Discussion
I have a budget of around 20k and looking at M3. I only do local driving so wondering between a long range or standard around 2022 model. What are the differences between these 2. I know LR has 4 wheel drive and better stereo. Does the standard have better battery technology? Also is the ryzen chip worth seeking out?
SR+ doesn’t so much have a better battery, rather a different one. You can (and should) charge it to 100% which is convenient.
I personally prefer how it drives, being RWD and lighter at the front.
Range difference isn’t particularly bothersome as over 200 miles I’d be stopping anyway.
I personally prefer how it drives, being RWD and lighter at the front.
Range difference isn’t particularly bothersome as over 200 miles I’d be stopping anyway.
Long Range has two motors, is quicker, has better sound system.
The Long Range also supercharges faster, not that you're likely to notice that often, and has a longer battery warranty in terms of max mileage, they have the same 8 year age limit
The battery type is also different, as well as the capacity. The RWD by 2022 uses LFP which can be charged to 100%, in fact Tesla recommend it is fairly often.
The Long Range also supercharges faster, not that you're likely to notice that often, and has a longer battery warranty in terms of max mileage, they have the same 8 year age limit
The battery type is also different, as well as the capacity. The RWD by 2022 uses LFP which can be charged to 100%, in fact Tesla recommend it is fairly often.
Each to their own, of course, but I bought a '21 SR last year......and I'd recommend the LR!
I was coming from a relatively quick 4wd ICE car and I now regret not going for the LR (or even the performance). I miss the all-weather traction of a 4wd car and the slight backward step in performance (relative to what I had previously) rankles a little.
The LR would've allowed me the option of the performance upgrade when/if I got bored, 4wd (appreciate not everyone cares about this) for a relatively small premium over the SR model and then you get a bit of extra range for when you need to do a longer journey. A no-brainer in my book. Not sure what that says about my previous decision making!
I was coming from a relatively quick 4wd ICE car and I now regret not going for the LR (or even the performance). I miss the all-weather traction of a 4wd car and the slight backward step in performance (relative to what I had previously) rankles a little.
The LR would've allowed me the option of the performance upgrade when/if I got bored, 4wd (appreciate not everyone cares about this) for a relatively small premium over the SR model and then you get a bit of extra range for when you need to do a longer journey. A no-brainer in my book. Not sure what that says about my previous decision making!
Edited by OIGMatt on Tuesday 11th February 14:36
page3 said:
You must had had something very fast before if 5.1 seconds to 60 is a performance regression.
Compared to a lot of people on here, it was nothing too special! I had a Golf R MK7.5, which was running about 390bhp, plus a gearbox map too. I suspect that a LR would have been very similar peformance-wise, with the further option to upgrade if I felt that I wanted a bit more shove.Don't get me wrong, the SR is a perfectly quick car, very torquey, amazing for overtakes etc. I live in rural Scotland and def notice the lack of 4wd on our greasy roads at times. As a used purchase, the LR wasn't much of extra stretch, I now wish I'd gone for it at the time.....but that doesn't make it the right choice for others!
OIGMatt said:
Compared to a lot of people on here, it was nothing too special! I had a Golf R MK7.5, which was running about 390bhp, plus a gearbox map too. I suspect that a LR would have been very similar peformance-wise, with the further option to upgrade if I felt that I wanted a bit more shove.
Don't get me wrong, the SR is a perfectly quick car, very torquey, amazing for overtakes etc. I live in rural Scotland and def notice the lack of 4wd on our greasy roads at times. As a used purchase, the LR wasn't much of extra stretch, I now wish I'd gone for it at the time.....but that doesn't make it the right choice for others!
I made a pact with myself when I started buying cars 40+ years ago that each successive car had to be quicker/faster than the one before. I’ve kept that promise thus far, but now that I have a Plaid, I fear I may have to break the pact with my next purchase, UNLESS Lucid survives and Sapphires finally fall into a price range I can justify!Don't get me wrong, the SR is a perfectly quick car, very torquey, amazing for overtakes etc. I live in rural Scotland and def notice the lack of 4wd on our greasy roads at times. As a used purchase, the LR wasn't much of extra stretch, I now wish I'd gone for it at the time.....but that doesn't make it the right choice for others!
Zcd1 said:
OIGMatt said:
Compared to a lot of people on here, it was nothing too special! I had a Golf R MK7.5, which was running about 390bhp, plus a gearbox map too. I suspect that a LR would have been very similar peformance-wise, with the further option to upgrade if I felt that I wanted a bit more shove.
Don't get me wrong, the SR is a perfectly quick car, very torquey, amazing for overtakes etc. I live in rural Scotland and def notice the lack of 4wd on our greasy roads at times. As a used purchase, the LR wasn't much of extra stretch, I now wish I'd gone for it at the time.....but that doesn't make it the right choice for others!
I made a pact with myself when I started buying cars 40+ years ago that each successive car had to be quicker/faster than the one before. I’ve kept that promise thus far, but now that I have a Plaid, I fear I may have to break the pact with my next purchase, UNLESS Lucid survives and Sapphires finally fall into a price range I can justify!Don't get me wrong, the SR is a perfectly quick car, very torquey, amazing for overtakes etc. I live in rural Scotland and def notice the lack of 4wd on our greasy roads at times. As a used purchase, the LR wasn't much of extra stretch, I now wish I'd gone for it at the time.....but that doesn't make it the right choice for others!
