6 ms·

The model 3 is among the best driving cars. It accelerates very fast, is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground, and they provide smooth power across all

by screye 6y ago

The model 3 is among the best driving cars. It accelerates very fast, is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground, and they provide smooth power across all speed ranges, due to torque being provided directly at the wheels and the lack of a gear box. Tesla cars also have far more trunk space and highest in class safety ratings. They also have an 'appealing' design which includes the titular panoramic roof. Now the car is unpolished across the board. Be that manufacturing, interior materials or general care for UX. But those things matter far more to enthusiasts. Your average family owner cares more about all of Tesla's positives. If Tesla can provide good customer service and aftermarket support, (which it has historically been terrible at) then I can see the other shortcomings not being deal breakers at all. Now my dream car will stay the Mazda 3 2021. But, I am a certain type of weird.

FireBeyond 6y ago
> It accelerates very fast, is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground, and they provide smooth power across all speed ranges, due to torque being provided directly at the wheels and the lack of a gear box. What about handling in corners, etc., ride comfort? Genuinely curious. I have driven a (2016?) Model S a few times, and wasn't hugely impressed with the handling (beyond as you same, the very valid straight line acceleration and linear-ish power curve), compared to my Audi, or Jaguar.
- abc_lisper 6y ago
  Its a joy in the corners. The batteries have all the weight, and that weight is at the center of the car, and you get a car that spins like a top(when you want to). My last accord (2015) had better ride quality. I was honestly very impressed with autopilot(works for commuter traffic very well) and handling..
- pwagland 6y ago
  The model 3 handles way better than the Model S, except for (probably) the not yet released model S Plaid (due next year). The new 2020 model S handles a lot better than the older models, but is still quite big and boaty compared to the model 3, at least assuming that you want a "drivers car". That said, I love driving my model S, it's quite comfortable, and rock solid for "normal" driving.
  - TwoBit 6y ago
    Model 3 is more nimble than the S. But it also feels cheaper and less solid. Depends on what you like.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- athriren 6y ago
  i have a model 3 performance and the suspension tune that came from the factory is worse than any performance car i have driven—rear seat passengers actually complain if you do more than highway cruising or drive somewhere with perfect asphalt. i am used to suspensions being stiff, but this one just bounces. tesla considers it within spec. that said, the feeling behind the wheel is completely addicting. i cannot go back to noninstantaneous peak torque. this is pretty lizard brain of me, performance is more than acceleration, but pinning your head against the seat is a ton of fun and when i purchased the c8 hadn’t come out so there wasn’t another 3 second to 60 option in this price bracket. agree with everything upthread about build quality issues, UX is not great, hope you don’t live somewhere that it rains hard because the fastest setting on the wipers is way too slow, etc etc. still fun as hell.
- runT1ME 6y ago
  >What about handling in corners, etc., ride comfort Drives a lot like a higher end mercedes, E-class/CLS feel. Smooth, powerful, good handling but not a tight suspension. My previous BMWs had better handling with better suspensions. Still, when comparing the Model 3 to similar ICE vehicles, the Tesla was hands down a better buy in my opinion.
lambdadmitry 6y ago
> is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground This is the first time I've ever heard people saying "heavy" as a pro. Any car is heavy in a sense of staying firmly on the ground. The rest is steering, suspension, and rubber; a tiny cheap Fiesta ST on good tires and dry tarmac handles like it's on rails. It'll go around a corner much more eagerly though, being about 60% lighter than a model 3.
- modeless 6y ago
  Heavy is the wrong way to describe it. What the Model 3 has is a very low center of gravity and low moment of inertia due to the low and centered battery pack.
- xedeon 6y ago
  Not quite. Low center of gravity is key. "In addition to its near 50/50 weight distribution, Model 3 was also designed with an extremely low polar moment of inertia, which means that its heaviest components are located closer to the car’s center of gravity. Even though Model 3 has no engine, its performance is similar to what’s described as a “mid-engine car” due to its centered battery pack (the heaviest component of the car) and the fact that Model 3’s rear motor is placed slightly in front of the rear axle rather than behind it. Not only does this architecture add to the overall agility and handling of the car, it also improves the capability of stability control by minimizing rotational kinetic energy." Source: https://www.tesla.com/blog/model-3-lowest-probability-injury-any-vehicle-ever-tested-nhtsa https://www.tesla.com/blog/model-3-lowest-probability-injury... This also has some safety benefits such as low rollover risk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L24xzJkCGdk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L24xzJkCGdk
  - thesz 6y ago
    I think that Tesla's PR department is not a right source for judgement. https://fastestlaps.com/tests/95pv46ue63rt https://fastestlaps.com/tests/95pv46ue63rt - Tesla Model 3 Performance does not win big over BMW M3.
    - 6y ago
growse 6y ago
> The model 3 is among the best driving cars. It accelerates very fast, is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground.... This is nonsensical. Nobody ever said "How do we make this drive better? I know! Let's make it heavier!" More mass makes acceleration worse, cornering dynamics worse, ride quality worse and braking worse. There are literally no upsides. It's very good at certain things, but let's step outside of the reality distortion field for a moment...
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  This. The extra mass is done about as well as it can be because it's all at the bottom of a car but jerk the wheel left and right it becomes instantly obvious that it's not a light car.
- thesz 6y ago
  >ride quality worse I think you are wrong here, in this exact point. More mass in the car frame makes ride quality better: you can have more weight in wheels (unsuspended mass) or more responsive suspension.
  - growse 6y ago
