
Tesla Model 3 vs. BMW M3 [video] - crucio
https://www.topgear.com/videos/video/video-tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-m3
======
rootusrootus
I just rented a P3D a couple weeks ago for a weekend, and I agree with the
review, it would spank an M3. Hell, it would even spank my Camaro. But it's
not a driver's car. Steering is numb, handling is competent but it's a very
heavy car, seats are disapointing as hell. I was impressed, but not enough to
drop 60 grand. And to be honest, between an M3 and a P3D, I'd probably still
choose the M3.

It really, really depends on what you want from a car. If you want to win
stoplight races, almost nothing will hang with a P3D. And if you're not an
enthusiast, then it's probably sportier than anything you're familiar with. Go
for it.

~~~
dplgk
I'm only aware of Model S, 3, X and Y. What's P3D?

~~~
rootusrootus
It's not an official designation, it is informal lingo for the Model 3
Performance. It's a riff on the P##D system that Tesla uses for the Model S.

------
diab0lic
My last car was an E92 M3 MT (with Tech, Premium, Competition packages and a
modded exhaust). It was the most fun vehicle I've ever driven. It had plenty
of power, and introduced me to the side of cars other than straight line
power. It also had plenty of luxury inside, the car was credibly comfortable.
All in all I think it compared very favorably to my friends R8 with nearly as
much performance and plenty more luxury.

It was however incredibly expensive to maintain, especially those competition
package brakes!

A friend of mine has the Model 3, but not the performance version. He hasn't
had it long but the torque is very comparable and I'll bet the maintenance is
quite a bit lower.

That said I'll miss that RWD behavior and those exhaust notes.

~~~
davidjnelson
That car is bananas, so fun to drive. I had the 2013 e92 m3 competition but
very similar. Incredible luxury, 3.9 second 0-60 that literally slammed your
head back into the seat producing a stupidly happy grin.

The best part of that car was the handling/suspension and the stereo though.
You could put it in M Dynamic Mode, which let you do controlled drifts.
Shredded tires, but goodness it was fun to drift corners everywhere.

The sound system was the best I've ever heard, far better than a custom $4,000
system. 800 watts, a 10 inch sub under both front seats. That car was the
closest thing to perfection I've personally ever driven. Its only real flaw
was it didn't have quite enough low end torque ( 300 lb ft ) because it was a
naturally aspirated v8. Plus you had to really baby the throttle on the low
end so the tires wouldn't start sliding around when you accelerated from a
stop.

I had literally 0 problems with it in three years outside of the stupid Takata
airbag recall, which is why I didn't keep it. But you can't blame that on bmw.
Plus I mean I spent a lot on tires, but that's on me :-)

At the time I test drove a comparable tesla and thought it accelerated really
slow and had poor handling. Also it didn't even have a backup camera, decent
stereo, or integration with popular music streaming services. But I hear they
have gotten better.

For me the big benefit of the tesla is that you can shave 15-20 minutes off
your commute by using the carpool lane and still have a decent car. Plus you
are doing something to offset climate change.

~~~
diab0lic
I'm glad I'm not the only one who is still ridiculously in love with their M3
experience. Haha.

Yeah I spent a fair bit on tires too, also on me.

------
TaylorAlexander
In this test performed by the show host (not a professional driver) the Tesla
Model 3 won for 1/4 mile, 0-100-0, and the hot lap. The BMW M3 was deemed
“more fun to drift”. Looks good for the Tesla!

~~~
ynniv
I'm not sure it really won the spirit of the 0-100-0. Yes it completed the
task faster, but it also required more distance, implying that it takes
significantly longer to brake. A quick search suggests this is a known Model 3
weakness.

Edit: It would have been more honest to have one test of acceleration and
another of only braking. Also, the Tesla won the hot-lap but had significant
body roll that made it difficult to stay on the track... This video is really
only appealing to people who already like the Tesla.

~~~
dsfyu404ed
A quick lookup of the curb weight and the OEM spec'd tires would also indicate
this.

