# Nice picture of the Dual motor chassis



## Sandy (Jun 3, 2017)

I'm posting this here as the explanation is tech related. The new configurator is in the Reserving, Ordering, Production and Delivery thread here:

https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/threads/new-official-model-3-configurator.106723/#post-2520367

Shows the steel sub frames front and rear in nice detail. Unlike the S and X both motors are mounted between the 2 axles. There is very little weight outside the axles. I can't say enough about how much this improves handling. You will feel this in everyday driving especially during quick maneuvering and corner turn-in. The one downside is it limited battery case size to between the axles/motors. However I'm more than happy with the range from the current 2170's in the LR version.

Love the way they left the '3' bars stamped into the center floor pan.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

Sandy said:


> Shows the steel sub frames front and rear in nice detail. Unlike the S and X both motors are mounted between the 2 axles. There is very little weight outside the axles. I can't say enough about how much this improves handling. You will feel this in everyday driving especially during quick maneuvering and corner turn-in. The one downside is it limited battery case size to between the axles/motors. However I'm more than happy with the range from the current 2170's in the LR version.
> 
> Love the way they left the '3' bars stamped into the center floor pan.
> 
> View attachment 5107


Wait a minute. This looks like the Performance chassis.
Based on the S/X, the Dual motor uses a smaller rear and smaller front motor. This appears to have the standard rear motor and similarly sized front motor. When this diagram "fell off the truck", did it have any other pictures or explanations with it?


----------



## Sandy (Jun 3, 2017)

Brokedoc said:


> Wait a minute. This looks like the Performance chassis.
> Based on the S/X, the Dual motor uses a smaller rear and smaller front motor. This appears to have the standard rear motor and similarly sized front motor. When this diagram "fell off the truck", did it have any other pictures or explanations with it?


From the new today online configurator. 
Here's a pic of the single motor. The rear motor looks the same in both.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

I'm posting in the TMC thread also. I can't select the dual motor option in my configurator and I can't see that chassis diagram. I wonder if Dual Motor is actively being offered to employees now?


----------



## Tom Bodera (Aug 10, 2016)

Through the new design studio the AWD design leak surfaces. So excited. Apparently this is through code manipulation in html and not available at this time. Does not mean that employees do not have access but not available as a selectable option in the new config.


----------



## EValuatED (Apr 29, 2017)

Coffee break reading online led me to this article on Electrek...

"...see a great image of the dual motor configuration of Tesla's latest electric vehicle thanks to some code sleuthing by Eaer from /r/teslamotors on the latest update of the design studio..."


----------



## Tom Bodera (Aug 10, 2016)

A second motor could mean additional battery heater potential, better range and faster preheat in cold climates. This would mean more advantages than just AWD in the cold. TMC post spec the rear motor at less than 2.5kw of heat from the rear alone compared to the MS's 6kw heat.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

Tom Bodera said:


> A second motor could mean additional battery heater potential, better range and faster preheat in cold climates. This would mean more advantages than just AWD in the cold. TMC post spec the rear motor at less than 2.5kw of heat from the rear alone compared to the MS's 6kw heat.


Agreed. The 2nd motor may provide some very needed added benefits in cold weather aside from traction.


----------



## Guest (Jan 19, 2018)

Tom Bodera said:


> TMC post spec the rear motor at less than 2.5kw of heat from the rear alone


Source?


----------



## Tom Bodera (Aug 10, 2016)

arnis said:


> Source?


https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/thr..._campaign=ed82&utm_content=iss10#post-2517035


----------



## 3V Pilot (Sep 15, 2017)

Tom Bodera said:


> A second motor could mean additional battery heater potential, better range and faster preheat in cold climates. This would mean more advantages than just AWD in the cold. TMC post spec the rear motor at less than 2.5kw of heat from the rear alone compared to the MS's 6kw heat.


Keep in mind that the Model S has a dedicated heater for the battery and the 3 uses a different system that just engages the electronics to get some battery heat. Really can't compare the two systems as they are so different. That being said hopefully the dual motor 3 will have better battery heating but nobody will really know until more details are released.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Mike Land said:


> Keep in mind that the Model S has a dedicated heater for the battery and the 3 uses a different system that just engages the electronics to get some battery heat.


The 3 uses the motors themselves to heat up the coolant that's used to warm up the battery. That's why he says that the addition of a second motor will probably provide more heating capability for the battery.


----------



## Guest (Jan 20, 2018)

2.5kW of heat from a drivetrain (not motor) is not impressive at all.
I wasn't expecting anything below 5kW
When driving at 200km/h draw is like 100kW. So 5-10kW of losses are expected.
And those losses are sustainable.
I understand that turning rotor has better heat transfer but why not generate half of the heat
inside the inverter. Weird. Maybe they start with safety margins in mind and later crank it up.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Is anyone else bothered by the tires mounted in the wrong direction in this picture??


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

JWardell said:


> Is anyone else bothered by the tires mounted in the wrong direction in this picture??


Not wrong. Front is left.

I think Dual Motor Production has started. See my other post. https://teslaownersonline.com/threa...ion-cars-watch-thread.4199/page-54#post-67993


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Brokedoc said:


> Not wrong. Front is left.
> 
> I think Dual Motor Production has started. See my other post. https://teslaownersonline.com/threa...ion-cars-watch-thread.4199/page-54#post-67993


Front is left. But the view is from below. V-treads should be pointed in the direction of travel on the top of the wheels. So in this case the outsides of the treads will contact the road first, and pull water into the center...


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

JWardell said:


> Front is left. But the view is from below. V-treads should be pointed in the direction of travel on the top of the wheels. So in this case the outsides of the treads will contact the road first, and pull water into the center...


I believe view is from above. Front strut towers overlie the axles. Plus that little piece of metal overlying the tire is above the tire. Not below or the car couldn't drive.


----------



## JWardell (May 9, 2016)

Brokedoc said:


> I believe view is from above. Front strut towers overlie the axles. Plus that little piece of metal overlying the tire is above the tire. Not below or the car couldn't drive.


 If from top it is correct. First impression viewed small is from below, and I think that stuck. There is some weird choices of layer opacity in there.


----------



## Rich M (Jul 28, 2017)

Brokedoc said:


> Wait a minute. This looks like the Performance chassis.
> Based on the S/X, the Dual motor uses a smaller rear and smaller front motor. This appears to have the standard rear motor and similarly sized front motor.


I wonder if it's cheaper with the permanent magnet units to put the same rear motor in all the 3's, and just 'cork' the non P AWD cars.


----------



## Scuffers (Jun 8, 2017)

arnis said:


> 2.5kW of heat from a drivetrain (not motor) is not impressive at all.
> I wasn't expecting anything below 5kW
> When driving at 200km/h draw is like 100kW. So 5-10kW of losses are expected.
> And those losses are sustainable.
> ...


I think your looking at two different things here.

Using the inverter/motor as a heater may well be limited to 2.5-3Kw (or whatever the figure is).

this has no link/reference to how much cooling the motor/inverter need at max power (when actually working).

PS. if the inverter/motor loses at 100Kw are in the order of 5%, that's dam impressive.


----------



## Kizzy (Jul 25, 2016)

I can't help but wonder about the feasibility of adding/hacking in a front drive unit on a RWD model after purchase…


----------



## Scuffers (Jun 8, 2017)

Rich M said:


> I wonder if it's cheaper with the permanent magnet units to put the same rear motor in all the 3's, and just 'cork' the non P AWD cars.


As I understand it, the only two ways to increase motor torque (and thus power) are:

1) increase motor voltage
2) increase motor (rotor) diameter

What we have no idea is just how capable the M3 motor is, that said, we can be pretty sure the current one if it is the same as the 4 used in the truck, have somewhat higher capability than the M3 uses currently.


----------



## Sandy (Jun 3, 2017)

JWardell said:


> If from top it is correct. First impression viewed small is from below, and I think that stuck. There is some weird choices of layer opacity in there.


I had the same trouble at first. If you ignore the opacity layer it makes more sense.


----------



## Sandy (Jun 3, 2017)

Kizzy said:


> I can't help but wonder about the feasibility of adding/hacking in a front drive unit on a RWD model after purchase…


Wonder? Sure! Feasibility?


----------



## 3V Pilot (Sep 15, 2017)

Sandy said:


> Wonder? Sure! Feasibility?


Feasibility of installing the hardware should not be a problem, it's the software that would be the trick. Someone would have to hack the car and make it believe it was the dual motor version, that would not be easy without help from Tesla. If they offered is as an upgrade that would be very cool!


----------



## Guest (Jan 21, 2018)

Scuffers said:


> if the inverter/motor loses at 100Kw are in the order of 5%, that's dam impressive.


It should be around 5% at speeds higher than city crawling and load more than steady slow highway.







,


Scuffers said:


> this has no link/reference to how much cooling the motor/inverter need at max power (when actually working).


Why? Inverter doesn't have anything spinning inside. It doesn't care about the speed. IGBT's just do their job.
Cold Tesla doesn't dump heat into radiator, it dumps it into battery mass. So airflow doesn't matter much.


----------



## Brokedoc (May 28, 2017)

Mike Land said:


> Feasibility of installing the hardware should not be a problem, it's the software that would be the trick. Someone would have to hack the car and make it believe it was the dual motor version, that would not be easy without help from Tesla. If they offered is as an upgrade that would be very cool!


The Model 3 is a truly unique revolutionary car and has been equated to the 2002 for BMW or the Civic CVCC for Honda. Aside from catapulting Tesla into the mainstream, Elon's plans of making 500,000+ annually will compound this revolutionary effect. Neither the 2002 nor the Civic were made in those numbers at the outset of introduction.

My point is that the aftermarket will EXPLODE for the Model 3. Aside from simple bolt on aftermarket parts, there will surely be tuners and hackers that will pop up. Hacks for the Model S already exist but once these cars get hacked, they cannot update their UI or they will lose their hacks. Perhaps tuners will be able to work around this or develop their own updates but we will have to see how much leeway Tesla allows to these tuners.

Aside from allowing people to modify their vehicles, you have to realize that Tesla has a network-wide responsibility to preserve safety, security, and redundancy. This is not simply a matter of a kid popping in a new ECU chip to get a few more HP. If someone can hack the system and disrupt vehicle operations, the effect on an autonomous fleet could be disastrous.


----------



## Wilk's 3 (Sep 19, 2017)

Kizzy said:


> I can't help but wonder about the feasibility of adding/hacking in a front drive unit on a RWD model after purchase…


I have thought about this too, especially given the full rebate implications for some of us where waiting for AWD could put us out for half of the rebate. Considering how much more "upgradable" Tesla's are versus other cars (OTA updates, software than can be turned on later, etc) that would be awesome down the road to take a LR RWD to a LR AWD or even a PLR AWD.

Apologies if this has been discussed elsewhere, I seem to recall that when the MS had a RWD/AWD option, the S75 only gained a few tenths of a second on 0-60 speed with AWD, and was still fairly far behind the larger battery option 0-60 times. Without the specifics from Tesla yet, is it reasonable to estimate that a LR RWD will be faster 0-60 than a SR AWD? For someone in a warmer climate, the performance would be the only temptation for AWD...


----------

