At a glance
Here is how the two models stack up on the specs that matter most.
| Specification | Model 3 Long Range | R1S |
|---|---|---|
| Range | 549 km | 507 km |
| Battery | 82 kWh | 135 kWh |
| Efficiency | 14.9 kWh/100km | 23.9 kWh/100km |
| 0-100 km/h | 4.2 s | 3.1 s |
| Fast charge 10-80% | ~22 min | ~40 min |
| Seats | 5 | 7 |
| Price | $44,990 | $78,000 |
| Rating | 4.6/5 | 4.6/5 |
| Estimated running cost / year | $335 | $538 |
The Model 3 Long Range wins 4 of 8 categories, making it our pick in this head-to-head.
Range & efficiency
The Model 3 Long Range is rated for 549 km of range versus 507 km for the R1S. That is a difference of about 42 km, which matters most if you do regular long trips.
The Model 3 Long Range consumes about 14.9 kWh per 100 km versus 23.9 kWh for the R1S - so the Model 3 Long Range is the cheaper and greener option per kilometre.
Performance
The Model 3 Long Range reaches 100 km/h in 4.2 seconds versus 3.1 for the R1S. R1S is the quicker car, though real-world feel also depends on power delivery and weight.
Charging
Fast charging from 10-80% takes about 22 minutes in the Model 3 Long Range and 40 minutes in the R1S. Model 3 Long Range spends less time at the plug on road trips.
Space & comfort
The Model 3 Long Range seats 5 and the R1S seats 7. Check the full spec sheet for cargo volume.
Price & running costs
The Model 3 Long Range lists at $44,990 and the R1S at $78,000. At 15,000 km per year, estimated running costs are about $335/yr versus $538/yr.
Verdict
The Model 3 Long Range is our pick, taking 4 of 8 categories in this head-to-head. It leads on the longer range (549 km vs 507 km), the lower consumption (14.9 kWh/100km vs 23.9 kWh/100km) and the faster 10-80% charging (~22 min vs ~40 min). That said, the R1S is still the better buy if driving dynamics are your priority (quicker 0-100 in 3.1 s), or you need the extra cargo space (2945 L vs 0 L), or you regularly carry more passengers (7 seats vs 5).