Musk Says Tesla Model 3 Performance Could Hit 60 MPH In 3.3 Seconds


Tires are key.

For many people shelling out the big bucks for a Tesla Model 3 Performance (base price $64,000), its 3.5-second 0-to-60 mile-per-hour time is probably quick enough. For those who would still like to see some improvement on that metric, good news: it might go even quicker.

While it is true that Tesla has, in the past, delivered software updates that have improved performance, there’s no need to wait for that to happen. You can take matters into your own hands and probably not only improve acceleration, but also lateral grip by merely changing the tires.

If you’ll remember, one of the criticisms brought up by Wall Street Journal contributor Dan Neil yesterday in his worshipful review of the picante Model 3 was the grippiness of its Michelin Pilot Sport 4S shoes. On Twitter, CEO Elon Musk thanked the writer and said to let him know about any improvements that could be made. The tire grip issue was then pointed out to the entrepreneur by Tesla podcaster Ryan McCaffrey.

In tweeted response, which we’ve embedded below, Musk explained the trade-off they had made between range and grip and suggested that with stickier tires and “optimized rims,” a 3.3-second 0-to-60 mph time might be achievable. Makes sense, right? Maybe.

As we saw recently saw, better tires can definitely bring down lap times considerably, but when it comes to decreasing 0-to-60 sprints, things can be more complicated. Last year, for instance, we saw that putting drag radials on a Tesla Model S didn’t seem to have the desired effect over the 1/4-mile. Now, that’s not to say the Musk is wrong about his performance prediction. All we’re saying is he should send us a car equipped with faster footwear and we’ll be happy to undertake some experiments. You know, for the sake of science.


Source: Twitter via Teslarati

Categories: Tesla

Tags: , ,

Leave a Reply

26 Comments on "Musk Says Tesla Model 3 Performance Could Hit 60 MPH In 3.3 Seconds"

newest oldest most voted


Its actually particulates that are the real issue, not co2. Just another part of the rich mans trick.

Carbonic Acid build up in the Ocean, from dissolved CO2 buildup in the water, also has the potential to be a significant game changer for life in the Ocean as we know it. Just as it was significant 55.5 million years ago.

Ocean acidification is the ongoing decrease in the pH of the Earth’s oceans, caused by the uptake of carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere.[2] Seawater is slightly basic (meaning pH > 7), and ocean acidification involves a shift towards pH-neutral conditions rather than a transition to acidic conditions (pH < 7).[3] An estimated 30–40% of the carbon dioxide from human activity released into the atmosphere dissolves into oceans, rivers and lakes.

Don’t bring science into this forum you will upset Trump supporters LOL CONNECT THE DOTS ON CLEAN AIR WAKE UP FOLKS THANKS CO2.EARTH

Calling people Trump supporters or Hillary supporters is just another way to divide people and fight amongst ourselves. It is what the big boys want. Stop giving it to them please.

Yes, everyone loves Russia and hates “particulates”. /s

I should have said the immediate issue rather than the real issue.

Not according to actual climate scientists who have devoted their careers to studying the situation.

But Dony said we can’t trust them because that’s what they do. Next time i have a bad tooth i will go see a cardiologist because a dentist would be too subjective about diagnosing my problem.

You guys are very confusing.

Actual scientists are not saying ocean acidification is more of an immediate problem for humans than particulate matter in the air.

Actually, your posts are a problem for humans, because they seek a level field between fossil fuels and EV use, over particulates. It is you that confused the issues cities are having, with NOX or having to pay up for CO2, AGW or “adaptation”.

I’m not seeking anything but the truth. I assume you have it though since you are adept enough to see all the problems my posts are causing humans.

The rich ones pedal oil, and spew BS.

Tesla’s performance figures are great, no doubt. That’s one area where ICE cannot compete in the same price range.

Currently, only if you’re talking about the S P100D which starts at $135K…The cost of performance version of the Model 3 is more than a Vette/ZL1/Shelby all of which are pretty comparable on performance to the 3…Furthermore, if you’re talking track, you can’t Nürburgring the S/X without them cutting the power on you…With that being said, what if the Bolt EV added a second EV motor or even three EV motors? That would seem extremely affordable to get outstanding performance…

It remains to be seen whether any combustion car in the $70,000 range can compete on The Ring with the performance Model 3…

If we’re talking about 0-60 only, the Hellcat already has it beat…Otherwise, the ZL1 most likely will beat this in all performance aspects…With Tesla’s capability, there’s no doubt they could make the Model 3 quicker and it probably will, but they don’t want to shoot themselves in the foot with X/S sales…

So Model S is bad because it’s all about 0-60 acceleration, and Model 3 is bad because it’s not all about 0-60 acceleration. Impeccable logic.

His point was that EVs can’t yet be super-fast and have endurance at high speeds. ICE vehicles, like the Corvette and some of FCA’s rediculous cars, can do so. EVs will get there, plus it’s meaningless for 99% of drivers who don’t track their cars.

That depends on your definition of “high speed”. Run the Model 3 Performance at the I-Pace’s maximum speed of 125 MPH, and it’s reasonable to assume it will last a lot longer than it does at 155 MPH! (I say “assume” because I haven’t seen anyone try racing an I-Pace vs. any Tesla car on a distance run.)

It’s crazy that the Usual Suspects have been able to get so much traction (so to speak) out of Tesla designing its cars like quarter horses rather than thoroughbreds. Limit a quarter horse to the top speed of a thoroughbred, and it will go the distance without getting winded!

Lol! I can’t remotely comprehend that’s what you got from my comments…Reread slower this time…With that being said, Musk said the 3 will track better than the BMW M3 but we still don’t know if that means road course…While CCIE pointed out 99% of owners will never road course their cars, sustaining high speeds on a road course would deliver the final blow to ICE…

“Optimized” means a little more work than some might think. That doesn’t just mean take off the tires it has now and throw on one favorite tire and wheel combo, take it for a speed run, and call it a day.

“Optimizing” in this context would be a rather long drawn out process of working with a tire manufacturer to test different rubber compounds, tread patterns, widths, and heights on different width and diameter wheels, at different tire pressures at different temperatures and on different road surfaces, etc. All in very controlled, instrumented track conditions to find the optimal tire/wheel combo.

So if somebody puts one pimp set of wheels and tires on one of these, and does one run and says Musk was wrong, that’s not optimizing. That’s taking a stab in the dark.

Lighter tires and wheels might have as much benefit to the performance numbers as well.
Made a big difference in my drag racing days.

Correct and Musk spoke specifically about 0-60 vs other performance metrics and rear width vs all four width…Often downsizing rotors and rim diameter while increasing rim width helps improve this…

Tire width and compound will help track performance too. Most of the track reviews/videos mention the tires are high efficiency, low grip tires.