Will the Model 3 be Ludicrously Fast?

[justthemessenger]

Several publications have indicated that the primary motor in the Model 3 will be the secondary motor already used in the Model S and Model X. Crain Communications is a pretty big outfit, and today, Automotive News released this:
Tesla plans to borrow from the Model S and Model X to speed the Model 3 to market. For instance, the company already has a motor in its parts bin that produces a suitable 257 hp. (The dual-motor Model S 70D and 85D use one over each axle.) An updated version of that motor will power the Model 3.

http://www.autonews.com/article/201...a-will-make-a-mass-market-shift#disqus_thread
I don't see a 257HP motor base Model 3 with more steel and less exotic components getting to 60 in much under 5 seconds.
They also wrote: The base car will have one motor, but buyers will be able to pay more for a dual-motor awd setup.
The dual motor version will be faster, and you can look at the difference in 0-60 times for the Model S vehicles that use it, like the 70D vs. the 70.
Of course, there are faster versions of the Model S than the 70D, but what would be the point of a $60,000 Model 3?

 

[McHoffa]

Of course, there are faster versions of the Model S than the 70D, but what would be the point of a $60,000 Model 3?

To have almost Model S P90D performance for $60k instead of $130k?

 

[shrspeedblade]

I just hope that tesla remembers something that makes the M3 great is RWD and delivers a hi performance version in the model 3. Making it AWD or vanilla like the current S would really suck.

 

[MassModel3]

I just hope that tesla remembers something that makes the M3 great is RWD and delivers a hi performance version in the model 3. Making it AWD or vanilla like the current S would really suck.

It seems to me that the general consensus of the forums is that the dual motor Tesla is a more desirable vehicle, but I'd guess that's mostly due to the increased acceleration and the increased range the second motor provides. From a "feel of the road" perspective, some people say they prefer the feel of driving RWD, but for safety, acceleration, and range, give me the dual motor. Honestly, I probably couldn't tell the difference in FWD, RWD, or AWD under most conditions, and neither will most buyers.

And without a doubt, there will be a version of the 3 with the Ludicrous button, but it'll cost ya.

 

[Caligula]

It seems to me that the general consensus of the forums is that the dual motor Tesla is a more desirable vehicle, but I'd guess that's mostly due to the increased acceleration and the increased range the second motor provides. From a "feel of the road" perspective, some people say they prefer the feel of driving RWD, but for safety, acceleration, and range, give me the dual motor. Honestly, I probably couldn't tell the difference in FWD, RWD, or AWD under most conditions, and neither will most buyers.

And without a doubt, there will be a version of the 3 with the Ludicrous button, but it'll cost ya.

Having blown the tires off of a P85+ on a slightly damp freeway onramp, and doing the same sans wheel spin in my S85D, I can attest to the awesomeness of the added traction in all but dry conditions on quality roadway.

 

[SΞXY P100D]

The BMW M3 does 0-60 in 3.9s. A performance version of Tesla Model 3 ought to beat that.

 

[favo]

The BMW M3 does 0-60 in 3.9s. A performance version of Tesla Model 3 ought to beat that.

I'm pretty sure Elon will insist on having a Performance version that beats all of the competition (except maybe whatever top-of-the-line Model S is shipping at the time). I was thinking maybe 3.5s. There will surely be a large number of folks who will be willing to pay extra for it.

 

[Colsla]

A lot of people here seem to be very certain that there will be Ludicrous mode for Model 3.

My assumption is that it will be one of the features that will be exclusive to Model S/X.

That is of course if Tesla doesnt offer any faster launch upgrades between now and the time Model 3 is out.

 

[ProphetM]

A lot of people here seem to be very certain that there will be Ludicrous mode for Model 3.

My assumption is that it will be one of the features that will be exclusive to Model S/X.

That is of course if Tesla doesnt offer any faster launch upgrades between now and the time Model 3 is out.