    More mass means more inertia, which means you get more body roll and heave. To counter this, you need to compromise on your suspension design (essentially make it stiffer) to stop the thing flopping about. There is some nuance here though: more mass does potentially give you options in lowering the centre of gravity which can certainly help. Putting the batteries in the lowest point is a smart design move from this point of view. In general, I'm not saying you can't make a heavy car have a good ride quality, I'm saying you can make it ride well in spite of the extra mass it has to deal with. Adding more mass doesn't magically let you have a better ride quality.
- SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
  > This is nonsensical. Nobody ever said "How do we make this drive better? I know! Let's make it heavier!" It's not well phrased, but it is better for the vehicle, if the mass is the same, just closer to the ground. Center of mass is lower down. Electric cars have this due to the big heavy "sled" of batteries at the bottom of the vehicle.
simonebrunozzi 6y ago
> is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground, I think you meant "it has a low center of gravity and so sticks to the ground". It's that, not pure weight - otherwise trucks would dominate F1 circuits.
- sk5t 6y ago
  In the early days of auto racing there were maximum weight limits--it was thought that more weight -> bigger engine -> faster car. Of course now things are just the opposite, to the point that race winners hope to collect enough loose bits of rubber ("marbles") to their super-sticky tires from the track during the victory lap to avoid penalty...
  - NLips 6y ago
    Collecting rubber isn’t about adding weight. The teams want to mask the exact tyre wear amount/patterns, which they do by covering the surface with scraps. <edit> Actually this seems less clear cut than I thought. I'd heard from David Coulthard's commentary that the reason for picking up was to cover the wear from other teams' eyes. A quick search suggests many people believe it's to do with weight. The weight explanation seems odd, since if the officials think the tyres are masking the true weight of the car, they can demand a different set are used for the weigh-in, but I can't find an authorative source either way. So it may be to do with weight, or it may be to do with hiding tyre wear. </edit>
- screye 6y ago
  Yep. I most certainly did. I got a 4 year degree in mechanical engineering and worked a full-time job building cars for a bit, and I still wrote down a line that sounds as stupid as it does. But damn, I did not expect that line to draw as much attention as it did down the thread. Such is life.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Sophistifunk 6y ago
> is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground That's... that's not how cars work.
- michaeljohansen 6y ago
  (I get that you're trying to be funny. That's OK.) Nevertheless: He means that electric cars have a "low center of gravity" which matters immensely in collision scenarios. See this short video of a Model X in a capsizing test: https://twitter.com/ValaAfshar/status/1310623334367989761?s=20 https://twitter.com/ValaAfshar/status/1310623334367989761?s=...
  - Sophistifunk 6y ago
    "Low CoG" and "Heavy" are not at all the same thing, and frankly I've known plenty of people in meatspace who genuinely thought "moar heavy === better grip", so I may be over-sensitive to this particular falsehood.
chipotle_coyote 6y ago
> Now the car is unpolished across the board. Be that manufacturing, interior materials or general care for UX. But those things matter far more to enthusiasts. Your average family owner cares more about all of Tesla's positives. This actually seems kind of backwards to me? Car enthusiasts -- at least the way I think of "car enthusiast" -- are the ones who prioritize acceleration, speed and handling to a point where they're forgiving, at least to a point, of other flaws. Tesla also has a lot of tech enthusiast appeal, of course, and their best target market is right at the center of that Venn diagram. However, I'd think "average family owners" are the kinds of folks who are way more likely to think that if they spent $60,000+ on a new car, that car should be as close to problem-free, and even maintenance-free, as realistically possible. They're not prioritizing for under 4-second 0–60 speeds. I mean, they'll also love the high safety ratings and trunk space, but if the car gets a reputation for reliability problems, they're going to remember there's a Volvo dealer next door.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- arcticfox 6y ago
  Tesla's problems generally aren't much about reliability, they're stuff like panel gaps and bad paint, which are in the enthusiast realm. The OP here is really an extreme example.
bobo-the-dodo 6y ago
The model 3 performance is great at straight line but stock suspension isn’t fun to around tight corners. The way it rebounds on road imperfection at highspeed is not confident inspiring. The mass also resists willingness to turn in. Unless I manhandle it I always run wide around corner.
- TwoBit 6y ago
  You always run wide unless you manhandle it? Are you talking about city driving or track racing??
Grazester 6y ago
There is rumor(leaked video) of an AWD speed 3 coming. Both my wife and I like the 3.
barake 6y ago
When compared to dimensionally similar (but certainly not similarly priced!) sedans, the Model 3 ranks well but doesn't really have more cargo space. Dimensions are in cubic feet. BMW 330: 17 Kia Forte: 15.3 Honda Civic (sedan): 15.1 Telsa Model 3: 15.0 (combined front and rear trunk) Hyundai Elantra: 14.4 Volkswagen Jetta: 14.1 Mercedes CLA-250: 13.1 Toyota Corolla: 13.1 Audi A3: 12.3 Subaru WRX: 12 No doubt Tesla vehicles have amazing crash ratings, they've really put together some structurally sound vehicles.
- screye 6y ago
  I am genuinely surprised. I could've sweared the Model 3 was a bigger than that.
JohnBooty 6y ago
I had a 2008 Mazda 3, and that car was amazing. Cheap and absolutely a blast to drive, particularly if you shifted gears yourself. I'm sure that many reading this comment will scoff. However, that car was living proof of one of my favorite truisms when it comes to driving cars in everyday traffic: "It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than it is to drive a fast car slow." That Mazda was not powerful by any means, but it rode low and handled like a sports car. Fun to toss around.
Goz3rr 6y ago
> due to torque being provided directly at the wheels and the lack of a gear box. All Tesla's have gearboxes[1], sometimes to the surprise of the owner when they learn they need their transmission oil changed after thinking they've been driving a car that doesn't need any oil. [1]: https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1051911793373638661 https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1051911793373638661

