Sub 3 seconds for Model 3 DL

[Red Sage]

Someone gives a reasoned prediction on battery sizes and acceleration and are threatened with ignore and told they're stammering? What is happening?

Actually, I noted that I will not [IGNORE] him (though it is tempting) and predicted he will be stammering about this time next year. His predictions are, in my previously stated opinion, rather pessimistic. If they are reasonable to you, cool. Don't worry though, I'm sure he has already placed me on his own Ignore list.

 

[Red Sage]

I think there will be a performance version upgrade on top of the Dual motor upgrade. With that i bet it will be a "Package" required that boost battery size in order to meet those performance needs. The cost will get quite high and in to Model S price territory. If they can make more money off a loaded model 3 than a base model S, then thats great! Let them become profitable. Its like somebody buying a fully loaded BMW M3, vs a base model 5 series. You are buying the M3 if you want performance in a small sedan, or a 5 series if you want a standard performing car in a larger package! You can have both cars and not cannibalize too much of the other. Things will work out like with most auto manufacturers, where less desireable models and packages go away and lead the way to new options to attract customers.

Yes, but it's a little different at BMW. The base price for the M3 ($64,000) or M4 ($66,200) are higher than the base price for the 5-Series ($60,900). So, you don't even have to max out options on the M3 or M4 to get into the 5-Series price range. I expect the base price for the Tesla Model ☰ in Performance trim to be substantially lower than the base price of the Tesla Model S 60. I'm guessing by at least $15,000 or so. That way, a fully loaded, completely maxed out, optioned to the hilt version of a Tesla Model ☰ P100D might cost about the same as a Model S 75D. And that would be quite a bit less than a fully loaded M3 or M4.

 

[Red Sage]

My understanding is that the bigger the battery, the more energy you can discharge (and charge). The P100DL is heavier, but also faster because you can dump more power into the motors compared to a P90DL.

The Model 3 will not have anywhere near a 100kWh battery, so I don't forsee it beating the S in acceleration. Reduced weight will only get you so far, and the fact that the 3 will have more steel doesn't necessarily mean it'll be that much lighter. Hell, it could be a wash as far as weight goes. Smaller car + heavier materials = larger car + lighter materials. For the record, I do think it'll be lighter, but certainly not the feather people are hyping it up to be.

Aerodynamics also won't affect acceleration much.

Does 90 kWh count as 'near'...? I expect to see a 135 kWh battery pack in the Tesla Model ☰ some day. I foresee the Tesla Model ☰ attaining new heights in terms of both acceleration and top speed well beyond what the Model S has done so far. For many of the same reasons that the Ford GT40 is far more capable than was the Ford Model T. With the passage of time and multiple iterations, technology advances far beyond what may have been considered formidable, or insurmountable limitations at one time. The phrase 'Tesla Generation III' means something.

 

[Tech_Guy]

From what I've heard the S and X will always be the technology leaders for Tesla. They are the premium models with the newest features and the most performance the Model 3 will get the tried and perfected features after they have been perfeted on the S and X so it's definitely going to be a solid car but I doubt they would make it perform better then the S or X.

I'd guess in the 3 second to 60 range for a P85DL Model 3, I doubt it would get a 100KW pack due to many reasons even with the capacity increase from the larger cells. Suffice to say I have my reservation to add a Model 3 to my Tesla family and I will buy the largest battery available which will come with the Performance Dual Motor Ludicrous option.

 

[Garlan Garner]

From what I've heard the S and X will always be the technology leaders for Tesla. They are the premium models with the newest features and the most performance the Model 3 will get the tried and perfected features after they have been perfeted on the S and X so it's definitely going to be a solid car but I doubt they would make it perform better then the S or X.

I'd guess in the 3 second to 60 range for a P85DL Model 3, I doubt it would get a 100KW pack due to many reasons even with the capacity increase from he larger cells. Suffice to say I have my reservation to add a Model 3 to my Tesla family and I will buy the largest battery available which will come with the Performance Dual Motor Ludicrous option.