I think a lot of us are operating under the assumption that they will try to make the best car that they can for the money. Given that ludicrous mode would undoubtedly be one of the tippy-top options on the highest-end model, it wouldn't factor in to their $35,000 base price goal. So the only real impediment to them doing it is cost - will it be so costly that they won't be able to sell it even at the very top end? Most people I think would probably say no.

The alternate point of view is that they will intentionally make the Model 3 less of a car that it can be, just to differentiate it from the Model S. That's something a traditional car company might do, but it doesn't really seem to fit in with Tesla's goals, IMO. They need the Model 3 to blow the doors off any comparable ICE car. Whether it also beats the Model S is irrelevant. They don't need to protect the S because upselling to it is not part of the plan.

 

[Colsla]

The alternate point of view is that they will intentionally make the Model 3 less of a car that it can be, just to differentiate it from the Model S. That's something a traditional car company might do, but it doesn't really seem to fit in with Tesla's goals, IMO. They need the Model 3 to blow the doors off any comparable ICE car. Whether it also beats the Model S is irrelevant. They don't need to protect the S because upselling to it is not part of the plan.

I believe even the base model will be able to beat its competitors i.e. lowest end of bmw 3 series easy and that will already be enough to beat the competition. It's just hard to imagine model 3 being as good as lots of people say it will be.. I guess it will be one hell of a car haha

 

[Tedkidd]

Last year, before the Tesla 'D' Event, Elon Musk said that people on the internet were on the right track, but had misjudged the magnitude of what they had to show.

I believe that people are doing the same with Model ≡. Some are literally predicting that the rear wheel drive base version will be no more powerful than a BMW 320i. Just a neat little runabout that is affordable and relatively efficient due to electric drive. Effectively, nothing more than a Camry LE, with rear wheel drive. It is that notion that my 'Ugh.' above was about.

No.

Elon has repeatedly said that their cars must be compelling, better than all the other cars on offer, or no one would have a reason to buy them.

That sentiment has been echoed by JB Straubel, who says that more than anything else, they want to make sure all their cars are fun to drive.

People both here and at the Tesla Motors forum told me that I was being 'Over-the-Top Optimistic' when I theorized that a version of Model ≡ might have dual 250 HP motors, 500 HP combined, paired with at least an 85 kWh battery pack, and that it would be priced similarly to the BMW 335i. They said I was out of my mind when I suggested that the base version of Model ≡ would probably use a refined version of the ~300 HP rear motor from the Model S 60, which would be discontinued ahead of the release of Generation III vehicles, and that the smallest capacity battery pack would be at least 60 kWh for a range approaching 250 miles. I now suspect that even that specification may be seriously short of what Tesla will actually unleash upon the automotive world.

So, yeah... This is a rather touchy subject for me. I honestly believe that Tesla Motors intends to utterly astonish the world with what the Model ≡ can do. They want to prove that all the Naysayers, every single one, is absolutely, thoroughly, and completely, 100% incorrect.

+1. Probably guilty of confirmation bias.

 

[ScepticMatt]

I think Tesla will have a high ASP version of the 3 at launch, maybe even at first like they did on S/X.
Makes sense to keep revenue high during demand constraints.

 

[Yggdrasill]

I think Tesla will have a high ASP version of the 3 at launch, maybe even at first like they did on S/X.
Makes sense to keep revenue high during demand constraints.

Agree. I think pretty much the only way Tesla will be able to offer an attractive Model 3 at 35k USD is by cutting the profit margin to the bone, and then making up for that by taking out more margin on higher priced versions. I wouldn't even completely rule out that the 35k USD model 3 would be eliminated, just like the 40 kWh Model S, if demand is sufficient for higher spec Model 3.

From Tesla's perspective, this is completely in line with their objectives. If they have no problem selling 500k Model 3 at 50-70k USD, Tesla can (and should) take those profits and roll them into the Gigafactory 2 as well as a new car factory.

 

[S'toon]

Agree. I think pretty much the only way Tesla will be able to offer an attractive Model 3 at 35k USD is by cutting the profit margin to the bone, and then making up for that by taking out more margin on higher priced versions. I wouldn't even completely rule out that the 35k USD model 3 would be eliminated, just like the 40 kWh Model S, if demand is sufficient for higher spec Model 3.

