Trickle down effect (M3P at 3.3 0-60)

[Linkeds2]

so since there’s now an official increase in the performance M3 from 3.5 to 3.3 seconds. What’s the likelihood of us AWD and RWD (non MR) owners getting some trickle down performance boost?

There’s obvious evidence that RWD can get below 5.1 seconds and NON P AWD is unproven. So since there’s an even bigger gap, is there a likelihood for Tesla to boost AWD and RWD 0-60 numbers to incentivize upgrading once the cheaper models release?

 

[brianman]

official increase in the performance M3 from 3.5 to 3.3 seconds

increase in advertised performance

 

[JeffK]

exactly... there's no actual performance increase.

 

[Big Earl]

It was always 3.3 seconds, even when they told you it was 3.5. Just like the AWD is closer to 4.2 than the advertised 4.5, so maybe they’ll give you an increase in the advertised numbers if you ask nicely.

 

[JeffK]

Depends how you measure it, but yeah.

Actual 0-60 mph remains 3.5 seconds (as measured by something like Dragy)
0-60 mph not counting the time for rollout is 3.3 seconds. (as measured by something like vbox, etc)

 

[Garlan Garner]

It was always 3.3 seconds, even when they told you it was 3.5. Just like the AWD is closer to 4.2 than the advertised 4.5, so maybe they’ll give you an increase in the advertised numbers if you ask nicely.

I got to 3.1 0-60 at the autobon race track in Joliet Il last Friday. ( Standard everything in my P3D+ )

 

[Linkeds2]

increase in advertised performance

This is what I was thinking. It was obvious that performance was getting better than 3.5. But now that they’ve reflected it in advertised numbers instead of gimping like they did with RWD (supposedly), are they gonna treat RWD and AWD the same?

And by that I mean, keep AWD performance and advertise it as 4.1 as stated above. And then improve RWD from 5.1 to 4.9 as we know they can achieve?

 

[JeffK]

It was obvious that performance was getting better than 3.5.

It's not getting terribly better than 3.5 seconds though. Only when you subtract rollout.

 

[JeffK]

Here's a great example of people thinking they are getting "well ahead of Tesla's estimates"

check 4:30

Vbox is telling him that he is getting 4.7 (4.66) seconds in the LR RWD version vs Tesla's stated 5.1 seconds (because it's subtracting rollout).

But then look at the graph at 4:56 which clearly shows it really hit 60 mph in around 5.1 seconds.

 

[Zoomit]

Depends how you measure it, but yeah.

Actual 0-60 mph remains 3.5 seconds (as measured by something like Dragy)
0-60 mph not counting the time for rollout is 3.3 seconds. (as measured by something like vbox, etc)

Dragy is now reporting out both 0-60 and 0-60 (1ft) times, presumably to help people recognize and understand the difference in the measurements. There have been a number of 3.4sec 0-60 and 3.2sec 0-60 (1ft) runs reported.

 

[JeffK]

Dragy is now reporting out both 0-60 and 0-60 (1ft) times, presumably to help people recognize and understand the difference in the measurements. There have been a number of 3.4sec 0-60 and 3.2sec 0-60 (1ft) runs reported.

Sweet! I saw that Dragy had an update but I haven't gone back out with it since.

 

[Zoomit]

It looks like all the past 0-60 and 0-130 runs are reporting both with and without 1ft rollout, so they obviously just went back in the data and extracted the rollout metric.

 

[Linkeds2]

So if Tesla’s reported numbers are made with a 1ft rollout, does that mean that the RWD and AWD variants that haven’t had changes include that 1ft rollout, or no?

 

[JeffK]

So if Tesla’s reported numbers are made with a 1ft rollout, does that mean that the RWD and AWD variants that haven’t had changes include that 1ft rollout, or no?

Tesla reports all of their performance models subtracting the one foot rollout, the non performance models are all reported as real 0-60 times. Model 3 performance was previously advertised with the real time instead of the time without rollout.

 

[Knightshade]

This is what I was thinking. It was obvious that performance was getting better than 3.5. But now that they’ve reflected it in advertised numbers instead of gimping like they did with RWD (supposedly), are they gonna treat RWD and AWD the same?

And by that I mean, keep AWD performance and advertise it as 4.1 as stated above. And then improve RWD from 5.1 to 4.9 as we know they can achieve?

No.

The P was never getting much better than 3.5 real 0-60, only with roll-out and/or on race trackswere peple getting 3.3s and 3.2s.

Likewise the RWD was never getting much better than 5.1 real 0-60, but the car mags using rollout were posting up 4.8s

And likewise the AWD is 4.5 in real life, or 4.2-4.3 in magazine/rollout land.


Tesla has always advertised P models with rollout times and non-P models without. Which honestly is pretty deceptive, but it makes the P models look better to encourage people to spend more.

The fact they advertised the non-rollout time on the P for the model 3 for a while was an anomaly they have now reversed. No actual performance has changed, and nothing has been "gimped"