You are willing to make that statement about a non 100 M3 - 18 months early?

Remember the MS didn't even exist 4 years ago.

 

[Tech_Guy]

As I said that's my guess... You know the saying opinions are like ........ Everyone has one that's mine

 

[Garlan Garner]

As I said that's my guess... You know the saying opinions are like ........ Everyone has one that's mine

gotcha.

 

[JeffK]

From what I've heard the S and X will always be the technology leaders for Tesla. They are the premium models with the newest features and the most performance the Model 3 will get the tried and perfected features after they have been perfeted on the S and X so it's definitely going to be a solid car but I doubt they would make it perform better then the S or X.

I'd guess in the 3 second to 60 range for a P85DL Model 3, I doubt it would get a 100KW pack due to many reasons even with the capacity increase from the larger cells. Suffice to say I have my reservation to add a Model 3 to my Tesla family and I will buy the largest battery available which will come with the Performance Dual Motor Ludicrous option.

Well the comment was meaning that new features are expensive and will appear in the Model S and X first .... it doesn't mean that the Model 3 is somehow crippled to be slower than the S and the X.

I can go without the auto presenting door handles...

 

[Tech_Guy]

Somehow I don't think it would be a smart move for Tesla to make the 3 quicker then the S. Think about it the S and X are the money makers for Tesla, without them you wouldn't have a 3 or the other future models... Also I don't think a 3 second range 0 to 60 would cripple the Model 3 it would be the quickest car in that price range, but I do think a Model 3 that's faster then a Model S would cripple Tesla the company

 

[wallet.dat]

While I'm certain that the S will always have an upgrade option to keep it on top, it's not entirely unreasonable to expect that Tesla might produce a Mod3 that's quicker than previous versions of the S PXXXD.

 

[ohmman]

Somehow I don't think it would be a smart move for Tesla to make the 3 quicker then the S. Think about it the S and X are the money makers for Tesla, without them you wouldn't have a 3 or the other future models... Also I don't think a 3 second range 0 to 60 would cripple the Model 3 it would be the quickest car in that price range, but I do think a Model 3 that's faster then a Model S would cripple Tesla the company

The Model 3 should make more money for Tesla than the Model S. The margins won't be as high, but the volume will be vastly greater. Also, the highly optioned Model 3 is likely to approach the margins that we're seeing on the Model S today. I don't worry about the financial aspect of this. I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla decides to differentiate the S on build options - more "luxury" options, for instance - instead of acceleration alone.

 

[Tech_Guy]

From what I've think I've read in a cost saving move isn't the Model 3 going to be built with more steel vs aluminum or possibly all steel vs the Model S and X and thus will be heavier weight car for its size as well? Please correct me if I'm wrong but I'm pretty sure I read that somewhere...

I still feel a car that's quickest in its category isnt out of the question, for example see people in this thread compareing the Model 3 to the BMW M3, which for example is 3.8 seconds to 60. I see no reason the Model 3 wouldn't be at least 1/2 a second faster then the fastest car in the category 3.2-3.3 to 60 seems about right and that would be about as quick as a non ludicrous P90D Model S...

It's all speculation but that's my theory

 

[3Victoria]

EM has said that Tesla doesn't make slow cars. I think that they will maximize Model 3's speed to the best of their ability. There are many tradeoffs to be made in terms of construction (amount of aluminum, motor size, etc), but batteries and motor efficiency will improve with time. I do not think Tesla will prevent 3's from being faster then S's, but all will depend on options. All their cars will be excellent cars. The new Roadster will probably take the speed crown.

 

[ohmman]

The new Roadster will probably take the speed crown.

At some point, maybe. But that project is shelved, according to Elon at the Gigafactory event.

