# Simple question - Long Range non performance - torque and HP?



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

I can't seem to find the torque and horsepower metrics for the non-performance dual motor AWD version. Anyone have that?

Here is what I found for the Long Range, RWD
271 HP • 307 LB-FT

The numbers for performanc are all over the place. But can't find it for the dual motor AWD non-performance. Thanks in advance.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Nom said:


> I can't seem to find the torque and horsepower metrics for the non-performance dual motor AWD version. Anyone have that?
> 
> Here is what I found for the Long Range, RWD
> 271 HP • 307 LB-FT
> ...


It depends upon the batteries state of charge.

Tesla doesn't publish the specs but when the battery is almost depleted, the AWD LR torque and HP are AWESOME.
When charged to 80% or more the torque and HP are beyond AWESOME.

Any questions?

Sorry, I couldn't help it.


----------



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

@PNWmisty - good answer but also looking for numbers.

Here's my directional estimate. Given 0-60 times, and assuming acceleration during the 0-60 is directly proportionate to torque for dual motor versions (same weight), I arrived at the estimate below. Logic V= at. a proportionate to force, and torque is rotational force. V=60mph for both.

Performance Dual Motor 0-60 = 3.3 seconds
Non Performance Dual Motor 0-60 = 4.5 seconds

Performance Dual Motor Torque = 471 lb-ft
Non Performance Dual Motor Toque = 345 lb-ft *(Seem about right???)*

Found a wikipedia article saying the following for HP (but has TBDs for Torque on all but the long range performance)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_3

Performance Dual Motor HP = 450
Non-Performance Dual Motor HP = 346


----------



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

So no one on this forum has heard of an official torque figure for this model? I figure my math seems about right but curious about the actual numbers.


----------



## PNWmisty (Aug 19, 2017)

Nom said:


> So no one on this forum has heard of an official torque figure for this model? I figure my math seems about right but curious about the actual numbers.


The torque curves for a Model 3 aren't really directly comparable to anything else due to the way the torque is managed over the rpm range so no one really pays that much attention to the numbers. They are very impressive numbers (whatever they are) but are only meaningful in very specific ways.

If you want a good meaningful number that is somewhat comparable to other vehicles, I would suggest you either read an article that has already extracted approximate numbers based upon vehicle weight and 0-60 and 1/4 mile times or use an online calculator that uses the vehicle weight and acceleration times to derive the same. Dyno torque and hp numbers have already been measured, I'm sure, but, as I mentioned, they're not really directly comparable in any meaningful way.

Of course, someone who is more focused on these kind of numbers might have already done that, I'm surprised they haven't spoken up yet.


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

Nom said:


> So no one on this forum has heard of an official torque figure for this model?





PNWmisty said:


> The torque curves for a Model 3 aren't really directly comparable to anything else due to the way the torque is managed over the rpm range so no one really pays that much attention to the numbers.


Tesla was sued for false advertising in Norway in 2016.

They advertised the P85D as having 700 HP. While each motor's peak HP did add up to 700, the two motors are never operated at their peak power simultaneously. Electric motors have peak torque at 0 RPMs, so if you just allow them to max out at low speeds, you get nothing but wheelspin. So it becomes difficult to provide an "official" max torque rating for an electric car. If you give the motor's peak capability, you'll once again get in trouble for false advertising.

Your math is probably good for a real-world estimate.


----------



## Diamond.g (Jun 26, 2017)

There is a thread on TMC where some VA folks tested an AWD and a P. The P has ~100 more HP and Torque than the AWD.


----------



## MountainPass (May 15, 2018)

We put ours on the dyno the day we drove it home:






Also here is our dyno session on SOC based power:


----------



## Diamond.g (Jun 26, 2017)

MountainPass said:


> We put ours on the dyno the day we drove it home:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


It would be nice if you guys could test all three on the same dyno. Your numbers make it appear that the RWD is only down ~80 ft lbs of torque. Which seems like not enough to overcome the weight difference between the AWD and RWD for the 0-60 times, let alone the quarter mile times.


----------



## MountainPass (May 15, 2018)

Diamond.g said:


> It would be nice if you guys could test all three on the same dyno. Your numbers make it appear that the RWD is only down ~80 ft lbs of torque. Which seems like not enough to overcome the weight difference between the AWD and RWD for the 0-60 times, let alone the quarter mile times.


Our dyno has always read low, which we consider being realistic. With only a few clicks you can make any dyno read higher or lower, so it wouldn't even necessarily be accurate to compare dynapack vs dynapack! We want to dyno the AWD cars, but we aren't sure how the dyno will react since every AWD car except the Model 3 still has a connection between the front and rear wheels!


----------



## Diamond.g (Jun 26, 2017)

What do you think of these results from TMC members?


----------



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

@Diamond.g - thank you! I went and found the thread on the Tesla forums to help me decipher that graph. Looks like the test was done on a AWD non-P and a P. Also did test in Chill mode. Interestingly, in chill mode, the two versions behave exactly the same in their HP and Torque curves.

For non-chill mode
Performance version peaked at nearly 500 (this is a bit higher than published figures)
Non Performance version peaked at nearly 400 ........... my simple math would have predicted about 364.

Seeing these graphs taught me that the torque isn't definitely not constant (I haven't studied this stuff before). And the two cars had a bit of a different shape to their curves. So my simple math is just that ... too simple.

Thanks for finding this and sharing!

Realizing I haven't looked at the video @MountainPass posted ..... will do that now.


----------



## Nom (Oct 30, 2018)

@MountainPass - good stuff! Seeing you were finding max torque of 320 lb-ft. Good info on SOC impact on power and how long the max torque can be held.

Notably -- the 320 figure is a lot less than the nearly 400 figure from the data Diamond.g shared ... but if I split the difference I get 358 or so. I'll go with that!!


----------



## Matthias Fritz (Aug 20, 2017)

want to put a Model 3 Performance on a dyno? why not? what could go wrong?


----------



## MountainPass (May 15, 2018)

Matthias Fritz said:


> want to put a Model 3 Performance on a dyno? why not? what could go wrong?


It appears there was a strap malfunction


----------



## garsh (Apr 4, 2016)

MountainPass said:


> It appears there was a strap malfunction


Thank goodness there were two rear straps.


----------



## HCD3 (Mar 3, 2019)

Sorry if this has been covered. I can’t find anywhere the horsepower rating for Model 3 LR RWD. Does anyone here have any info on this?


----------



## rmorgan (Oct 24, 2018)

hcdavis3 said:


> Sorry if this has been covered. I can't find anywhere the horsepower rating for Model 3 LR RWD. Does anyone here have any info on this?


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Model_3 - the figures are in there.


----------



## HCD3 (Mar 3, 2019)

Thanks very much R. I saw that before but never scrolled down far enough to see the HP rating. Do you think that number goes up with 2019.8.3 and the 5 % power increase? Thanks in advance.


----------

