Why incorrect 0-60 for M3LR ?

[Camedia]

Hi, am a new M3LR owner and have been reading a lot on these forums. First post!

Seems people believe that Tesla artificially reports slower times for the AWD version - 4.4 vs here people are saying 4.0 before the boost.

My question is simply why would they do that? They emphasize the 4.4 again in the acceleration upgrade to 3.9 but people are saying its actually 3.5.

Just seems hard to believe they artificially report inaccurately slow numbers for the LR to show a greater spread w the Performance? Is it just a mistake or really intentional? Just seems they lose more than they gain by being inaccurate on purpose.

 

[Tdriver]

They have to guarantee what is stated from every car they produce so its safer to understate the figures. If you agree to buy the car at a certain 0-60 time and it turns out better.....who won't like that.

 

[Knightshade]

Hi, am a new M3LR owner and have been reading a lot on these forums. First post!

Seems people believe that Tesla artificially reports slower times for the AWD version - 4.4 vs here people are saying 4.0 before the boost.

3.9 actually- it was 4.0 before the last free 5% bump.

Note these times include 1' rollout. Tesla historically (and dishonestly since nobody else does this) reports times WITH rollout for P models, and WITHOUT it for everything else.

My question is simply why would they do that? They emphasize the 4.4 again in the acceleration upgrade to 3.9 but people are saying its actually 3.5.

Because they want you to think the gap between the P and everything else is larger than it is, so you spend more on a P.

They've been doing the same for years and years on the S and X.

Is it just a mistake or really intentional? Just seems they lose more than they gain by being inaccurate on purpose.

It's super intentional.

They even used to specifically call out that they measured them differently back in the P85 days, but have since removed even the * disclaimer notice admitting to that fact.


Weirdly, they very briefly did NOT do this for the 3 when it first came out.

The P was listed at 3.5 and the AWD at 4.5... both (roughly) accurate WITHOUT rollout.

Then a few months later the P magically dropped to 3.3 with no actual changes to the vehicle. Because they began listing it with rollout (while still not including it for other versions).

That later dropped to 3.2 on the web (as the AWD did to 4.4) after one of the free 5% power bumps.

 

[Camedia]

Thank you Knightshade and Tdriver

But don’t they run the risk of people not buying the M3LR bc of the slower times? Yes maybe they get a few more people buying the P but could easily lose more customers for the LR.

Just seems really odd to purposely mislead potential customers. That’s why I sort of hope its just a mistake.

 

[holmgang]

Thank you Knightshade and Tdriver

But don’t they run the risk of people not buying the M3LR bc of the slower times? Yes maybe they get a few more people buying the P but could easily lose more customers for the LR.

Just seems really odd to purposely mislead potential customers. That’s why I sort of hope its just a mistake.

4.4 for all purposes and in all context is already a tremendously good time.

 

[Gasaraki]

Thank you Knightshade and Tdriver

But don’t they run the risk of people not buying the M3LR bc of the slower times? Yes maybe they get a few more people buying the P but could easily lose more customers for the LR.

Just seems really odd to purposely mislead potential customers. That’s why I sort of hope its just a mistake.

Doesn't make sense that someone would not buy the LR AWD because it's too slow? What other car can do "4.4 sec" and have AWD for $47,000?

Some ICE manufacturers understate their HP rating all the time.

 

[Camedia]

For sure 4.4 is v fast, fastest car I’ve ever had. My logic is simply like pricing, every few pennies matters to somebody.

I’m just struggling accepting that they’d report slower than actual times on purpose. But I hear the point about pushing people to P. Just seems v unusual.

 

[Knightshade]

For sure 4.4 is v fast, fastest car I’ve ever had. My logic is simply like pricing, every few pennies matters to somebody.

I’m just struggling accepting that they’d report slower than actual times on purpose. But I hear the point about pushing people to P. Just seems v unusual.

Unless you can find some comparable cheaper, quicker, cars, how are they losing anything to other buyers?

Besides, folks REALLY pinching pennies are getting an SR or SR+ anyway.

 

[run-the-joules]

For sure 4.4 is v fast, fastest car I’ve ever had. My logic is simply like pricing, every few pennies matters to somebody.