From Tesla's perspective, this is completely in line with their objectives. If they have no problem selling 500k Model 3 at 50-70k USD, Tesla can (and should) take those profits and roll them into the Gigafactory 2 as well as a new car factory.

I disagree. Tesla and Musk have stated time and again that the Model 3 is the the car for the masses with a price of $35,000. It would completely destroy their reputation if they don't make a car for the masses with a price of $35,000.

 

[Yggdrasill]

I disagree. Tesla and Musk have stated time and again that the Model 3 is the the car for the masses with a price of $35,000. It would completely destroy their reputation if they don't make a car for the masses with a price of $35,000.

It depends on how it's done. No one is up in arms because Tesla failed to meet it's promise of a $50k starting price for the Model S. The reason why no one is upset is because the more expensive versions stole the attention. And the same thing could easily happen again, once the Model 3 lauches, no one will be paying much attention to the base version. Everyone will be testing the P80D Ludicrous.

If Tesla then allows all the people holding a reservation at launch to spec out a $35k Model 3 if they want, and then quietly terminate that version, saying "there was no demand - only 5% chose this version", hardly anyone will notice, or care. Looking into the past: Tesla Kills The $50,000 Model S, Makes The Media The Fools Of April

 

[Stretch2727]

My bet is a $35K RWD, 0-60 in 6 secs with a $70K AWD Ludicrous Mode Fully Optioned Car.

 

[electracity]

I don't see Tesla going after the ludicrous level performance in a steel car with a small battery. A six second base car and a four second performance model 3 should be plenty good enough.

I would prefer Tesla making a $45K aluminum base car. I'm curious what Tesla will be able to do with a steel model 3.

 

[Vger]

Several publications have indicated that the primary motor in the Model 3 will be the secondary motor already used in the Model S and Model X. Crain Communications is a pretty big outfit, and today, Automotive News released this:
Tesla plans to borrow from the Model S and Model X to speed the Model 3 to market. For instance, the company already has a motor in its parts bin that produces a suitable 257 hp. (The dual-motor Model S 70D and 85D use one over each axle.) An updated version of that motor will power the Model 3.

http://www.autonews.com/article/201...a-will-make-a-mass-market-shift#disqus_thread
I don't see a 257HP motor base Model 3 with more steel and less exotic components getting to 60 in much under 5 seconds.
They also wrote: The base car will have one motor, but buyers will be able to pay more for a dual-motor awd setup.
The dual motor version will be faster, and you can look at the difference in 0-60 times for the Model S vehicles that use it, like the 70D vs. the 70.
Of course, there are faster versions of the Model S than the 70D, but what would be the point of a $60,000 Model 3?

Except that JB Straubel explicitly said this would not be the case at a recent talk at U Nevada-Reno. He indicated that it would be and "had to be" all-new technology.

Almost everything the conventional auto industry and conventional auto press has assumed about Tesla has been wrong.

 

[S'toon]

It depends on how it's done. No one is up in arms because Tesla failed to meet it's promise of a $50k starting price for the Model S. The reason why no one is upset is because the more expensive versions stole the attention. And the same thing could easily happen again, once the Model 3 lauches, no one will be paying much attention to the base version. Everyone will be testing the P80D Ludicrous.

If Tesla then allows all the people holding a reservation at launch to spec out a $35k Model 3 if they want, and then quietly terminate that version, saying "there was no demand - only 5% chose this version", hardly anyone will notice, or care. Looking into the past: Tesla Kills The $50,000 Model S, Makes The Media The Fools Of April

I suspect you're looking at it from the point of view of someone who can afford a higher priced car, not someone who can't. I'm one of those who can't. I'll be royally pissed if after all these years I can't get the car I've been wanting.

 

[Colsla]

My bet is a $35K RWD, 0-60 in 6 secs with a $70K AWD Ludicrous Mode Fully Optioned Car.

I would be happy with this.

I don't even need the 'p' let alone Ludicrous. should bring down the price by 20k ish without the P and L :smile: