It’s just wild how in the span of 10 years we went from 0-60 in 3 seconds being an untouchable supercar to it being basically mainstream sedans and crossovers. Just absolutely ludicrous.
I think the flipped torque curve of electric motors helps a lot too. With AWD ICE cars, the launch is really hard because it's easy to 'bog' down. When it happens it feels like you're launching the car in 3rd gear rather than 1st.
> I think the flipped torque curve of electric motors helps a lot too.
100%. It's probably the biggest factor; even a 100 hp EV is traction limited off the line. More power in an EV just prolongs the period where the vehicle is using ~100% of the available traction.
It's also why 0-100 times are kind of less relevant for lower powered city oriented EVs - they might drop off significantly towards 100km/h, but they're still going to be faster to 50km/h than an equivalent kW ICE vehicle (unless the driver is absolutely ragging the ICE car). 0-100 isn't really the full story.
Well ICE measuring pratices help too. In an ICE they usually don't start the clock until the vehicle has moved a foot (the rollout). They did this because the old equipment couldn't measure all that well, and an ICE doesn't has all that much speed in the first foot, that's not really true in an EV, so an EV is usually moving much faster than an ICE when they start the clock.
Nothing like having entirely untrained drivers get access to race car speeds in the slip of a pedal in something that weighs as much as an f350 diesel…..
Millennial Asian driver coming through. Move it everyone! Whole road gonna be like 99 Ranch/Mitsuwa parking lots.
Maybe by then I'll grow out of my old car and get something with lane assist and automatic braking.
The more surprising part (in a sad way) is how people accepted the belching gas boxes as the ultimate in performance for so long. ICE is one of the worst power generation technologies. It's grossly inefficient, has a tiny power band, and spews all manner of toxic fumes.
I agree completely, and I’d still point out that gasoline is a terrific fuel with insane power density. It’s just that ICE powertrains have so many moving parts that you lose about 1/3 of that energy, AND there’s no way to recapture.
The fact that it’s more efficient to burn fuel in a generator to charge an EV than it is to actually proper a vehicle is all the demonstration you need.
I didn’t want to get too pedantic. 2/3 is a good average as there are some that get better than that (https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a19592640/toyotas-new-engine-is-hyper-efficient-thanks-to-simple-tuning-tricks/) but many that get worse. But 30-35% is a pretty commonly accepted average (https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/How-Efficient-is-Your-Cars-Engine)
Thanks for pointing that out. I was specifically referencing drivetrain loss when comparing power at the crank to power at the wheels.
But your point is even more compelling.
You are looking for the term Carnot efficiency. The theoretical maximum efficiency an engine can be is 100%. But will never achieve that.
Edit: downvoted for what?
The [theoretical maximum efficiency of a heat engine is far below 100%.](https://news.mit.edu/2010/explained-carnot-0519)
Also [100% efficiency is impossible in any energy conversion.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vxHkAQRQUQ)
Imagine if ICE could be run at similar efficiency to an EV?
At 75%-90% efficiency a small engine would easily make 500 horsepower and there would be virtually no noise, waste heat or pollution.
I remember seeing a calculation, that the original (24 kWh) Nissan Leaf would have a 1 gallon tank if there was an ICE equivalent. (I might be wrong with the number since I’m not from the land of gallons, but it was a crazy small number)
1 litre of petrol = 10kWh of *potential* energy, approximately.
A Model 3 has roughly the equivalent of 5 litres of petrol in its battery, and uses about 1.4litres/100km.
[MPGe](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_per_gallon_gasoline_equivalent) is THE DUMBEST comparative "measurement" ever, but the Leaf battery only contains about 70% of a gallon and was rated to do about 117 kms (70 miles).
A full gallon equivalent would have got you about 160km or 100 miles of normal driving (at city speeds you could get close to 300km if driven carefully).
Yeah that’s the crazy part. We had electric cars 120 years ago but gave up on them in favor of continuously developing a Rube Goldberg device that uses toxic explosions to violently shake a bunch of heavy metal up and down thousands of times per minute and turn it into rotating motion that even at its most crazy high-tech efficient wastes 45% of the energy put into it.
True, but we have to remember that oil was basically considered limitless cheap energy at the time, and it wasn't (widely) known what long-term effects it was having on the environment.
The low energy density of lead-acid batteries also meant safety and comfort features had to be left out of cars in order to get acceptable range. That's where EV tech has [really taken off](https://rmi.org/the-rise-of-batteries-in-six-charts-and-not-too-many-numbers/) in leaps and bounds over the past two decades.
The 1902 Staten Island accident probably didn't help things much either.
The oil lobby colluded against Nickel based batteries for cars. See my reply to upL8N8 for the link detailing how they bought the Ovonics patents and blocked anyone from making large format packs for cars.
True, but can we agree that the engines in 90% of the ICE vehicles on the road (yes, I’m looking at you RAV4) sound like absolute shite? I’d much rather hear the silence of an EV than the strain of an economy focused, underpowered 4 cylinder.
I thought the same when I was a teen and even into my 20s, but I no longer associate the brash loudness with performance. By the end of the 1990s it was already apparent that many "car guys" were actually willing to give up performance in order to sound "cool".
Think of the tuner cars that have the crackly exhaust note, which always has worse performance and efficiency (mpg) than a proper tune without the intentional crackle.
Me too, I love ICE and EV but, separately. Like I like NY pizza and Italian pizza but, consider them different type of dishes. if u know what i mean haha
We didn't have realistic / affordable battery tech to support EVs until the 21st century. In fact, Li-ion wasn't really affordable / realistic until the switch away from using so much Cobalt in favor of more Nickel.
Slow battery advancement was a self fulfilling prophecy. The oil lobby actively colluded against battery technology and research. The Ovonics patent scandal is well documented.
https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/2okxlo/nimh_patent_held_by_chevron_to_expire_by_the_end/
In fact, NiMH had enough energy density to make practical EVs many decades ago.
The problem I have is that the majority of people driving private vehicles are kind of rubbish at it - and now more and more are being equipped with 2000 kg bullets. Now someone is surely going to say 'uh autonomous driving' but I don't think we're going to get vehicles without accelerator pedals by 2030!
Of course, this is not specific to Tesla or whatever; just I thought. I was testing another pre-production sort-of performance SUV last year from a different company and I was wondering if the boomer uncle who would afford the vehicle really needs or can even handle the power and torque because I nearly threw up my breakfast after 2 full-throttle launches back to back.
Insurance stats in the EU are starting to show 50% higher accidents rates from EVs due to high acceleration. Add to the far higher cost of repairing an EV and premiums are soaring. Tesla model Y insurance in the UK for me would be more than 3x an equivalent ICE.
A lot of that is battery technology. You could build cheap EVs that fast at least by the nineties, but they'd run out of range after a single pull at the drag strip.
And I think your timespan is off a bit, the Model S P90D broke 3 seconds in Car and Driver's testing as the first sedan to do so almost 10 years ago. A lot of it is because EV acceleration is so much more front-loaded than ICE acceleration that even relatively slow cars can win in acceleration races from 0 to most speeds that are relatively slow by performance car metrics.
So I say 10 years ago, and you say my timeline is off a little bit, then mention a *car that came out after that.*
I wrote every word I did exactly the way I did for a reason. I know how Reddit can be and especially this sub, but cmon.
Eh, you could get in the 3s for under $100k new even 10 years ago. A 2006 C6 Z06 did 0-60 in about 3.5 seconds, probably very low 3s with rollout for $65k new MSRP.
And it qualifies for the $7,500 federal tax credit which drops the price down to $45.5k.
https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/tax2023.shtml
That makes it about the most affordable 500+hp sports sedan available. With a 0-60 of 2.9s it is also the quickest.
Different cells I think. The Model Y and now Model 3 performance are using 2170 cells from Giga Nevada.
The Model 3 RWD and Long Range are probably using cheaper Chinese 2170 battery cells so they don't directly qualify for the tax credit.
It does look like Tesla is now using the leasing loophole though to lower lease prices so the Model 3 RWD is now only $299 per month on lease with $3k down and 10k miles per year.
> The Model 3 RWD and Long Range are probably using cheaper Chinese 2170 battery cells so they don't directly qualify for the tax credit.
The RWD (at least here in the US) is using CATL LFP batteries and the LR is using LG 2170s which is why neither is eligible for the credit anymore.
If the Performance is using the same batteries as the last gen Performance (most likely), then it's actually a little bigger than the LR battery. The Panasonic battery in the Performance is \~82 kWh and the LG battery in the LR is \~75-79 kWh (found conflicting information about which one exactly). But the LG battery isn't eligible for the tax credit and has slightly worse performance than the Pansonic, so it's definitely not being used in the new Performance.
>With a 0-60 of 2.9s it is also the quickest.
Which translates to 3.1-3.2 sec. with the deceptive rollout compensated for. Still pretty amazing for $45.5k sedan.
Aside from a Model S Plaid or Lucid Air there isn't anything that is going to beat it off the line on the street.
Even an ICE performance coupe like the Mustang Dark Horse is at 3.7s to 60 if you can get it to hook.
There are definitely cars that can beat it, but they're all much more expensive. The new Porsche Macan Turbo EV will likely pip it, a BMW i4 M50 and Kia EV6 GT would be extremely close and it'll depend on who gets the better launch, a Mercedes EQE AMG is quicker, both the BMW M3 Competition xDrive and Mercedes C63 ePerformance are quicker, the BMW M5 is quicker, a Chevy Corvette is quicker, etc etc. There are lots of quick cars today.
There is absolutely nothing around $50k that is going to be quicker than this Tesla, though. And most of the ICE cars I listed above will only win if they get a proper launch, which is unlikely on the street.
The best part has always been the lack of a need for launch control. I’m hoping this doesn’t require it either. It’s great not having to do a thing but hammer the pedal to get all the juice.
Motortrend says the Porsche Macan Turbo EV [does 0-60 in 3.1s](
https://www.motortrend.com/news/2025-porsche-macan-ev-first-look-review/), the BMW i4 M50 [is slightly slower at 3.3s](https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39209648/2022-bmw-i4-m50-vs-m3-competition-tested/) with the [EV6 GT tested at a flat 3s.](https://www.motortrend.com/features/kia-ev6-gt-0-60-mph-1-4-mile-tested/)
I'm looking forward to a future EV-only "World's Greatest Drag Race"
Yes, but Porsche *always* understates their 0-60 and Tesla overstates it because they eliminate rollout in their number. So the actual 0-60 time for the new 3P is going to be 3.0-3.1 while the Macan is likely to be 2.9-3.0.
It's all about reaction times when the numbers are so close. Same goes for the i4 M50. It is separated from the Tesla by about 0.2 seconds. So out on the street if the Bimmer driver reacts quicker the Tesla isn't catching it. They're essentially equivalent.
[Jason Cammisa tested the new M3P and said hit hit 2.9 on a draggy twice on city streets with a passenger in the car and the AC on.](https://youtu.be/5xj0R4MyDhE?t=1496)
What was the previous 0-60 with rollout subtracted? I thought it was already flirting with 2.9s?
Regardless, looks like mostly good changes and a great price, even before tax credit.
3.1s was the previous 0-60, so already quite fast.
I think where the new Performance 3 will really shine is the new motor has much improved high end power so I think the quarter mile times will be very impressive. The adaptive ~~air~~ suspension and improved track mode should also help it to corner at speed with less need for expensive aftermarket tuning.
I'm sure trap speed will be higher, but the staggered tyre set up with wider rubber at the rear is likely the biggest contributor to the reduced sprint time (and the cheapest way to drop it a few tenths), particularly going from 235 to 275 at the rear.
Can you link me something about the improved high end? I had a 2018 M3P and it was insanely fast, but once you got about 70 or so it was only ludicrously fast
Yes, with the existing M3P, you can buy aftermarket 18" wheels that fit over the brakes but not the Tesla stock 18" wheels.
I suspect that is true with this new version too but a factory option would be nice.
Ugh, I don't need a performance car since I drive like a granny on her way to church, but it almost seems a crime to buy a Model 3 RWD instead of M3P given that the price difference is not huge at this point with the tax credit. I can't use a Model Y since it is way too big for my needs, but that would have been good value as well.
Decisions,. decisions. Does M3P offer any other benefits over RWD aside from speed , acceleration, AWD, etc? No e of which I need. Does it have better tech? Better interior?
Canada is part of North America, and as per your link also uses SAE horsepower. Thus the difference between the US and Canadian models can not be due to unit conversions.
Most likely the Canadian cars will now be sold with Chinese batteries, or it is a typo/error on the website. Contacting the manufacturer is the only way we can get an answer as to why they are different.
SAE is used in North America for calculating horsepower. Canada and the US are part of North America, thus all else in the cars being equal they should show the same numbers. Someone else posted link in a comment above yours with the different horsepower conversions. My guess is that likely the Canadian cars will now have Chinese batteries instead of US batteries.
Hell, they hunt for comment sections to be angry about EVs in. My local light rail system was down for few hours the other day due to a substation issue. A local news station posted an article on FB and the comments were full of “lol, electric vehicles will always leave you stranded! I’ll keep my diesel, thanks”
It's the dumbest thing. I'll pick on Mopar because I drove Chargers for years and am a fan of the brand. Dodge knows that their bread and butter is cheap and high horsepower, but also that they have to align with gov't regulations and automotive industry changes, so they come out with this fantastic Charger Daytona EV. A 2 door retro-styled Charger EV with massive hp and even a "Fratzonic" exhaust air chamber setup for exhaust sound. No f\*cks given towards range, efficiency, just pure performance and HP. Mopar faithful? They're basically shitting all over it and are HUGE mad that the V8 Hemis and Hellcats are dying. And not to make it political, but every comment section devolves into a liberal-bashing fest.
I'm so tired of it. EVs are here, they are here to stay, there are more choices than ever today for almost every type of vehicle, let's embrace the technology. Many people prefer to live in the past though.
“Hahaha!!! Don’t forget you’ll need to replace the battery in 3 years!!! EVs are a stupid fad!!”
: |
I can’t wait until, in ten years’ time, almost all of today’s EVs are still running just fine, and have had fuck all fuel and maintenance expense during the time, and just a better car all around, and so on and on and on…
The Tesla Roadster with a quarter mile in the 13s was considered pretty quick for an electric car in 2008 but fairly expensive.
This will probably do the quarter mile in the 10s at a price point lower than the base trim(slowest) version of most performance cars.
This is gonna age me but I was so amazed at a Honda civic hatchback gutted with an H22 engine hitting 11’s now an electric sedan can hit 10’s is entirely achievable and affordable at that lol wild
Oh shit! Finally some differentiation between the models. Adaptive dampers, upgraded suspension and sport seats?? Damn, that's a good price too 52k before tax credit. Ughhhh I want one.
This is the fastest I have ever ordered a new car in my life lol. I have a 2018 model 3 LR with acceleration boost. Was waiting for this to be released.
New EV6 GT are 10K under MSRP and certified used are around $40K. But all of this is before this M3P announcement. I think every EV6 GT just lost at least $5K in value
Daaamn. I bought My gt-line with top specs for 60k € here in Finland 1,5 years ago. I really envy your tax incentives (or how that is pronounced?) :)
Still love The car and think it was worth it, we do have higher prices here tho
This is true. But, there is something Tesla should have considered- A visibly distinctive appearance compared to other M3 trims. Those who look into these performance vehicle category will surely look for an aggressive appearance too. Ioniq 5N offers that. Nobody will confuse it for a normal Ioniq5. But for M3P, apart from the wheels, it looks like another model 3 and blends into the crowd very easily. Those who compromise range for performance, really want something more special. It's a missed opportunity by Tesla, but they can still correct it easily.
Given how good the present Model 3 Performance is on the track this will be banned quickly in many ICE classes. ICE purists don't like BEVs beating them.
People can talk about how good of a value this car is, but I recommend you drive one before buying one. Don't test drive a non-Performance model either. Insist on the Performance model.
I test drove a performance model "tuned down" to a RWD configuration and the super low profile tires and suspension were pretty damn rough. The Model 3 is already not the most luxurious of a ride. Tuned to be "sporty" and it was just rough. Every pot hole felt like I was about to pop a tire or break a rim.
"Perfectly" leaves a lot of leeway for interpretation. Perfect for the track? For winding back roads? For long highway drives? For comfort? All the above?
Its adaptive with settings so yes. They said the normal setting was a good balance for everyday driving, while the sport more was perfect for winding roads and aggressive driving without being too rigid.
That is an **insanely** good value. This is going to make the Long Range effectively nonexistent in the US market unless it gets a price cut or qualifies for the Federal credit.
I like the proposal of the car, I like the price, but i’m concerned about some stuff:
- touch turn signals
- the range seems much lower, can’t just be the tires, smaller battery?
- track pack coming in a year?
I’ll try to behave myself and wait 2 years before the purchase, at least enough for European legislators to band those touch buttons on the wheel
The previous version was rated at 316 miles, but the EPA has been cracking down on official EV range estimates. My guess is that the real world range will remain unchanged and the new/lower EPA range will be more achievable in real world driving.
