Configure page currently states 0-60 in 5.1 seconds for LR battery. Though reported to be faster. Any guesses or reliable(?) rumors what official ratings will be for AWD and Performance options?
It’s anyone’a guess at this point. I would expect the AWD to be fairly close - maybe 4.8s and performance to be probably around a second faster. That said, ask 10 people and you’ll get 10 different answers.
I started with an S85 in 2013 that had a 0-60 of 5.4 seconds, and then traded in for S85D with 0-60 of 4.2 seconds. The 0-60 times for the S85D have been timed under 4 seconds. Our LR RWD M3 gets 0-60 under 5 seconds and has been timed at 4.68 seconds, and I would guess that the AWD version M3 will be substantially faster than that given the history noted for our MS's. I have found a huge difference in our S85D as compared to our S85. I would bet that the AWD M3 will be close to 4 seconds.
My guess is closer to 4 seconds for AWD and close to 3 for performance.
@Tesla-David: I don't think you can use Model S stats to predict Model 3 performance. Bear in mind that the uncorked RWD S75 had about the same 0-60 time as the S75D (4.3 vs. 4.2 seconds). Some people have also said here that the Model 3 is slower off the line than Model S.
We won't really know until Tesla publishes the specs. Hopefully they'll do that when they start taking orders for AWD next week.
Motor Trend tested the Model 3 carefully:http://www.motortrend.com/news/tesla-model-3-2018-car-of-the-year-finalist/
TEST DATA 2017 Model 3 Long Range battery
ACCELERATION TO MPH
0-30 2.1 sec
PASSING, 45-65 MPH 2.1
QUARTER MILE 13.4 sec @ 104.9 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 119 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.87 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 25.7 sec @ 0.74 g (avg)
Interestingly, compared to my 2014 Model S 85 (RWD, not performance), the Model 3 is actually faster off the line (0-30, 0-40, 0-50, and 0-60) but slower at passing speeds (45-65, 0-70, 1/4 mile, etc.):http://www.motortrend.com/news/2013-motor-trend-car-of-the-year-tesla-mo...
TEST DATA 2013 Model S 85 and P85
ACCELERATION TO MPH
0-30 2.3; 1.7 sec
0-40 3.1; 2.4
0-50 4.0; 3.1
0-60 5.0; 4.0
0-70 6.1; 5.0
0-80 7.4; 6.3
0-90 8.9; 7.7
0-100 10.8; 9.5
PASSING, 45-65 MPH 1.9; 1.7
QUARTER MILE 13.2 sec @ 110.9 mph; 12.4 sec @ 112.5 mph
BRAKING, 60-0 MPH 124; 113 ft
LATERAL ACCELERATION 0.87; 0.89 g (avg)
MT FIGURE EIGHT 25.7 sec @ 0.76 g (avg); 25.6 sec @ 0.77 g (avg)
The last thread in the acceleration mentioned, the Model 3 is limited by *software* till 40 mph. The standard "cheapo" tires they are using in current production will be shredded if full torque of the motor is fed to them.
I smell a "performance option" paired with a tire upgrade and a software update for about $5000 to reclaim the "fastest accelerating production vehicle" crown.
The SR will have less heavy battery, that might beat the LR in these tests. Given the same motor power and torque and less mass, SR might out perform LR.
No, SR won't have enough power in the pack, just like with the S, bigger battery equals faster car.
I just love me some speculation... in the end, it just makes everybody mad that they didn't get what they thought they should have.
It would be stupid of Tesla to have model 3 get too close to model S in terms of performance. AWD might shave off a tenth, P might take off 0.5-1.1 seconds. Sub-4 doesn’t make sense from a marketing point of view.
@AJPHL: That's not how Elon thinks. He would make a really quick Model 3 just to make ICE cars look bad, and plenty of people would be willing to buy one. Model S will do just fine regardless of what Model 3 does.
Then I hope they update my LR to do 0 to 60 in less than 4 seconds!
Ya, my M3 is already shredding tires from the torque. Rubber accum fast on fender with white paint. Feeling better we didnt wait for the awd. We needed a car more than a dragster. And snow has never been a problem for this Canadian in Az. Plus, I dont like torque affecting steering. Never did. Thanks a bunch 4 the specs.and comparisons.
I’m with EVRider on this one. Short burn of the century comin soon.
I'm going from w trucks and an Aveo5, I'm sure I'll be impresssd. Red vin and phone call 5/11 car not released from factory yet. :0
2 trucks lol
My opinion is 4 seconds for AWD, and 3 for performance. I don't think P is gonna have the same premium as it does on the S, because I don't think they're going to have to make the significant electrical changes that they did for model S P.
The ICE cars charge just 3 or 4 K for AWD over FWD. They need to run a shaft to the rear, add a center differential, redesign the floor for the propellor shaft. There was one crazy Volvo that used an inline V6, transmission behind the engine and ran the front wheel drive shaft through the center of the engine crankshaft! Subarus have a center transfer case behind the transmission and two shafts one for the front and one for the rear. All this complexity and they sell for just 4K more.
Electric AWD is simplicity itself. Two motors, electrically linked. Costwise it would probably add 1K max. But it is a good profit center and it will be sold at whatever the market will bear. And without any competition on the horizon it will bear a lot.
I am not sure I recall the volvo engine correctly. What I said seems impossible to be correct. What am I misremembering?
M3-P75D- 3.1 0-60
M3-P75DL- 2.7 0-60
@ST70: down 2 whole seconds from now?? Not that fast. Or can it?
john just put it in range mode. No more rubber burn out. If you can't control yourself let the car control that problem.
As for times... S had one big motor and 1 small motor. Model 3 has 2 same sized motors and magnetic. So our speculation will only be a guess as this hasn't been done b4
I forgot the base model:
MS-75D- 4.6 0-60
non owner can only bump above spam. cant flag the. yet.
AJPHL | May 12, 2018
It would be stupid of Tesla to have model 3 get too close to model S in terms of performance.
Almost every premium sedan manufacturer does this (compact/intermediate cars in “sports models” outperform the full-size flagship models in driving dynamics). Not sure why you’d think it strange for Tesla to do the same.
My guesses (what do we win?):
3D LR: 0-60 4.6s (published); 4.2s (as tested)
P3D(if available without Ludicrous): 0-60 3.5s (published); 3.1s (as tested)
P3DL: 0-60 3.1s (published); 2.8s (as tested)
And down the road, 3D SR: 0-60 5.2 (published); 4.9 (as tested)
It’s nice to know we may know most of these published numbers soon!
"It would be stupid of Tesla to have model 3 get too close to model S"
Then they shouldn't have made the Model 3 lighter and smaller, or maybe dropped a couple ton of lead in the trunk to artificially slow it down. Stupid physics!
My guesses are based on what they’ll uncork and make available to us, not on the maximum theoretical performance, so physics doesn’t apply...
I'm thinking physics ALWAYS applies....... ain't no way around that......
At some point, it is just unsafe to make the 3 faster. The typical Prius or Camry buyer that moved over doesn't want, need and can't handle too much acceleration. Some of these cars will go to teenagers. Sure, most$100k cars are pretty quick and driven by older adults, used 3s not so much. An expensive performance edition for those who really want it is great, but controlling the right foot is easier said than done sometimes.
Chill mode with parent lock-out :)
@gballant4570 that’s...a given—I’m guessing Tesla won’t unleash the maximum theoretical performance (per physics) to avoid showing up model S. Others seem confident Tesla will. We’ll find out soon enough.
AJPHL | May 15, 2018 "@gballant4570 that’s...a given—I’m guessing Tesla won’t unleash the maximum theoretical performance (per physics) to avoid showing up model S."
I have to agree with djharrington on this one. It's perfectly normal for the sports model to outperform the luxury boat. For a while, Tesla tried to maintain the fiction that Model S is superior to Model 3 in every way, so as to avoid cannibalizing S sales. But that dog won't hunt any longer - to maintain Model S sales growth, Tesla will need a substantial refresh of the S. Even then, it would be fine for Model 3 to have quicker acceleration.
Given how close the ER already is to the 75 and 100D in terms of acceleration, there should be little question that the real world numbers on the Model 3 P would beat those. Tesla will almost certainly also make more money on a performance Model 3 than a standard S, so the questions becomes how close will it be to the P100D. Here, they would likely want to maintain the superiority of the S, while still beating competitors like the BMW M3, meaning a time somewhere in the 3-3.5 second range. My guess would be 3.2, which would be a solid class leader, while still leaving meaningful daylight to the P100D.
[the Model 3 is limited by *software* till 40 mph.]
Do you have a link to back that up? Traction-control should be preventing slippage, not software-limiting the motor.