# 0-60 times at various battery SOC levels



## Rich M (Jul 28, 2017)

My butt dyno is telling me there is a good deal more 'oomph' at 70%+ charge than there is at 50% and under. Has anyone else noticed or tested this?


----------



## tencate (Jan 11, 2018)

Funny you should ask. There's a posting over in the Experiences thread (Model 3 with RWD is all the fast you need!, Post 85 and ff) where we've done some 0-60 mph runs with a G-Tech. The discussion sprouted out of people feeling that Tesla had "nerfed" the performance with a recent software update. One of the cars tested is a 2017 model with an older software update, the other is a 2018 with a very recent update. On the same stretch of road in similar conditions we noticed no difference between 0-60 times at 95% SoC or at 60% SoC. Both of our cars came in right at about 5.1 to 5.2 seconds too (Factory Spec), which is within the error of the G-Tech. Chill mode was around 8 seconds. Still need to do the CHILL measurmeent a bit more carefully.


----------



## tencate (Jan 11, 2018)

I'll try it again with less than 50% charge. It's pretty darn easy to do these, the Model 3 is perfectly predictable and repeatable. Amazing really.


----------



## tencate (Jan 11, 2018)

Rich M said:


> My butt dyno is telling me


I need one of those.  It seems you're right. I found my favorite stretch of road, just me this time so the car was missing about 150 pounds of extra person, and it was dark so the headlights were on. Otherwise roughly the same conditions as the previous tests. 41 psi showing on the tire pressure all around. 2017 model, early suspension, 18 inch Aeros, 21.9 software.
State of Charge: 142 miles of range, less than 50%.
0-60 mph: 5.4 seconds. Both ways.


----------



## Krash (Nov 11, 2017)

FYI. Here is what the Max Power by State of Charge (SoC) looks like for the rest of the lineup. Initial torque doesn't change by SoC, but a few seconds into the performance run where the power levels out is very dependent on SoC...


----------



## tencate (Jan 11, 2018)

Cool! By the way, did a sanity check tonight after writing the above post. I charged the car back up to 212 miles of range tonight and reran the tests just now. Indeed faster 0-60 mph times. I again saw some sub 5 second runs. Average with about 60% charge is back around 5.1 seconds. Give or take 0.1 seconds or so.


----------



## Rich M (Jul 28, 2017)

Thanks for testing this out! Rumor has it that turning slip start on improves 0-60 a bit too.


----------



## tencate (Jan 11, 2018)

I'll add it to my list of things to try. Left the G-Tech home today but perhaps I can test that out tonight as well. I never hear any protest from the tires but I wondered about that. Mashing the pedal certainly is a jolting experience!


----------



## tencate (Jan 11, 2018)

Rich M said:


> Rumor has it that turning slip start on improves 0-60 a bit too


Checked it out today. 5.25 seconds, a bit slower than without slip start. Anyone else care to confirm? (I think I need to buy one of those Dragy things too  )


----------



## MountainPass (May 15, 2018)

We have done some testing to confirm whether it was just a butt dyno sensation or real difference in power


----------



## Ken Voss (Feb 2, 2017)

Very helpful and may explain why some people feel that certain firmware releases decrease or increase acceleration.... not the firmware just your battery charge state when you first drive after uploading the new firmware


----------



## Krash (Nov 11, 2017)

Sasha Anis said:


> Dyno Testing The Tesla Model 3 At Various Battery SOC


The earth is flat.
We never went to the moon.
Tupac is still alive.
Tesla Nerfed My 3.

Nicely done Sasha Anis. Nicely done.


----------



## MountainPass (May 15, 2018)

Haha, thanks all!

Here is an image of the power at every SOC along with Motor RPM and ground speed on the X-axis.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Sasha Anis said:


> Here is an image of the power at every SOC along with Motor RPM and ground speed on the X-axis.]


I *really* wish you had done a run at 100% SOC. I know you don't believe it will matter, based on the similarity of the 90% and 95% runs.

But I'd like to see it proven.