------
soared
Does anyone trust topgear for actual reviews, especially when tesla is
involved? The courts literally ruled that you shouldn't:

> Mr Justice Tugendhat said that no Top Gear viewer would have reasonably
> compared the car's performance on the show's airfield track to its likely
> performance on a public road

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_controversies#Tesla_R...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_controversies#Tesla_Roadster_review)

~~~
jdietrich
Top Gear is under new ownership. Clarkson and Wilman sold the IP to the BBC
and took their team with them to Amazon; post-2016 Top Gear is a completely
new entity operating under old branding.

The new Top Gear has been nothing but fair about EVs and has given glowing
reviews to several all-electric models.

------
jak92
These super fast cars are a threat to life and safety in urban environments.
EV or not, these fast vehicles should not be sold as these speeds do not serve
any valid purpose.

~~~
tosser0001
I just came here to say something similar. It drives me nuts that this sort of
power and performance is let loose on public streets.

At some point I would think we'd be able to have some sort of geofencing
system were a car would be forced into "golf cart" mode once it's off the
highway.

~~~
hpkuarg
Where is this sentiment coming from? Let the driver (who is legally,
ethically, and morally responsible for the operation of the vehicle they are
controlling) judge the appropriate safety boundaries of the environment
they're currently driving through. A 45mph zone would be more appropriately
driven at anything from 15 to 70mph, depending on so many factors other than
"it's off the highway".

At any rate, don't turn a fine piece of engineering that many people have an
emotional connection with, not to mention pay a lot of hard-earned money for,
into some vaguely-autonomous, ToS-bound appliance that does not what its owner
sees fit, but what its maker deems appropriate from medium earth orbit.

Censorship applies to behavior as well as words.

~~~
apta
> Let the driver (who is legally, ethically, and morally responsible for the
> operation of the vehicle they are controlling) judge the appropriate safety
> boundaries of the environment they're currently driving through.

Time and time again, it's been shown that people do not have the capacity to
make correct judgements on simple things, let alone things that threaten
other's lives.

------
leetbulb
FYI: youtube-dl works with this URL.

Cannot stand watching a video surrounded by a ton of crap.

    
    
      youtube-dl -o - 'https://www.topgear.com/videos/video/video-tesla-model-3-vs-bmw-m3' | vlc -

~~~
Nerdfest
There _is_ a maximize button.

------
hwj
I think the 0-100-0 point should go to BMW because it stopped a few meters
before Tesla (visible at 00:02:45). This can make a difference in real
traffic.

~~~
Pokepokalypse
not if the m3 driver is asleep!

------
dillonmckay
I thought there would be an article with text. Meh.

~~~
sctb
Thanks, we've noted that in the headline.

------
Judgmentality
I admittedly haven't watched the video yet (although I plan to and will update
my comment), but as someone who _really_ wants to love an EV, the technology
just isn't there for me yet. The range is not nearly enough for me. Yes, 300
miles is not enough. Just this weekend I drove between LA and SF twice, and
while I had to stop and get gas it took me 5 minutes instead of however long
it would take me to charge the car enough to make it the rest of the way (I'd
guess around 30 minutes). This is absolutely positively unacceptable when I
just want to get from point A to point B, at least for me. The other factor is
that batteries are heavy, and this destroys how fun a car is. Weight is always
the enemy with performance vehicles (and I feel an M3 is too heavy as well
actually). Yes, the cars have incredible acceleration - better than the
majority of performance vehicles. But they handle like shit, and this is
coming from someone who test drove a Tesla after driving there in a '94 Camry.
I honestly preferred the way the Camry handled, and everyone would
unequivocally agree my Camry was a piece of shit (parts of the car were
actually falling off of it). The other thing to consider is that batteries
overheat, so it can only go around the track I believe once or twice before
you have to pull over for it to cool down.

However, the idea of instant acceleration, a flat torque band, silent
performance, and less pollution is very appealing to me. But the technology
just isn't there for me yet, plus the inconvenience of the currently limited
charging network compared to gas stations. Yes, I know it's getting better and
I'm happy that it works for many people, but it does not work for me. I look
forward to the day it does.