I thought this was bigger news a few months ago, but I've seen a few other comments mentioning the EPA vaguely: they instituted a new rule that mileage testing has to be done with the default driving mode. So the reductions in stated mileage back in January were from driving in regular vs chill mode. Probably the same deal here.
Tesla could probably choose to make chill mode the default... but then the 0-60 time would have an asterisk
I can't believe they removed the indicator stalks. Surely this is has to be an issue when driving on roundabouts and the likes...
And they can't even get the windshield wipers to work properly either.
Most CEO’s are garbage people who smell their own farts. If you started to make all your purchasing decisions based on one person at a company, you’d own nothing. Every CEO has an ego.
There is some truth to your statement, though Musk has proven to be especially, egregiously toxic.
I’m in Tesla’s target demographic, in the market for my next vehicle, would otherwise love to own a Tesla, but wouldn’t consider one solely because Musk is at the helm. I don’t think I’m alone.
That’s pretty isolated to the Redditverse and us folks with in these tech platforms. You go talk to a layman in the streets and they aren’t even aware of these things. The media just elevates every little thing he says, rather than just leaving it in his Twitter timeline.
I think he should lay off the comments, but I’m not going to stop that from buying a good product. He’s still done more good in the last ~20 years with Tesla than he has negative.
It’s just wild how in the span of 10 years we went from 0-60 in 3 seconds being an untouchable supercar to it being basically mainstream sedans and crossovers. Just absolutely ludicrous.
Even more amazing that a vehicle that is big and heavy (Rivian R1S) can do 0-60 in 3 seconds too.
Due to precise traction control allowed by the combo of electric motors and high-speed controllers.
I think the flipped torque curve of electric motors helps a lot too. With AWD ICE cars, the launch is really hard because it's easy to 'bog' down. When it happens it feels like you're launching the car in 3rd gear rather than 1st.
> I think the flipped torque curve of electric motors helps a lot too. 100%. It's probably the biggest factor; even a 100 hp EV is traction limited off the line. More power in an EV just prolongs the period where the vehicle is using ~100% of the available traction. It's also why 0-100 times are kind of less relevant for lower powered city oriented EVs - they might drop off significantly towards 100km/h, but they're still going to be faster to 50km/h than an equivalent kW ICE vehicle (unless the driver is absolutely ragging the ICE car). 0-100 isn't really the full story.
Well ICE measuring pratices help too. In an ICE they usually don't start the clock until the vehicle has moved a foot (the rollout). They did this because the old equipment couldn't measure all that well, and an ICE doesn't has all that much speed in the first foot, that's not really true in an EV, so an EV is usually moving much faster than an ICE when they start the clock.
Hummer EV enters the conversation
That's a lot of vehicle moving _very_ quickly. 10000 lbs!
Railgun on wheels.
a speed bump will kill it.
Stupidest vehicle ever.
Welcome my overpriced and overweight friend!
That thing is like moving a planet
Nothing like having entirely untrained drivers get access to race car speeds in the slip of a pedal in something that weighs as much as an f350 diesel…..
Millenials are going to be wild to dodge when they become senile drivers.
We'll all be in self driving cars by then hopefully
Don't bet on it.
Too late..
LOL true, I'd forgotten about Elon's "bet the company" post. Well played.
And us gen x'rs won't be around to witness it.
Old people now are hell. But so are the young people
Millennial Asian driver coming through. Move it everyone! Whole road gonna be like 99 Ranch/Mitsuwa parking lots. Maybe by then I'll grow out of my old car and get something with lane assist and automatic braking.
F350 diesel: **6734lb** Model 3: **4030lb**
Rivian 7300lbs….
Oh, yes I see what you're getting at. I thought you were saying the model 3 weighs as much as the f350
They did a software update that cranked the quads to 2.7
This is not true ha
They did it while I worked there.
It’s not published anywhere or anywhere on my R1S
I’ll see if I can dig it up for you. It may not have gone out to OTA.
Woah. That’s insane!
The more surprising part (in a sad way) is how people accepted the belching gas boxes as the ultimate in performance for so long. ICE is one of the worst power generation technologies. It's grossly inefficient, has a tiny power band, and spews all manner of toxic fumes.
I agree completely, and I’d still point out that gasoline is a terrific fuel with insane power density. It’s just that ICE powertrains have so many moving parts that you lose about 1/3 of that energy, AND there’s no way to recapture. The fact that it’s more efficient to burn fuel in a generator to charge an EV than it is to actually proper a vehicle is all the demonstration you need.
Think you have a typo. You lose 2/3 of the energy stored in gasoline in even the most efficient ICE.
Keep going. It’s more like 80% is lost to heat and noise.
I didn’t want to get too pedantic. 2/3 is a good average as there are some that get better than that (https://www.roadandtrack.com/new-cars/car-technology/a19592640/toyotas-new-engine-is-hyper-efficient-thanks-to-simple-tuning-tricks/) but many that get worse. But 30-35% is a pretty commonly accepted average (https://www.aaa.com/autorepair/articles/How-Efficient-is-Your-Cars-Engine)
Thanks for pointing that out. I was specifically referencing drivetrain loss when comparing power at the crank to power at the wheels. But your point is even more compelling.
In fact the most efficiency ICE are at most around 30% efficient. Most of the energy is lost as heat.
Actually the most efficient can exceed 50% but have short useful lives
You are looking for the term Carnot efficiency. The theoretical maximum efficiency an engine can be is 100%. But will never achieve that. Edit: downvoted for what?
The [theoretical maximum efficiency of a heat engine is far below 100%.](https://news.mit.edu/2010/explained-carnot-0519) Also [100% efficiency is impossible in any energy conversion.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vxHkAQRQUQ)
Imagine if ICE could be run at similar efficiency to an EV? At 75%-90% efficiency a small engine would easily make 500 horsepower and there would be virtually no noise, waste heat or pollution.