by screye 6y ago

FireBeyond 6y ago

> It accelerates very fast, is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground, and they provide smooth power across all speed ranges, due to torque being provided directly at the wheels and the lack of a gear box. What about handling in corners, etc., ride comfort? Genuinely curious. I have driven a (2016?) Model S a few times, and wasn't hugely impressed with the handling (beyond as you same, the very valid straight line acceleration and linear-ish power curve), compared to my Audi, or Jaguar.

abc_lisper 6y ago
Its a joy in the corners. The batteries have all the weight, and that weight is at the center of the car, and you get a car that spins like a top(when you want to). My last accord (2015) had better ride quality. I was honestly very impressed with autopilot(works for commuter traffic very well) and handling..
pwagland 6y ago
The model 3 handles way better than the Model S, except for (probably) the not yet released model S Plaid (due next year). The new 2020 model S handles a lot better than the older models, but is still quite big and boaty compared to the model 3, at least assuming that you want a "drivers car". That said, I love driving my model S, it's quite comfortable, and rock solid for "normal" driving.
- TwoBit 6y ago
  Model 3 is more nimble than the S. But it also feels cheaper and less solid. Depends on what you like.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
athriren 6y ago
i have a model 3 performance and the suspension tune that came from the factory is worse than any performance car i have driven—rear seat passengers actually complain if you do more than highway cruising or drive somewhere with perfect asphalt. i am used to suspensions being stiff, but this one just bounces. tesla considers it within spec. that said, the feeling behind the wheel is completely addicting. i cannot go back to noninstantaneous peak torque. this is pretty lizard brain of me, performance is more than acceleration, but pinning your head against the seat is a ton of fun and when i purchased the c8 hadn’t come out so there wasn’t another 3 second to 60 option in this price bracket. agree with everything upthread about build quality issues, UX is not great, hope you don’t live somewhere that it rains hard because the fastest setting on the wipers is way too slow, etc etc. still fun as hell.
runT1ME 6y ago
>What about handling in corners, etc., ride comfort Drives a lot like a higher end mercedes, E-class/CLS feel. Smooth, powerful, good handling but not a tight suspension. My previous BMWs had better handling with better suspensions. Still, when comparing the Model 3 to similar ICE vehicles, the Tesla was hands down a better buy in my opinion.