I’m just struggling accepting that they’d report slower than actual times on purpose. But I hear the point about pushing people to P. Just seems v unusual.

It's also noteworthy as possibly the only thing in history where Tesla has underpromised and overdelivered.

 

[Camedia]

Run-the-joules - hilarious! One more reason why it’s a bit hard to believe they did it on purpose Guess we’ll never know unless they change it.

Do other car companies do the same? For example, is the 911 Carrera reported 4.0 real or is it similarly faster?

 

[1.21GW]

Advertising to drive sales of more expensive versions.

/thread

 

[run-the-joules]

Run-the-joules - hilarious! One more reason why it’s a bit hard to believe they did it on purpose Guess we’ll never know unless they change it.

Do other car companies do the same? For example, is the 911 Carrera reported 4.0 real or is it similarly faster?

Porsche, possibly more than any other manufacturer, is known for under-reporting the performance of their cars.

 

[Knightshade]

Run-the-joules - hilarious! One more reason why it’s a bit hard to believe they did it on purpose Guess we’ll never know unless they change it.

Do other car companies do the same? For example, is the 911 Carrera reported 4.0 real or is it similarly faster?

it's faster.

BUT the difference is- Porsche (and everyone OTHER than Tesla AFAIK) is actually honest- in that they use the same method to measure all their cars.


Typically german companies measure ALL their cars without rollout, and report them as such (which is why they tend to beat those numbers when tested by american car magazines who test WITH rollout).

American car companies (that aren't Tesla) measure ALL their cars WITH rollout, and report them as such (which is why they tend to be closer to car mag tests)


but in all those cases you can at least reasonably fairly compare different models from the SAME company using that companies numbers.

Not so Tesla.

See below for image from the P85 where they used to at least be honest enough admit they were measuring differently for the P.

 

[Saturday]

it's faster.

BUT the difference is- Porsche (and everyone OTHER than Tesla AFAIK) is actually honest- in that they use the same method to measure all their cars.


Typically german companies measure ALL their cars without rollout, and report them as such (which is why they tend to beat those numbers when tested by american car magazines who test WITH rollout).

American car companies (that aren't Tesla) measure ALL their cars WITH rollout, and report them as such (which is why they tend to be closer to car mag tests)


but in all those cases you can at least reasonably fairly compare different models from the SAME company using that companies numbers.

Not so Tesla.

See below for image from the P85 where they used to at least be honest enough admit they were measuring differently for the P.

View attachment 561777

Wait I'm confused.

Does your own posted table from Current real world 0-60 times vs. advertised for all models contradict what you're saying? The M3P with rollout is around 3.0 and the M3P without is 3.2 as stated by Tesla?

 

[Knightshade]

Wait I'm confused.

Does your own posted table from Current real world 0-60 times vs. advertised for all models contradict what you're saying? The M3P with rollout is around 3.0 and the M3P without is 3.2 as stated by Tesla?

Not really... they just stopped updating the online chart it seems.


History as I recall it:


At launch of Model 3 P/AWD:


P is 3.5, AWD is 4.5. Both of these (a first for Tesla to measure both the same way) were without rollout.

Then a few months later I guess someone realized they'd done that- and suddenly the P was 3.3 with no actual change- because they'd switched back to the deceptive double-measurement system. So P was listed 3.3 with rollout, AWD was 4.5 without it.

Then the first 5% update and they bumped P to 3.2, and AWD to 4.4.... (real world magazine testing showed both cars at 3.1 and 4.0 respectively if you included rollout- so Tesla was slightly underrating the P here and massively underrating the AWD in comparison)


And that's where we are today.

After the second 5% bump they didn't change the times on anything despite it knocking at least .1 off both vehicles (roughly 3 flat on the P, 3.9 on AWD, both with rollout)

(there was some speculation they were waiting for real #s on the next-gen M3 before updating 'official' listed times I think but Tesla being Tesla it could be the one internal IT guy in the whole company just forgot to do it )

 

[TomT]

It's the old saw: Under-promise and over-deliver.

My question is simply why would they do that? They emphasize the 4.4 again in the acceleration upgrade to 3.9 but people are saying its actually 3.5.