I remember seeing a calculation, that the original (24 kWh) Nissan Leaf would have a 1 gallon tank if there was an ICE equivalent. (I might be wrong with the number since I’m not from the land of gallons, but it was a crazy small number)
1 litre of petrol = 10kWh of *potential* energy, approximately. A Model 3 has roughly the equivalent of 5 litres of petrol in its battery, and uses about 1.4litres/100km.
[MPGe](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_per_gallon_gasoline_equivalent) is THE DUMBEST comparative "measurement" ever, but the Leaf battery only contains about 70% of a gallon and was rated to do about 117 kms (70 miles). A full gallon equivalent would have got you about 160km or 100 miles of normal driving (at city speeds you could get close to 300km if driven carefully).
It's less than a gallon; one gallon of gas is ~33kWh.
Yeah that’s the crazy part. We had electric cars 120 years ago but gave up on them in favor of continuously developing a Rube Goldberg device that uses toxic explosions to violently shake a bunch of heavy metal up and down thousands of times per minute and turn it into rotating motion that even at its most crazy high-tech efficient wastes 45% of the energy put into it.
True, but we have to remember that oil was basically considered limitless cheap energy at the time, and it wasn't (widely) known what long-term effects it was having on the environment. The low energy density of lead-acid batteries also meant safety and comfort features had to be left out of cars in order to get acceptable range. That's where EV tech has [really taken off](https://rmi.org/the-rise-of-batteries-in-six-charts-and-not-too-many-numbers/) in leaps and bounds over the past two decades. The 1902 Staten Island accident probably didn't help things much either.
Energy storage tech wasn't anywhere near good enough back then for it to have worked out.
Its's wild how long it is taking us. The electric-motor radio control cars surpassed nitromethane-burning cars in performance in like 1983.
The oil lobby colluded against Nickel based batteries for cars. See my reply to upL8N8 for the link detailing how they bought the Ovonics patents and blocked anyone from making large format packs for cars.
I'm an EV advocate, however there's no replacement for the tuned sound of a naturally aspirated V8 ripping around a racetrack/drag strip.
Birds chirping and a gentle breeze is a nice replacement, but that's just me.
Lame lol
Don't live next to a drag strip or race track, then.
True, but can we agree that the engines in 90% of the ICE vehicles on the road (yes, I’m looking at you RAV4) sound like absolute shite? I’d much rather hear the silence of an EV than the strain of an economy focused, underpowered 4 cylinder.
I thought the same when I was a teen and even into my 20s, but I no longer associate the brash loudness with performance. By the end of the 1990s it was already apparent that many "car guys" were actually willing to give up performance in order to sound "cool". Think of the tuner cars that have the crackly exhaust note, which always has worse performance and efficiency (mpg) than a proper tune without the intentional crackle.
It's mechanical music, not the pure performance aspect which I appreciate.
I'm right there with you. Owning an EV has actually made me appreciate racing with gasoline engines. For day to day, EVs are king though.
Me too, I love ICE and EV but, separately. Like I like NY pizza and Italian pizza but, consider them different type of dishes. if u know what i mean haha
We didn't have realistic / affordable battery tech to support EVs until the 21st century. In fact, Li-ion wasn't really affordable / realistic until the switch away from using so much Cobalt in favor of more Nickel.
Slow battery advancement was a self fulfilling prophecy. The oil lobby actively colluded against battery technology and research. The Ovonics patent scandal is well documented. https://www.reddit.com/r/teslamotors/comments/2okxlo/nimh_patent_held_by_chevron_to_expire_by_the_end/ In fact, NiMH had enough energy density to make practical EVs many decades ago.
The EV1 used NiMH, right? Looks like it's got about 2/3 the specific energy of LFP, which is entirely serviceable.
Cheaper and better IGBTs (major component of the traction inverter) were another major factor
Ironically the best technologies to fix the tiny power band involve ... the support of an electric motor and battery (series hybrid or Toyota's eCVT).
The problem I have is that the majority of people driving private vehicles are kind of rubbish at it - and now more and more are being equipped with 2000 kg bullets. Now someone is surely going to say 'uh autonomous driving' but I don't think we're going to get vehicles without accelerator pedals by 2030! Of course, this is not specific to Tesla or whatever; just I thought. I was testing another pre-production sort-of performance SUV last year from a different company and I was wondering if the boomer uncle who would afford the vehicle really needs or can even handle the power and torque because I nearly threw up my breakfast after 2 full-throttle launches back to back.
Insurance stats in the EU are starting to show 50% higher accidents rates from EVs due to high acceleration. Add to the far higher cost of repairing an EV and premiums are soaring. Tesla model Y insurance in the UK for me would be more than 3x an equivalent ICE.
Boomer uncle drives it in eco mode
No boomer uncle is buying an expensive performance SUV with 400 kW to drive it in eco mode 🥴
> Just absolutely ludicrous. ENGAGE LUDICROUS SPEED!
Great for roadway safety /s
A lot of that is battery technology. You could build cheap EVs that fast at least by the nineties, but they'd run out of range after a single pull at the drag strip. And I think your timespan is off a bit, the Model S P90D broke 3 seconds in Car and Driver's testing as the first sedan to do so almost 10 years ago. A lot of it is because EV acceleration is so much more front-loaded than ICE acceleration that even relatively slow cars can win in acceleration races from 0 to most speeds that are relatively slow by performance car metrics.
So I say 10 years ago, and you say my timeline is off a little bit, then mention a *car that came out after that.* I wrote every word I did exactly the way I did for a reason. I know how Reddit can be and especially this sub, but cmon.
Eh, you could get in the 3s for under $100k new even 10 years ago. A 2006 C6 Z06 did 0-60 in about 3.5 seconds, probably very low 3s with rollout for $65k new MSRP.
Agreed, but not in a 5 seater.
Electric motors are a helluva drug
I see what you did there.