~~~
Silhouette
I agree with the basic sentiment that EVs have potential but aren't quite
there yet.

One issue that I've seen raised a few times now is how honest the
environmental credentials of these EVs really are. Sure, you aren't emitting
pollution from your petrol/diesel engine as you drive. However, you have the
emissions from whatever electricity source you use for charging instead, which
obviously depends on how environmentally friendly or otherwise your power
supply is. Crucially, you also have the effects of manufacturing these
vehicles. Particularly when it comes to the batteries, those are still very
significant. On top of that, batteries for EVs are _heavy_ , and shifting all
that extra weight around has a cost as well.

Just last week, there was a study being widely reported that suggested the
true overall lifetime CO2 emissions given typical lifetime and usage levels
for a car would make an electric vehicle _worse_ than a diesel one of
otherwise similar specification, much of this due to the hidden costs in
mining key elements used in the battery.

Given that some of the materials involved are also relatively rare (or at
least relatively difficult to supply viably in large quantities) I think the
jury is still out on whether the modern generation of EVs will bring the big
improvements that some of the environmentalists are hoping for.

Edit: To those anonymously downvoting, it would be more constructive and
probably a lot more interesting to discuss actual facts and scientific
evidence. For example, if you know of substantial, robust research on the
environmental impacts of mining the materials needed for EV batteries on a
scale where these vehicles become mass market rather than a niche product,
please share it so the rest of us can learn something. Likewise, if you have
substantial knowledge about the likely efficiency of improving EV technology,
charging facilities and the sources behind them compared to other new or
evolving models for powering vehicles over the next 10-20 years such as hybrid
models or alternative fuels, please comment accordingly.

~~~
heartofgold
If you want to look at it that way, you also should include the
emissions/environment impact included in acquiring the oil, building
refineries, the emissions during the refinery process, and the shipment of the
fuel around the country.

[https://cleantechnica.com/2018/02/19/electric-car-well-to-
wh...](https://cleantechnica.com/2018/02/19/electric-car-well-to-wheel-
emissions-myth/)

And with electric cars, the ongoing CO2 emissions can be limited by where you
get your charge. If you have solar for example, your not contributing any
additional emissions beyond what it took to produce your solar setup. With an
internal combustion engine, you don't really have much choice on how your fuel
is produced.

~~~
Silhouette
_If you want to look at it that way, you also should include the emissions
/environment impact included in acquiring the oil, building refineries, the
emissions during the refinery process, and the shipment of the fuel around the
country._

Yes, we should.

As I said, so far it looks like the jury is still out. The problem with many
of these reports, including much of last week's commentary on the study I
mentioned and also including the source you linked to in the parent comment,
is that the popular summaries are often light on key details so it's hard to
make meaningful like-for-like comparisons based on the available reporting
alone. And so far, it has often been remarkably difficult to track down and
evaluate the primary sources behind a lot of these reports, on both sides.

It's also worth observing that some of these claims aren't necessarily
contradictory. It's certainly conceivable (without seeing more data to confirm
either way) that the average petrol/diesel vehicle in the US is relatively big
and inefficient compared to those in say Europe or Japan. Meanwhile, the
environmental impact of an EV is going to depend on how environmentally
friendly the energy supplies ultimately used for charging are, which
apparently varies dramatically across the US based on your linked source, and
presumably varies elsewhere as well.

If our national power grids and/or local microgeneration facilities at homes
and offices continue to move towards more environmentally friendly sources,
and if the environmental costs of the batteries do not increase significantly
as more EVs are produced, then it seems reasonable to assume that _at some
point_ it would become more environmentally friendly in terms of emissions to
use EVs. So far, I see a lot of loaded arguments and cherry-picking from both
sides of the debate, which makes it difficult to know whether we have yet
passed that point in any given set of circumstances.

