Separate names with a comma.
TMC Connect 2016, the Official Conference of Tesla Motors Club will take place on July 28-30 in Reno, Nevada. Register now.
Discussion in 'Model S' started by Mycroft, Jun 25, 2011.
For those wanting a Model S, are you needing the sport/performance option?
I would love to get a sport model but if they don't offer it at launch, it probably won't be for another year before they get around to it. I really don't see why it can't be done at launch or included with the Signature Series (maybe as an option).
I'm sure hoping the option is there at launch. That would be so awesome!
If I could have the Roadster too, then the regular 300 mile sedan would be fine for me. But sans Roadster, I want some juice!
Depends, depends, depends. Depends on how much, how fast, and what else is on the market. Right now, I am leasing the Roadster until I buy the Model S, but... I might just switch out the (2nd car) Lexus LS460 for the Model S, and keep the Roadster until they have a Model S "Sport." But all those decisions depend on what the marketplace looks like at the time I need to make the decision.
You need a faster 0-60 than 5.6 seconds?
I have never seen a sport option defined.
What exactly is it that you want in a sport/performance option?
From the poll so far, it looks like the majority is happy with 5.6 seconds. And frankly, if the test drive come February WOWs me, then I agree, the sport package may not be that important.
Why not? A good a guess as any.
0-60 in 4.4s was considered a target.
Check this out:
MODEL S - Sport 0-60 in 4.4s? AWD options? | Forums | Tesla Motors
Elon Musk mentioned having goals for a performance version with acceleration in that range as recently as April this year. (Didn't mention AWD, though). No target date given.
The easiest way for a sport is a smaller drivetrain in the front (150kW is enough) for better recuperation while offering 4-Wheel drive. This drivetrain could be used later in the bluestar model.
I don't think that developing another drivetrain and the system to control 2 of them would necessarily qualify as the easiest. That sounds complex to me.
In the Roadster acceleration is PEM/motor limited until about 50mph, above that it is battery power limited.
If the Model S is similar, then there isnt a lot of extra battery power for the 2nd drivetrain except below 50mph, so just adding another one may not improve performance at all above 50mph.
I am completely happy with Roadster 0-50, its the 50-100 that needs improving to run with supercars.
Adding a 2nd powertrain will give you the AWD you want, but its not clear that it is the best path to improved performance.
The extra weight just hurts you when you are battery limited.
The "easiest" way to improve performance is to reduce the weight of the car. That improves performance at every speed.
The 300-mile battery is 70% bigger than the Roadster-battery, so theoretically it should be able to prove about 70% more power too. That is just about exactly 150kW...
by adding AWD you increase the acceleration within the lower speed-range (up to 50mph). the roadster has a 1/3 front 2/3 rear, this helps a lot for single drive. Hope, Model S is better balanced like 45%/55%. Then only AWD helps to improve acceleration.
No one needs anything that fast of course but no one needs the Roadster's speed too. I just think it would be a smart thing financially for Tesla to offer it at launch as an option. Would be a lot of fun too.
While there is a market for a Model S sport or AWD, I think Tesla would be wise to keep it simple and first get "standard" Model S production going in a reliable fashion. It will be tough enough to get that right time wise but also financially. Let's remember this is Tesla's second model and the first one coming of a production line.
300 miles is OK, but doesn't get you from San Francisco to Los Angeles (need 400 for that).
Once you get to 500, Range Anxiety becomes as extinct as a Dodo bird.
Once you get to 600 you don't even have to worry about a quick charging infrastructure and the whole hybrid thing will have fulfilled its technology bridge purpose.
I agree smorgasbord, once the range is 500 and the price is < $40k, we're going to see a revolution.
For me, 300 is a nice sweet spot. On the rare occasions that we need more than that, perhaps once a year, I know several people who would love to trade cars for that period. :biggrin:
The 2011 Corvette ZR1 is RWD with 51% front / 49% rear and has a 3.4 second 0-60 with ridiculous 335 width rear tires.
The BMW 550i is RWD 50/50 and has a 4.8 second 0-60 with little 275 width tires in the back.
The Lexus LFA is RWD 48/52 and has a 3.6 second 0-60 with 305 width rear tires.
Having more weight on the drive wheels helps you get maximum traction out of your tires, so you can accelerate hard with smaller tires, but I dont think it is necessary at all to have AWD to improve the 0-60 time.
Of course AWD will give you better acceleration when wet and your tires cannot achieve maximum traction, and it helps you corner hard on a racetrack.