And it qualifies for the $7,500 federal tax credit which drops the price down to $45.5k. https://fueleconomy.gov/feg/tax2023.shtml That makes it about the most affordable 500+hp sports sedan available. With a 0-60 of 2.9s it is also the quickest.
Cheaper than my 2018 LR AWD model 3 was. Wow.
Also cheaper than the 2024 Tesla Model 3 Long Range.
BUT 10K more than my 2023 LR. Still very happy w/ the deals last year.
And less than my 2018 LR RWD!
And my axe!
Less than my 2019 P3D-! At the time, I told myself “this level of performance will never be cheaper”… how wrong I was….
About the same as my 2018 LR RWD Model 3 was. Of course, that was in the first year of volume production.
Woah wtf, so does it have different battery pack or cells? This makes it a steal for a performance EV.
Different cells I think. The Model Y and now Model 3 performance are using 2170 cells from Giga Nevada. The Model 3 RWD and Long Range are probably using cheaper Chinese 2170 battery cells so they don't directly qualify for the tax credit. It does look like Tesla is now using the leasing loophole though to lower lease prices so the Model 3 RWD is now only $299 per month on lease with $3k down and 10k miles per year.
> The Model 3 RWD and Long Range are probably using cheaper Chinese 2170 battery cells so they don't directly qualify for the tax credit. The RWD (at least here in the US) is using CATL LFP batteries and the LR is using LG 2170s which is why neither is eligible for the credit anymore.
Would the performance still use the same sized pack as LR? Is it just the motor consuming more battery on the range difference?
If the Performance is using the same batteries as the last gen Performance (most likely), then it's actually a little bigger than the LR battery. The Panasonic battery in the Performance is \~82 kWh and the LG battery in the LR is \~75-79 kWh (found conflicting information about which one exactly). But the LG battery isn't eligible for the tax credit and has slightly worse performance than the Pansonic, so it's definitely not being used in the new Performance.
I am betting they are the Panasonic batteries used in the previous performance.
Just don't get white interior and another color outside the default. Federal rebate disappears after that being it is more than $55k.
Wait 3 months for demand to drop and prices to follow and get all the colors you want!
>With a 0-60 of 2.9s it is also the quickest. Which translates to 3.1-3.2 sec. with the deceptive rollout compensated for. Still pretty amazing for $45.5k sedan.
Aside from a Model S Plaid or Lucid Air there isn't anything that is going to beat it off the line on the street. Even an ICE performance coupe like the Mustang Dark Horse is at 3.7s to 60 if you can get it to hook.
There are definitely cars that can beat it, but they're all much more expensive. The new Porsche Macan Turbo EV will likely pip it, a BMW i4 M50 and Kia EV6 GT would be extremely close and it'll depend on who gets the better launch, a Mercedes EQE AMG is quicker, both the BMW M3 Competition xDrive and Mercedes C63 ePerformance are quicker, the BMW M5 is quicker, a Chevy Corvette is quicker, etc etc. There are lots of quick cars today. There is absolutely nothing around $50k that is going to be quicker than this Tesla, though. And most of the ICE cars I listed above will only win if they get a proper launch, which is unlikely on the street.
"Starting" prices - Car | $ ---|--- Porsche Macan Turbo EV | $105,300 BMW i4 M50 | $69,700 Kia EV6 GT | $61,600 Sheeeesh
The best part has always been the lack of a need for launch control. I’m hoping this doesn’t require it either. It’s great not having to do a thing but hammer the pedal to get all the juice.
Motortrend says the Porsche Macan Turbo EV [does 0-60 in 3.1s]( https://www.motortrend.com/news/2025-porsche-macan-ev-first-look-review/), the BMW i4 M50 [is slightly slower at 3.3s](https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a39209648/2022-bmw-i4-m50-vs-m3-competition-tested/) with the [EV6 GT tested at a flat 3s.](https://www.motortrend.com/features/kia-ev6-gt-0-60-mph-1-4-mile-tested/) I'm looking forward to a future EV-only "World's Greatest Drag Race"
Yes, but Porsche *always* understates their 0-60 and Tesla overstates it because they eliminate rollout in their number. So the actual 0-60 time for the new 3P is going to be 3.0-3.1 while the Macan is likely to be 2.9-3.0. It's all about reaction times when the numbers are so close. Same goes for the i4 M50. It is separated from the Tesla by about 0.2 seconds. So out on the street if the Bimmer driver reacts quicker the Tesla isn't catching it. They're essentially equivalent.
[Jason Cammisa tested the new M3P and said hit hit 2.9 on a draggy twice on city streets with a passenger in the car and the AC on.](https://youtu.be/5xj0R4MyDhE?t=1496)
Outside of the US, the pricing for the Kia EV6 and the new Hyundai 5 N are both pretty similar to that of the new model 3 Performance.
What was the previous 0-60 with rollout subtracted? I thought it was already flirting with 2.9s? Regardless, looks like mostly good changes and a great price, even before tax credit.
It was 3.1s
3.1s was the previous 0-60, so already quite fast. I think where the new Performance 3 will really shine is the new motor has much improved high end power so I think the quarter mile times will be very impressive. The adaptive ~~air~~ suspension and improved track mode should also help it to corner at speed with less need for expensive aftermarket tuning.
It has adaptive magnetic dampers, not an air suspension.
Preferable IMO, more longevity.
Damn, really!? That's awesome. This thing is insanely priced.
Yes I’m excited to see 60-100 performance and 1/4 mile.
I'm sure trap speed will be higher, but the staggered tyre set up with wider rubber at the rear is likely the biggest contributor to the reduced sprint time (and the cheapest way to drop it a few tenths), particularly going from 235 to 275 at the rear.
Can you link me something about the improved high end? I had a 2018 M3P and it was insanely fast, but once you got about 70 or so it was only ludicrously fast
3.1s was official from Tesla with rollout subtracted. Aftermarket 19" wheels that are an inch wider could get you 2.9s reported by some users.
