Fair enough. It wouldn’t be for me. However, it is an interesting idea, so I’ll step out of my slow-driving cheapskate perspective and give a different take.
I do agree that a “plaid” M3 would be incredible to drive. The question is, would Tesla want to make that car? The people who want that type of experience are either getting a Model S or “settling” for a performance 3. I think they would be mostly cannibalizing sales they would have gotten anyway.
But, let’s say they do want to do this. You can’t just use the existing M3 battery. The range would be trash. And I imagine you wouldn’t keep the same interior that us plebs are used to (I believe the plaid S has interior differences?).
After all of those upgrades, a “standard range roadster”, priced at say, $150K might make more sense than a plaid M3, which IMO, would kinda muddy the whole idea behind the M3...a car made by a “luxury brand” that is affordable for people who might not buy a luxury brand otherwise.
Just my $0.02.
I understand this take, but disagree with the last sentence you said (that this would muddy the waters on the whole idea behind the model 3). Note, this is just conversation, and not ment to be argumentative etc (lol). Now with the qualifiers out of the way...
Almost every "mass market luxury brand" has a wide range of performance available in their "main" money making vehicle. By "mass market luxury" I am counting BMW / Mercedes / Audi / Lexus. There are others, of course, and its not just pricepoint (Ford, for example, makes vehicles for regular people that are well north of 50k, but most people would not consider Ford a Luxury brand, mass market or otherwise).
Anyway, take BMW, and their "bread and butter" car, the 3 series. They make that from a 320, that sometimes gets used as a cheap taxi vehicle in germany (my understanding anyway) all the way up to the M3 (the "real" M3.. we drive model 3s.../e ducks lol). In the US, a BMW 3 series (330) has a starting MSRP of 41k (a tesla model 3 SR+ is competitive with this MSRP), whjile if you were to fully option a BMW M3 competition, you could push the price fairly easily above 100k.
I dont know Merc and Audi as well, but I feel fairly confident that you can do something similar looking at an audi A4 vs a RS4 or a Merc C class vs the equivalent AMG version.
So, this is absolutely a thing, and doesnt do anything to "dilute" or muddy the waters. Its the opposite in fact (if done well / right). The higher end trims are visually distinguishable from the lower end ones, as well as much nicer materials (but the lower end ones do not suffer from worse build quality than the higher end trims of the same model).
So on the muddy the waters comment, I disagree, for the reason above.
Now, back to the premise in this thread, however. Teslas already present more "usable speed" than most people are familiar with, and than many could even control. Even the "slow" teslas are F...A....S...T. The model 3 P from 0 to about 100 ish will beat most cars on the road, let alone in its price class. Ones that come close are true sports cars. In a model 3 you can smoke people with 2 kids in car seats in the back (even though you likely shouldnt).
We are talking (as someone.. I think
@Knightshade ) said, a car that is already faster than 99% of the cars on the road, being made into a car that is faster than 99.9% cars on the road. There is not enough market there for a company that wont even offer decent ability of options, to segregate their market offering further.
Maybe in a few years, but they would be much better served (and likely make a boatload more money) that instead of engineering something like this (a tri motor model 3), putting the effort into increasing the range of the current model 3 as much as they can, AND offering a decent option slate (more colors, factory adjustable suspension, more rim options, more options on the interior) that they could upcharge for.
Maybe my 15 years of "BMW ness" has me used to being able to "get what I want" in a vehicle, if I am willing to pay, but Such a car as suggested by the OP would have a very small market. A few would buy it, but as
@BeeGood mentioned, it would likely be better to make a $150k version of the roadster than make a 90-100k model 3. Its almost the same market, in my opinion, and the person who is daily driving their loaded model S / X and wants a weekend flashy car, might drop that money on a 150k roadster, but likely wouldnt on a model 3 that looks just like every other model 3, even if its as fast as a bugatti.
