you still think the 5k for 95 extra miles is too much of a financial strech then the SR is also too much of a financial stretch. New cars depreciate fast and are never good investments. Getting a used Tesla after much of the depreciation has occurred is probably a better decision from a purely financial perspective.