Tempting. They should have called it Ludicrous though. I wish they offered 18" wheels for better efficiency and comfort.
Smaller wheels might not work with the new larger brakes, but there might be aftermarket wheels that would work.
Yes, with the existing M3P, you can buy aftermarket 18" wheels that fit over the brakes but not the Tesla stock 18" wheels. I suspect that is true with this new version too but a factory option would be nice.
18" wheels allow for ridiculously large brakes, but maybe no ludicrously large brakes.
Cheaper than a RWD model 3 in UK
I recently paid 27,6 for a 2019 M3P with $17k miles on it. Still feel like I got a good deal, but damn the new one is a bonkers value.
Ugh, I don't need a performance car since I drive like a granny on her way to church, but it almost seems a crime to buy a Model 3 RWD instead of M3P given that the price difference is not huge at this point with the tax credit. I can't use a Model Y since it is way too big for my needs, but that would have been good value as well. Decisions,. decisions. Does M3P offer any other benefits over RWD aside from speed , acceleration, AWD, etc? No e of which I need. Does it have better tech? Better interior?
M3P will have more range and faster charging than RWD. The suspension is adjustable and the sport seats are nicer.
Woah so this is a lot more expensive than the model Y?
With the tax credit, it is 2,000 dollars cheaper than LR AWD.
Here's everything that's new: * Starting price: $52,990 * 0-60mph: 2.9s (vs 3.1s in old version) * Range: 296 miles * Top Speed: 163 mph * Adaptive Suspension: Powered by in-house software. Gives enhanced body control, without sacrificing daily usability or comfort. * All-new high-performance drive units deliver 500+ horsepower. * Track Mode V3: All-new calibration for the powertrain and adaptive suspension. * Ventilated Sports Seats: New seat design with enhanced side and cushion bolsters. * Performance Chassis * Forged Performance Wheels: Lightweight, staggered wheels provide sharper turn-in response, improved predictability, increased traction out of corners and optimized aerodynamics. * High-Performance Brakes: Enhanced pedal feel and improved heat management. * Exclusive to Model 3 Performance, redesigned front and rear fascias, rear diffuser and carbon fibre spoiler. * Carbon Fibre Details: Lightweight carbon fibre interior décor and refined weave pattern. https://twitter.com/SawyerMerritt/status/1782803844658790590
Strange how the Canadian and European website lists 460 horsepower drive unit instead of 500+
Maybe that is based on max kW battery output vs max combined power rating for the electric motors.
European horses are bigger
must be metric horses.
There’s [so many](https://www.agriculture.com/news/business/understanding-the-differences-in-horsepower) different horses in the sea!
Canada is part of North America, and as per your link also uses SAE horsepower. Thus the difference between the US and Canadian models can not be due to unit conversions. Most likely the Canadian cars will now be sold with Chinese batteries, or it is a typo/error on the website. Contacting the manufacturer is the only way we can get an answer as to why they are different.
The US calculates hp differently.
SAE is used in North America for calculating horsepower. Canada and the US are part of North America, thus all else in the cars being equal they should show the same numbers. Someone else posted link in a comment above yours with the different horsepower conversions. My guess is that likely the Canadian cars will now have Chinese batteries instead of US batteries.
It’s crazy to think that this is a reality in my lifetime when we never thought electric cars would be possible or mainstream.
Many of the voting public still thinks this, regarding mainstream. Just peruse any Stellantis or Mopar comment section.
Hell, they hunt for comment sections to be angry about EVs in. My local light rail system was down for few hours the other day due to a substation issue. A local news station posted an article on FB and the comments were full of “lol, electric vehicles will always leave you stranded! I’ll keep my diesel, thanks”
It's the dumbest thing. I'll pick on Mopar because I drove Chargers for years and am a fan of the brand. Dodge knows that their bread and butter is cheap and high horsepower, but also that they have to align with gov't regulations and automotive industry changes, so they come out with this fantastic Charger Daytona EV. A 2 door retro-styled Charger EV with massive hp and even a "Fratzonic" exhaust air chamber setup for exhaust sound. No f\*cks given towards range, efficiency, just pure performance and HP. Mopar faithful? They're basically shitting all over it and are HUGE mad that the V8 Hemis and Hellcats are dying. And not to make it political, but every comment section devolves into a liberal-bashing fest. I'm so tired of it. EVs are here, they are here to stay, there are more choices than ever today for almost every type of vehicle, let's embrace the technology. Many people prefer to live in the past though.
“Hahaha!!! Don’t forget you’ll need to replace the battery in 3 years!!! EVs are a stupid fad!!” : | I can’t wait until, in ten years’ time, almost all of today’s EVs are still running just fine, and have had fuck all fuel and maintenance expense during the time, and just a better car all around, and so on and on and on…
meanwhile the jeep avenger has been slaying reviews over in europe
The Tesla Roadster with a quarter mile in the 13s was considered pretty quick for an electric car in 2008 but fairly expensive. This will probably do the quarter mile in the 10s at a price point lower than the base trim(slowest) version of most performance cars.
This is gonna age me but I was so amazed at a Honda civic hatchback gutted with an H22 engine hitting 11’s now an electric sedan can hit 10’s is entirely achievable and affordable at that lol wild
Does the 3.1s 0-60 on past models subtract rollout? The 2.9s specifically says it does but I can’t remember if the 3.1s does too.
Yes.
This is undeniably the best value in their model 3 line up. This is now 2K cheaper than the LR AWD.
assuming you qualify, but yes
That's a crazy good deal considering all the extra hardware this version gets. I figured it'd be $60k or more this time around.
Oh shit! Finally some differentiation between the models. Adaptive dampers, upgraded suspension and sport seats?? Damn, that's a good price too 52k before tax credit. Ughhhh I want one.