lambdadmitry 6y ago

> is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground This is the first time I've ever heard people saying "heavy" as a pro. Any car is heavy in a sense of staying firmly on the ground. The rest is steering, suspension, and rubber; a tiny cheap Fiesta ST on good tires and dry tarmac handles like it's on rails. It'll go around a corner much more eagerly though, being about 60% lighter than a model 3.

modeless 6y ago
Heavy is the wrong way to describe it. What the Model 3 has is a very low center of gravity and low moment of inertia due to the low and centered battery pack.
xedeon 6y ago
Not quite. Low center of gravity is key. "In addition to its near 50/50 weight distribution, Model 3 was also designed with an extremely low polar moment of inertia, which means that its heaviest components are located closer to the car’s center of gravity. Even though Model 3 has no engine, its performance is similar to what’s described as a “mid-engine car” due to its centered battery pack (the heaviest component of the car) and the fact that Model 3’s rear motor is placed slightly in front of the rear axle rather than behind it. Not only does this architecture add to the overall agility and handling of the car, it also improves the capability of stability control by minimizing rotational kinetic energy." Source: https://www.tesla.com/blog/model-3-lowest-probability-injury-any-vehicle-ever-tested-nhtsa https://www.tesla.com/blog/model-3-lowest-probability-injury... This also has some safety benefits such as low rollover risk: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L24xzJkCGdk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L24xzJkCGdk
- thesz 6y ago
  I think that Tesla's PR department is not a right source for judgement. https://fastestlaps.com/tests/95pv46ue63rt https://fastestlaps.com/tests/95pv46ue63rt - Tesla Model 3 Performance does not win big over BMW M3.
  - 6y ago

growse 6y ago

> The model 3 is among the best driving cars. It accelerates very fast, is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground.... This is nonsensical. Nobody ever said "How do we make this drive better? I know! Let's make it heavier!" More mass makes acceleration worse, cornering dynamics worse, ride quality worse and braking worse. There are literally no upsides. It's very good at certain things, but let's step outside of the reality distortion field for a moment...

throwaway0a5e 6y ago
This. The extra mass is done about as well as it can be because it's all at the bottom of a car but jerk the wheel left and right it becomes instantly obvious that it's not a light car.
thesz 6y ago
>ride quality worse I think you are wrong here, in this exact point. More mass in the car frame makes ride quality better: you can have more weight in wheels (unsuspended mass) or more responsive suspension.
- growse 6y ago
  More mass means more inertia, which means you get more body roll and heave. To counter this, you need to compromise on your suspension design (essentially make it stiffer) to stop the thing flopping about. There is some nuance here though: more mass does potentially give you options in lowering the centre of gravity which can certainly help. Putting the batteries in the lowest point is a smart design move from this point of view. In general, I'm not saying you can't make a heavy car have a good ride quality, I'm saying you can make it ride well in spite of the extra mass it has to deal with. Adding more mass doesn't magically let you have a better ride quality.
SideburnsOfDoom 6y ago
> This is nonsensical. Nobody ever said "How do we make this drive better? I know! Let's make it heavier!" It's not well phrased, but it is better for the vehicle, if the mass is the same, just closer to the ground. Center of mass is lower down. Electric cars have this due to the big heavy "sled" of batteries at the bottom of the vehicle.

simonebrunozzi 6y ago

> is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground, I think you meant "it has a low center of gravity and so sticks to the ground". It's that, not pure weight - otherwise trucks would dominate F1 circuits.

sk5t 6y ago
In the early days of auto racing there were maximum weight limits--it was thought that more weight -> bigger engine -> faster car. Of course now things are just the opposite, to the point that race winners hope to collect enough loose bits of rubber ("marbles") to their super-sticky tires from the track during the victory lap to avoid penalty...
- NLips 6y ago
  Collecting rubber isn’t about adding weight. The teams want to mask the exact tyre wear amount/patterns, which they do by covering the surface with scraps. <edit> Actually this seems less clear cut than I thought. I'd heard from David Coulthard's commentary that the reason for picking up was to cover the wear from other teams' eyes. A quick search suggests many people believe it's to do with weight. The weight explanation seems odd, since if the officials think the tyres are masking the true weight of the car, they can demand a different set are used for the weigh-in, but I can't find an authorative source either way. So it may be to do with weight, or it may be to do with hiding tyre wear. </edit>
screye 6y ago
Yep. I most certainly did. I got a 4 year degree in mechanical engineering and worked a full-time job building cars for a bit, and I still wrote down a line that sounds as stupid as it does. But damn, I did not expect that line to draw as much attention as it did down the thread. Such is life.

