Daniel in SD
(supervised)
I do too! I'm trying my best to explain my thinking.Honestly, Daniel, I prefer to rely on on my own thinking and training.
That is absolutely correct. Technically it takes approximately 0hp accelerate from 0mph. HP = Torque x RPM ÷ 5252. So it takes twice as much horsepower to generate the same torque at twice the speed. I was talking about the torque required to spin the tires not horsepower. Torque is proportional to the force at the wheels. It takes the same force at the wheels to get them to slip no matter the speed. You can observe this from braking times and distances. It takes the same amount of time go from 30-0mph as it does to go from 60-30mph (though three times the distance). So if you're not spinning the tires with the torque you produce at 40mph the same torque at 0mph will also not spin the tires. Even if the aerodynamic drag were significant (which it clearly can't be given the Tesla's range) it would not change this. Applying a a force to the front of the car does not change how much traction it has.1.It takes significantly more hp to accelerate at the same rate from 40 mph than it does from 0 mph due to air and mechanical rolling resistance, enough to make a difference on when you can chirp the tires or not.
On this I think we agree. The P models produce more torque/hp. The Model 3 does not produce enough torque to the wheels to spin the tires. The original poster's question was, why? Which is a good question given competitors cars with similar 0-60 times can do it easily. I've been trying my best to answer that question.2. And this is the point of my posting in this thread - the power modules on the basic S models use lower rated and less efficient CMOS inverters, and hence take a moment to deliver full torque to the wheels when you punch the throttle unlike the P models. Likely the same for the Model 3, which could explain less wheel spin.