EPA just posted officials AWD and Performance range and efficiency

Dinozero

Active Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
107
Location
Kentucky
Tesla Owner
Reservation
Country
Country
#5
Performance front engine rated at 147kW (plus 211kW rear). That's 480HP, folks

For non-performance, they down-rated the rear engine to 188kW.
I am sorry I don’t know the math but can you tell me how many horsepower that is for the all-wheel-drive regular?
 
Joined
Jul 15, 2018
Messages
3
Location
San Francisco Bay Area
Tesla Owner
Reservation
Country
Country
#7
This continues to point to the fact that the AWD and AWD+P have the same hardware, most likely just software limited. Regardless, I don't think Tesla will release the performance on the AWD; maybe down the line but $11k for software is pretty crazy.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
16
Location
Boston MA
Tesla Owner
Reservation
Country
Country
#8
This continues to point to the fact that the AWD and AWD+P have the same hardware, most likely just software limited. Regardless, I don't think Tesla will release the performance on the AWD; maybe down the line but $11k for software is pretty crazy.
That is what I thought too. But taking a look at AWD and Performance specs on the EPA site. It states that their motors are different:

AWD-
147 and 188 kW AC 3-Phase
Performance-
147 and 211 kW AC 3-Phase
LR RWD-
211 kW AC 3-Phase
Unless these refers to software limitation to the motor, reported as a physical power difference. It seems like AWD has a different motor compared to RWD and Performance.
 

Attachments

Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
16
Location
Boston MA
Tesla Owner
Reservation
Country
Country
#9
Performance front engine rated at 147kW (plus 211kW rear). That's 480HP, folks

For non-performance, they down-rated the rear engine to 188kW.
Is it a software downrate? Or a different motor all together? Im hoping it is all software because if it is a totally different motor, it'll mean I probably won't get my AWD anytime soon. Still holding out hope that AWD and Performance is just mainly software and they can quickly shift their assembly to satisfy AWD orders when Performance backlog dries up.
 

MelindaV

☰ > 3
Moderator
Joined
Apr 2, 2016
Messages
9,525
Location
Vancouver, WA
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
#10
This continues to point to the fact that the AWD and AWD+P have the same hardware, most likely just software limited. Regardless, I don't think Tesla will release the performance on the AWD; maybe down the line but $11k for software is pretty crazy.
the non P dual has a different rear motor. 188kw instead of 211kw.
 

Bokonon

Self-identified Teslaholic
Moderator
TOO Supporting Member
Joined
Apr 12, 2017
Messages
3,057
Location
Boston
Tesla Owner
Model 3
Country
Country
#13
AWD-147 and 188 kW AC 3-Phase
Performance-147 and 211 kW AC 3-Phase
LR RWD-211 kW AC 3-Phase
Interesting, so the motor-sizing for the three Model 3 variants ends up being similar to the way it was with the three Model S variants. Not sure why I was expecting both AWD motors to be higher-rated in the Performance configuration.

That feels software limited to me - would they really create a new rear motor for AWD?
Yeah, it kind of makes me wonder whether the rear AWD motors are actually just RWD motors that have been binned in the opposite direction as the Performance motors.
 
Joined
Jul 11, 2018
Messages
16
Location
Boston MA
Tesla Owner
Reservation
Country
Country
#14
Interesting, so the motor-sizing for the three Model 3 variants ends up being similar to the way it was with the three Model S variants. Not sure why I was expecting both AWD motors to be higher-rated in the Performance configuration.



Yeah, it kind of makes me wonder whether the rear AWD motors are actually just RWD motors that have been binned in the opposite direction as the Performance motors.
Unless Tesla has a wildly fluctuating variation, Binning should not make that much difference. (Also depends on how many motors they produce really. Cant effectively Bin if there isn't enough motor produced) If that is the case, software definitely plays a part.

Unless Tesla is hand building these motors, the manufacturing tolerance should be under 5% between top-shelf vs standard. I don't think binning is the whole story, may be a part of it.
 

marusan

Active Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2016
Messages
35
Location
California
Country
Country
#16
For the sake of manufacturing, I would expect these motors are identical. If anything, they're putting the better (binned) ones in the AWD-P and RWD, and the AWD are getting the worse ones in the rear. The EPA kW rating is probably based on the current that software is allowing in the motor. It's no different than rating a gas engine based on a particular ECU flash.
 

PNWmisty

Legendary Member
Joined
Aug 19, 2017
Messages
2,539
Location
Anacortes, WA
Country
Country
#19
If the AWD actually has a smaller rear motor, wouldn’t we see higher efficiency numbers vs the P?
Not necessarily. It's not analogous to ICE motors where they are most efficient at ~75% load. The LR Model 3 is already considerably more efficient than other EV's with much less powerful motors. So the excellent acceleration of the Model 3 is likely a side effect of choosing the motor that will be most efficient in regular driving.
 

calvan

Active Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2018
Messages
60
Location
St. Louis
Tesla Owner
Reservation
Country
Country
#20
1sec 0-60 difference with only 30hp difference doesn’t seem right to me. Anyone speculate what torque ratings are? If they are that similar has to be software controlled correct?

Also didn’t Elon at some point say same motors just using the higher burn in rate ones for P?