deleted 6y ago

[deleted]

Sophistifunk 6y ago

> is incredibly heavy and so sticks to the ground That's... that's not how cars work.

michaeljohansen 6y ago
(I get that you're trying to be funny. That's OK.) Nevertheless: He means that electric cars have a "low center of gravity" which matters immensely in collision scenarios. See this short video of a Model X in a capsizing test: https://twitter.com/ValaAfshar/status/1310623334367989761?s=20 https://twitter.com/ValaAfshar/status/1310623334367989761?s=...
- Sophistifunk 6y ago
  "Low CoG" and "Heavy" are not at all the same thing, and frankly I've known plenty of people in meatspace who genuinely thought "moar heavy === better grip", so I may be over-sensitive to this particular falsehood.

chipotle_coyote 6y ago

> Now the car is unpolished across the board. Be that manufacturing, interior materials or general care for UX. But those things matter far more to enthusiasts. Your average family owner cares more about all of Tesla's positives. This actually seems kind of backwards to me? Car enthusiasts -- at least the way I think of "car enthusiast" -- are the ones who prioritize acceleration, speed and handling to a point where they're forgiving, at least to a point, of other flaws. Tesla also has a lot of tech enthusiast appeal, of course, and their best target market is right at the center of that Venn diagram. However, I'd think "average family owners" are the kinds of folks who are way more likely to think that if they spent $60,000+ on a new car, that car should be as close to problem-free, and even maintenance-free, as realistically possible. They're not prioritizing for under 4-second 0–60 speeds. I mean, they'll also love the high safety ratings and trunk space, but if the car gets a reputation for reliability problems, they're going to remember there's a Volvo dealer next door.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
arcticfox 6y ago
Tesla's problems generally aren't much about reliability, they're stuff like panel gaps and bad paint, which are in the enthusiast realm. The OP here is really an extreme example.

bobo-the-dodo 6y ago

The model 3 performance is great at straight line but stock suspension isn’t fun to around tight corners. The way it rebounds on road imperfection at highspeed is not confident inspiring. The mass also resists willingness to turn in. Unless I manhandle it I always run wide around corner.

TwoBit 6y ago
You always run wide unless you manhandle it? Are you talking about city driving or track racing??

Grazester 6y ago

There is rumor(leaked video) of an AWD speed 3 coming. Both my wife and I like the 3.

barake 6y ago

When compared to dimensionally similar (but certainly not similarly priced!) sedans, the Model 3 ranks well but doesn't really have more cargo space. Dimensions are in cubic feet. BMW 330: 17 Kia Forte: 15.3 Honda Civic (sedan): 15.1 Telsa Model 3: 15.0 (combined front and rear trunk) Hyundai Elantra: 14.4 Volkswagen Jetta: 14.1 Mercedes CLA-250: 13.1 Toyota Corolla: 13.1 Audi A3: 12.3 Subaru WRX: 12 No doubt Tesla vehicles have amazing crash ratings, they've really put together some structurally sound vehicles.

screye 6y ago
I am genuinely surprised. I could've sweared the Model 3 was a bigger than that.

JohnBooty 6y ago

I had a 2008 Mazda 3, and that car was amazing. Cheap and absolutely a blast to drive, particularly if you shifted gears yourself. I'm sure that many reading this comment will scoff. However, that car was living proof of one of my favorite truisms when it comes to driving cars in everyday traffic: "It's more fun to drive a slow car fast than it is to drive a fast car slow." That Mazda was not powerful by any means, but it rode low and handled like a sports car. Fun to toss around.

Goz3rr 6y ago

> due to torque being provided directly at the wheels and the lack of a gear box. All Tesla's have gearboxes[1], sometimes to the surprise of the owner when they learn they need their transmission oil changed after thinking they've been driving a car that doesn't need any oil. [1]: https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1051911793373638661 https://twitter.com/Tesla/status/1051911793373638661