The easiest way for a sport is a smaller drivetrain in the front (150kW is enough) for better recuperation while offering 4-Wheel drive. This drivetrain could be used later in the bluestar model.
Last edited by Eberhard; 06-26-2011 at 01:17 AM.
#421 S32 P85+
I don't think that developing another drivetrain and the system to control 2 of them would necessarily qualify as the easiest. That sounds complex to me.
In the Roadster acceleration is PEM/motor limited until about 50mph, above that it is battery power limited.
If the Model S is similar, then there isnt a lot of extra battery power for the 2nd drivetrain except below 50mph, so just adding another one may not improve performance at all above 50mph.
I am completely happy with Roadster 0-50, its the 50-100 that needs improving to run with supercars.
Adding a 2nd powertrain will give you the AWD you want, but its not clear that it is the best path to improved performance.
The extra weight just hurts you when you are battery limited.
The "easiest" way to improve performance is to reduce the weight of the car. That improves performance at every speed.
Last edited by richkae; 06-26-2011 at 05:45 AM.
by adding AWD you increase the acceleration within the lower speed-range (up to 50mph). the roadster has a 1/3 front 2/3 rear, this helps a lot for single drive. Hope, Model S is better balanced like 45%/55%. Then only AWD helps to improve acceleration.
#421 S32 P85+
While there is a market for a Model S sport or AWD, I think Tesla would be wise to keep it simple and first get "standard" Model S production going in a reliable fashion. It will be tough enough to get that right time wise but also financially. Let's remember this is Tesla's second model and the first one coming of a production line.
300 miles is OK, but doesn't get you from San Francisco to Los Angeles (need 400 for that).
Once you get to 500, Range Anxiety becomes as extinct as a Dodo bird.
Once you get to 600 you don't even have to worry about a quick charging infrastructure and the whole hybrid thing will have fulfilled its technology bridge purpose.
I agree smorgasbord, once the range is 500 and the price is < $40k, we're going to see a revolution.
For me, 300 is a nice sweet spot. On the rare occasions that we need more than that, perhaps once a year, I know several people who would love to trade cars for that period.
The 2011 Corvette ZR1 is RWD with 51% front / 49% rear and has a 3.4 second 0-60 with ridiculous 335 width rear tires.
The BMW 550i is RWD 50/50 and has a 4.8 second 0-60 with little 275 width tires in the back.
The Lexus LFA is RWD 48/52 and has a 3.6 second 0-60 with 305 width rear tires.
Having more weight on the drive wheels helps you get maximum traction out of your tires, so you can accelerate hard with smaller tires, but I dont think it is necessary at all to have AWD to improve the 0-60 time.
Of course AWD will give you better acceleration when wet and your tires cannot achieve maximum traction, and it helps you corner hard on a racetrack.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)