 

[Red Sage]

Somehow I don't think it would be a smart move for Tesla to make the 3 quicker then the S. Think about it the S and X are the money makers for Tesla, without them you wouldn't have a 3 or the other future models... Also I don't think a 3 second range 0 to 60 would cripple the Model 3 it would be the quickest car in that price range, but I do think a Model 3 that's faster then a Model S would cripple Tesla the company

Tesla Motors will not limit, compromise, cripple, or otherwise gimp the Model ☰ to protect the Model S. There is no viable reason for such an action. People will buy what they want, need, and can afford. AUDI A4 outsells A8 L, BMW 3-Series outsells 7-Series, Jaguar XE will outsell XJ, Lexus IS outsells LS, Mercedes C-Class outsells S-Class. That is by design, on purpose, and fully expected. Those are the cars that pay the bills, keep the lights on, and allow those traditional automobile manufacturers the flow of cash necessary to pursue their true passion with high end vehicles. If Tesla Motors' sub-$40,000 cars were being outsold by their over $66,000 cars that have an average sale price of around $105,000 there would be something seriously wrong. The Model ☰ and other Tesla Generation III vehicles have been the goal of the company for the past ten-plus years. They are not a nuisance or an afterthought, but the very reason the company exists.

Think of it this way... Tesla Motors originally intended to sell something on the order of 15,000 of the Model S per year. At that rate, they sold one-and-a-half years worth of cars in 2013... Then two years worth of cars in 2014... Another three years worth of cars in 2015... And are on a pace to sell four years worth of cars in 2016... So, by the end of this year, only four-and-a-half years into an eight year product cycle, they will have sold over 11 years worth of cars. Don't worry about the Model S. It has done its job.

Because Tesla Motors will not compromise on the Model ☰, come this time of year two years from now, they will have Delivered those cars at a rate to match over 11 years worth of Chevrolet BOLT Production. Remember the Mission. It is better to sell ten Model ☰ with a 12% margin than one Model S with a 25% margin. Even if the Model S were to somehow drop to 'only' 45,000 units per year, that is still three times as much as they had intended to build per annum anyway. It is also far more than Porsche will ever manage with the Panamera, Audi will get out of the A8 L, or BMW can hope for from the 7-Series.

Tesla Motors is WINNING.

 

[Evil.Labrat]

[BOLSHEVIK]. Speed never killed anyone in the entire history of like, EVER, and stuff. Rapid deceleration trauma is what kills people. Ask any coroner, forensic medical examiner, or first responder. In other news: Trees don't move.

Or as Elon might call it Rapid Unscheduled Deceleration.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Somehow I don't think it would be a smart move for Tesla to make the 3 quicker then the S. Think about it the S and X are the money makers for Tesla, without them you wouldn't have a 3 or the other future models... Also I don't think a 3 second range 0 to 60 would cripple the Model 3 it would be the quickest car in that price range, but I do think a Model 3 that's faster then a Model S would cripple Tesla the company

Yes Tech Guy, but the roadster was the money maker before the S and X. The roadster funded the S and the X.

Now the S and X is funding the 3. ( new money maker )

Then the 3 is going to fund the ..........?

 

[JeffK]

Yes Tech Guy, but the roadster was the money maker before the S and X. The roadster funded the S and the X.

Now the S and X is funding the 3. ( new money maker )

Then the 3 is going to fund the ..........?

I don't think they are particularly pricing it to fund something else but the margins are high relative to other automakers so it might be to fund expansion and further development of future models and sustainable transportation. (truck, bus, semi, autonomous submersible car, etc)

 

[Garlan Garner]

I don't think they are particularly pricing it to fund something else but the margins are high relative to other automakers so it might be to fund expansion and further development of future models and sustainable transportation. (truck, bus, semi, autonomous submersible car, etc)

I agree. I've been trying to make this very point on other threads. At least there is another advocate. They are NOT using the M3 to fund anything else. So they don't have to charge the same thing on the M3 that they do on the MS and MX.

 

[Neohippy]

I agree. I've been trying to make this very point on other threads. At least there is another advocate. They are NOT using the M3 to fund anything else. So they don't have to charge the same thing on the M3 that they do on the MS and MX.

This is true but I'm sure investors want to finally see some profit margins. Most options are not not overpriced. I sure hope ludicrous isn't 10k though.