----------



## Dr. J (Sep 1, 2017)

garsh said:


> I *really* wish you had done a run at 100% SOC. I know you don't believe it will matter, based on the similarity of the 90% and 95% runs.
> 
> But I'd like to see it proven.


Perhaps you can lend him your car for that test.


----------



## Rich M (Jul 28, 2017)

Thank you for verifying my butt dyno is a highly calibrated, accurate instrument. I have added MPH to the chart so the Americans don't get confused.


----------



## Kizzy (Jul 25, 2016)

Rich M said:


> Thank you for verifying my butt dyno is a highly calibrated, accurate instrument. I have added MPH to the chart so the Americans don't get confused.
> 
> View attachment 13502


Even at 100 mph and low battery, it has more horsepower than my 2005 Honda Accord. I don't know if I'll be able to handle all that power.


----------



## NJturtlePower (Dec 19, 2017)

Great info @Sasha Anis 

Makes me want to step up my daily charge limit a few notches to stay in that power band a little longer throughout the day.

Currently do 75% each night and end up in the 55-65% range before charging again.


----------



## BostonPilot (Aug 14, 2018)

Gosh, look at the torque drop off... Is that just because of motor RPM? Do we need a transmission?


----------



## EvanLin (Jun 3, 2017)

What's interesting is EPA said 258HP while dyno tested 325HP. (anti-sell?)

325HP can do 0-60mph around 4.5s according to following link, which is close to the 4.6s of DragTimes.
https://insideevs.com/why-buy-tesla-model-3-long-range/


----------



## Rich M (Jul 28, 2017)

EvanLin said:


> What's interesting is EPA said 258HP while dyno tested 325HP. (anti-sell?)


258 could be the minimum HP it delivers with a low battery. Might be more of a legal CYA than undersell.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Rich M said:


> 258 could be the minimum HP it delivers with a low battery. Might be more of a legal CYA than undersell.


Exactly.

A combustion vehicle can deliver identical performance whether the tank is full or nearly empty. An electric vehicle's performance continues to decline as the battery state of charge gets lower. So it makes sense to advertise a more "typical" capability than advertise what's achievable only if you charge the battery 100% and heat it up.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

BostonPilot said:


> Gosh, look at the torque drop off... Is that just because of motor RPM? Do we need a transmission?


The torque to the pavement follows the HP graph lines exactly. Motor torque is academic to driving because it's just a value derived from knowing the torque at the wheels and the motor rpms (and the gearing). A multi-speed transmission could increase both low and high-speed performance by keeping the motor closer to the peak hp rpm at high speeds. The disclaimer is that the power output of the motor is regulated by software and/or the current delivery ability of the batteries. To elaborate, if Tesla had equipped the car with a multi-speed transmission, they would likely change the motor torque curves to be different from what you see in the graph to limit thermal issues. Or they would need a more powerful cooling system for the motor/batteries.

The chosen torque curves are a balancing act between efficiency, aerodynamics, cooling and battery/drivetrain longevity and cost (and probably other factors). In the end, it's a street car that was designed to please drivers with good performance/efficiency/cost/longevity. The Roadster will be a car that leans more towards the performance side of the equation.

What's amazing is the excellent balance between efficiency/performance and cost. Longevity is still an unknown but I predict it will be high too.


----------



## Krash (Nov 11, 2017)

garsh said:


> ...A combustion vehicle can deliver identical performance whether the tank is full or nearly empty. An electric vehicle's performance continues to decline as the battery state of charge gets lower...


Actually a combustion vehicle performance gets slightly better as the fuel tank gets empties because the vehicle gets lighter, not better in terms of power or torque, which stay the same, but better in terms of speed and distance over time.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

garsh said:


> I *really* wish you had done a run at 100% SOC. I know you don't believe it will matter, based on the similarity of the 90% and 95% runs.
> 
> But I'd like to see it proven.


Tesla Model 3 Performance rips 0-60 mph in blistering 3.18 seconds on 100% battery state of charge


----------