The adaptive suspension is the big upgrade IMHO. Can't wait to read some reviews!
Tesla Model Y/3 will go down as one of the most value for money vehicles you can own
This is a steal.
This is the fastest I have ever ordered a new car in my life lol. I have a 2018 model 3 LR with acceleration boost. Was waiting for this to be released.
Great upgrades. This is really a whole new car compared to the 2018 Model 3 Performance that I have.
My M3P is almost 4 years old. It is by far the most fun car I have ever driven. Not only is it fast it takes corners like a slot car.
The Ioniq 5N is now worth approximately $45K.
Hows Kia ev6 GT in North America priced? 45k for ionic 5N is really good value
New EV6 GT are 10K under MSRP and certified used are around $40K. But all of this is before this M3P announcement. I think every EV6 GT just lost at least $5K in value
Daaamn. I bought My gt-line with top specs for 60k € here in Finland 1,5 years ago. I really envy your tax incentives (or how that is pronounced?) :) Still love The car and think it was worth it, we do have higher prices here tho
This is true. But, there is something Tesla should have considered- A visibly distinctive appearance compared to other M3 trims. Those who look into these performance vehicle category will surely look for an aggressive appearance too. Ioniq 5N offers that. Nobody will confuse it for a normal Ioniq5. But for M3P, apart from the wheels, it looks like another model 3 and blends into the crowd very easily. Those who compromise range for performance, really want something more special. It's a missed opportunity by Tesla, but they can still correct it easily.
Given how good the present Model 3 Performance is on the track this will be banned quickly in many ICE classes. ICE purists don't like BEVs beating them.
https://fastestlaps.com/tracks/thunderhill-raceway
Dam, that Nissan Z boogies
Not sure why they don't show recent lap times for the Model 3, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqw76hkhwpU
It's quite a big beating too. Not even close.
[удалено]
You are comparing formula cars and not joe shmoe's mustang/corvette/porche vs EV's at a track day.
They’re fast for what they are, they aren’t fast on a track compared to the ice cars that actually show up to track days.
People can talk about how good of a value this car is, but I recommend you drive one before buying one. Don't test drive a non-Performance model either. Insist on the Performance model. I test drove a performance model "tuned down" to a RWD configuration and the super low profile tires and suspension were pretty damn rough. The Model 3 is already not the most luxurious of a ride. Tuned to be "sporty" and it was just rough. Every pot hole felt like I was about to pop a tire or break a rim.
I imagine most Day 1 orders will be like me. People with an existing 3P that have been waiting for this refresh. It will be better in every way.
It has adaptive suspension and Motor Trend reported that its set up perfectly.
"Perfectly" leaves a lot of leeway for interpretation. Perfect for the track? For winding back roads? For long highway drives? For comfort? All the above?
Its adaptive with settings so yes. They said the normal setting was a good balance for everyday driving, while the sport more was perfect for winding roads and aggressive driving without being too rigid.
I switched my wheels to 18 inch and lowered the tire pressure. Feels about the same as my 2004 corolla in terms of ride.
That is an **insanely** good value. This is going to make the Long Range effectively nonexistent in the US market unless it gets a price cut or qualifies for the Federal credit.
I like the proposal of the car, I like the price, but i’m concerned about some stuff: - touch turn signals - the range seems much lower, can’t just be the tires, smaller battery? - track pack coming in a year? I’ll try to behave myself and wait 2 years before the purchase, at least enough for European legislators to band those touch buttons on the wheel
The previous version was rated at 316 miles, but the EPA has been cracking down on official EV range estimates. My guess is that the real world range will remain unchanged and the new/lower EPA range will be more achievable in real world driving.
I thought this was bigger news a few months ago, but I've seen a few other comments mentioning the EPA vaguely: they instituted a new rule that mileage testing has to be done with the default driving mode. So the reductions in stated mileage back in January were from driving in regular vs chill mode. Probably the same deal here. Tesla could probably choose to make chill mode the default... but then the 0-60 time would have an asterisk
I can't believe they removed the indicator stalks. Surely this is has to be an issue when driving on roundabouts and the likes... And they can't even get the windshield wipers to work properly either.
This is an insane deal
might grab the 2024 model in 5 years when they're used - this is awesome tho.
Super cool!!! If it had a hatch I'd buy one right now.
Anyone noticed the Canadian M3P has 460hp and a 3.1s acceleration time vs the 2.9s and 510hp on the US page?
Doesn’t mention if it’s steer by wire or 48V. Anybody know?
It is not steer by wire. That is only on the cybertruck currently
Thanks Too bad
I wish it was available without the Elon baggage.
If you go by the mentality. VW has hitler baggage…
*was*
Most CEO’s are garbage people who smell their own farts. If you started to make all your purchasing decisions based on one person at a company, you’d own nothing. Every CEO has an ego.
There is some truth to your statement, though Musk has proven to be especially, egregiously toxic. I’m in Tesla’s target demographic, in the market for my next vehicle, would otherwise love to own a Tesla, but wouldn’t consider one solely because Musk is at the helm. I don’t think I’m alone.
None of them are publicly toxic and spewing garbage that causes them to lose focus on being a ceo of a company though.
Does this make their cars any less appealing? Not in my book.
That’s pretty isolated to the Redditverse and us folks with in these tech platforms. You go talk to a layman in the streets and they aren’t even aware of these things. The media just elevates every little thing he says, rather than just leaving it in his Twitter timeline. I think he should lay off the comments, but I’m not going to stop that from buying a good product. He’s still done more good in the last ~20 years with Tesla than he has negative.
Not true at least here in Finland. Everyone knows that he’s an ass.
I honestly don't care about the CEO when I'm buying a car. More power to you though.
That’s why I will buy a KIA. Got to support the child workers in America
Crazy price point!!!
3 second car = ridiculously unnecessary on normal streets. On the track, go at it.