I have gone backwards massively.
My last ICE daily was a 500+bhp rear wheel drive saloon, then a 400+bhp EV, and now a 180 bhp EV.
I don't get much enjoyment out of driving EVs, so I don't see the point in spending the extra on power anymore
I still have a fun ICE, so all is not lost.
Zcd1 said:
TheRainMaker said:
Same as me, up until EVs.
One big difference in our situations, evidently: I’ve never bought any car that didn’t make me happy while driving it…. Life’s too short!
The first one is a company car, so I stuck with it for four years (only 8 months left); the other one was an effort to find a fun EV because once you get used to running an EV with almost zero running costs, you can't justify the costs of a daily that will only do 18 mpg + much higher service costs etc.
I'm now stuck with EVs for daily usage.
FWIW, and I've repeated this often, if you can cover your daily, don't focus on range.
I've got a Model S 100D and my sister has a Model 3 SR. When we're off skiing, we take about the same amount of stops.
I do have to say, I like how the Model 3 drives, but the SR feels a bit "tame" in the Tesla pantheon. It's not a slow car and A to B it's a great tool, but it doesn't have that kick that even a LR gives you.
I've got a Model S 100D and my sister has a Model 3 SR. When we're off skiing, we take about the same amount of stops.
I do have to say, I like how the Model 3 drives, but the SR feels a bit "tame" in the Tesla pantheon. It's not a slow car and A to B it's a great tool, but it doesn't have that kick that even a LR gives you.
wyson said:
Personally wouldn’t touch an early M3 with a bargepole.
No offense, but your sources are woefully outdated. English Explained bought one of the long-discontinued, only ever offered for a few months “Medium Range” models. Edited by wyson on Wednesday 19th February 19:55
Furthermore, if my 2018 M3P can serves as one data point, it’s been flawless for 7 years and 50K miles.
8 had a 2930 M3 LR, which was the worst built and designed car I’ve ever owned and on the basis of the 2 examples we now have, they are 50% rubbish. Mud flaps.. essential to stop the paint being destroyed hit the ground when driving. For a “silent electric car” was the noisiest car I’ve owned in 20 years.
I got rid of it for a Model Y and the suspension was the worst I’ve known for a long time.
I won’t touch Tesla now, and was pleasantly surprised the competition have better EVs as cars
This is all about expectation and what you’re used to. If you are used to half decent cars from bmw, Audi, merc maybe even vw, especially at the middle and above of their range, you will find an early M3 a tin box iPad strapped to the dashboard.
I got rid of it for a Model Y and the suspension was the worst I’ve known for a long time.
I won’t touch Tesla now, and was pleasantly surprised the competition have better EVs as cars
This is all about expectation and what you’re used to. If you are used to half decent cars from bmw, Audi, merc maybe even vw, especially at the middle and above of their range, you will find an early M3 a tin box iPad strapped to the dashboard.
Edited by Gone fishing on Thursday 20th February 07:22
wyson said:
ZesPak said:
FWIW, and I've repeated this often, if you can cover your daily, don't focus on range.
I've got a Model S 100D and my sister has a Model 3 SR. When we're off skiing, we take about the same amount of stops.
I do have to say, I like how the Model 3 drives, but the SR feels a bit "tame" in the Tesla pantheon. It's not a slow car and A to B it's a great tool, but it doesn't have that kick that even a LR gives you.
That Engineering Explained guy was moaning about exactly the same with his SR and upgraded to the LR. He produced a video explaining why as well. Basically they use different types of electric motor, the SR’s has a longer response time.I've got a Model S 100D and my sister has a Model 3 SR. When we're off skiing, we take about the same amount of stops.
I do have to say, I like how the Model 3 drives, but the SR feels a bit "tame" in the Tesla pantheon. It's not a slow car and A to B it's a great tool, but it doesn't have that kick that even a LR gives you.
The earlier SR+ cars used the motor from the performance model, the later ones from the LR. The earlier cars are quite a bit quicker comparatively.
ZesPak said:
I've got a Model S 100D and my sister has a Model 3 SR. When we're off skiing, we take about the same amount of stops.
BTW, reading that I have to correct it, we take about the same amount of time stopping. She usually has to take an extra stop as she leaves the house with significantly less range, but she catches up because of better efficiency and faster charging. On a 1000km trip, it's about equal.ZesPak said:
BTW, reading that I have to correct it, we take about the same amount of time stopping. She usually has to take an extra stop as she leaves the house with significantly less range, but she catches up because of better efficiency and faster charging. On a 1000km trip, it's about equal.
This is actually a very key nuance that many don't seem to understand.Road trip total time isn't just affected by range; it's actually a combination of range, efficiency and charging time.
My Tesla has much more range and is more efficient than SWMBO's Genesis GV60P, but the Genesis charges much quicker, so total trip time doesn't work out to be much different.
Gassing Station | Tesla | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff