News

Model S P100D Hit 0-60 mph in 2.275507139 Seconds

Tesla’s Model S P100D is officially the fastest accelerating production car in the world, according to a recent Motor Trend test where the Model S P100D hit 0-60 mph in 2.275507139 seconds. No other production car has ever achieved that speed in less than 2.3 seconds.

The record was achieved using a new Easter egg mode called Ludicrous+, which raises the temperature of its battery pack to 122 degrees Fahrenheit and increases maximum power output from the motors.

Motor Trend’s article included a vivid description of the acceleration experienced during the test:  “Launching a Model S P100D (weighing 5,062 with gear and driver) in full-on Ludicrous Easter-egg mode snaps your body in a manner that is utterly impossible to replicate in any other street-legal production car on normal tires and dry asphalt at a mid-$100,000 price point.”

rowdy

Member
Jan 18, 2016
208
149
Australia
Cool article but why haven't any customer cars run this fast?

There are plenty of P100D's out in the wild now.

Is there something special about Motortrend's test track, their timing equipment, or the cars that they receive from Tesla?

Do we need to consider Motortrend as fake news and apply a fudge factor to all numbers that they report?

Seems that they get consistently better times than any other car that's actually delivered.
 

EinSV

Active Member
Feb 6, 2016
4,331
21,540
NorCal
Cool article but why haven't any customer cars run this fast?

There are plenty of P100D's out in the wild now.

Is there something special about Motortrend's test track, their timing equipment, or the cars that they receive from Tesla?

Do we need to consider Motortrend as fake news and apply a fudge factor to all numbers that they report?

Seems that they get consistently better times than any other car that's actually delivered.

They use the same methodology with the other cars they test -- including LaFerrari, 918, P1 and Porsche 911 Turbo S.

I am no expert but their 1 foot rollout method should result in faster times than without it because there is a small "head start," but the head-to-head comparison beating LaFerrari and the 918 at 0-60 using consistent methodology is impressive to me.

Also, from the photos it looks like they tested a P100D with the standard roof instead of glass or panoramic roof. Obviously, times are going to be a bit slower for cars with options that add weight (a point Car and Driver made when they ran their P90DL tests).
 
Last edited:

rowdy

Member
Jan 18, 2016
208
149
Australia
Why do they list the IIHS safety as N/A when we know that the Model S didn't exactly do well (and the P100D got marked down for the extra weight).

They also say a 911 turbo and GT-R accelerate faster than 918, P1 and Laferrari to 30. I'm not convinced...

That said I can absolutely appreciate the P100D for what it is. I just feel like Motortrend seem to exaggerate their figures
 

EinSV

Active Member
Feb 6, 2016
4,331
21,540
NorCal
Why do they list the IIHS safety as N/A when we know that the Model S didn't exactly do well (and the P100D got marked down for the extra weight).

They also say a 911 turbo and GT-R accelerate faster than 918, P1 and Laferrari to 30. I'm not convinced...

That said I can absolutely appreciate the P100D for what it is. I just feel like Motortrend seem to exaggerate their figures

I can't see any reason why Motor Trend would favor Tesla over Ferrari, Porsche and McLaren especially since Tesla spends zero dollars on advertising.

As mentioned above, I agree that the Motor Trend methodology does seem to produce faster times than some other 0-60 testing methods, but since they apply the same methodology to other cars the results are meaningful IMO. Feel free to disagree if you like :)
 

Dennis87

Member
Nov 15, 2014
364
198
Norway
Cool article but why haven't any customer cars run this fast?

There are plenty of P100D's out in the wild now.

Is there something special about Motortrend's test track, their timing equipment, or the cars that they receive from Tesla?

Do we need to consider Motortrend as fake news and apply a fudge factor to all numbers that they report?

Seems that they get consistently better times than any other car that's actually delivered.

The forged arachnid wheels are lighter than the stock 21. No panoroof save 60 kg weight, no other extras and a 45 kg girl as the driver maybe ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhzmark

AudubonB

One can NOT induce accuracy with precision!
Mar 24, 2013
8,292
29,175
You can forge your own wheels but you can't forge your own facts.

Goodness gracious, those are impressive data. As a real-world, rather than a test-track, driver, however, I agree with Vitold:

the 1.1 sec 45-65mph is representative of how much safer these EVs are than effectively any ICE.
 

esk8mw

Active Member
Oct 6, 2015
1,333
7,030
Midwest
Why do they list the IIHS safety as N/A when we know that the Model S didn't exactly do well (and the P100D got marked down for the extra weight).

They also say a 911 turbo and GT-R accelerate faster than 918, P1 and Laferrari to 30. I'm not convinced...

That said I can absolutely appreciate the P100D for what it is. I just feel like Motortrend seem to exaggerate their figures
Are you serious? Model S is highest rated in every category except for one from a recent test (scored just below highest rated) and Tesla already fixed the issue and expects to be retested for highest rating in every category once again in a couple weeks. Oh, and IIHS changed standards for headlights and now basically every car is rated poor there (and Tesla is working to improve this rating now too).

You might want to read beyond a clickbait headline before spreading disinformation all over the place.
 

sorka

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2015
8,250
6,019
Merced, CA
Cool article but why haven't any customer cars run this fast?

It's about 0.2 seconds faster than anything else reported from a P100D.

But we already know the "the P90D reliably rips through the quarter mile in 10.9 seconds" ringer they had before was really a 1600 amp car and not a 1500 amp car long before any actual customers got the V2.

I have no reason to believe this isn't another ringer.:rolleyes:
 

sorka

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2015
8,250
6,019
Merced, CA
They use the same methodology with the other cars they test -- including LaFerrari, 918, P1 and Porsche 911 Turbo S.

I am no expert but their 1 foot rollout method should result in faster times than without it because there is a small "head start," but the head-to-head comparison beating LaFerrari and the 918 at 0-60 using consistent methodology is impressive to me.

Also, from the photos it looks like they tested a P100D with the standard roof instead of glass or panoramic roof. Obviously, times are going to be a bit slower for cars with options that add weight (a point Car and Driver made when they ran their P90DL tests).

Everyone is already using 1 ft rollouts with their vbox and pbox meters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: P85DEE

gavine

Petrol Head turned EV Enthusiast
Apr 1, 2014
2,606
2,137
Philadelphia, PA
I can't see any reason why Motor Trend would favor Tesla over Ferrari, Porsche and McLaren especially since Tesla spends zero dollars on advertising.

I thought the same thing when the Model S won the MT Car of the Year. Maybe they simply care about the environment?
 
  • Funny
Reactions: P85DEE

EinSV

Active Member
Feb 6, 2016
4,331
21,540
NorCal
It's about 0.2 seconds faster than anything else reported from a P100D.

But we already know the "the P90D reliably rips through the quarter mile in 10.9 seconds" ringer they had before was really a 1600 amp car and not a 1500 amp car long before any actual customers got the V2.

I have no reason to believe this isn't another ringer.:rolleyes:

The TRC guy got 2.389 -- only about 0.1 second difference, not 0.2. Watch a "Ludicrous+" Tesla Model S P100D Do 0-60 in 2.39 Seconds

I understand that 0-60 times for Tesla P models are a religious issue for some so I plan to bow out of the discussion.

This testing looks legit to me as an apples-to-apples comparison with the 918 and LaFerrari. Feel free to believe otherwise.
 
  • Informative
  • Like
Reactions: bhzmark and Jaff

sdorn

Director of Awesome
Supporting Member
Oct 9, 2016
1,035
993
Georgia
They also say in the article what the time is from standstill to the 1 ft mark (where the rollout ends). It was 0.26 seconds, so the total 0 - 60 time including the rollout was 2.54 seconds which is not out of line at all with what others have gotten that weren't excluding the rollout.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Reactions: Cowby and bhzmark

sorka

Well-Known Member
Feb 28, 2015
8,250
6,019
Merced, CA
They also say in the article what the time is from standstill to the 1 ft mark (where the rollout ends). It was 0.26 seconds, so the total 0 - 60 time including the rollout was 2.54 seconds which is not out of line at all with what others have gotten that weren't excluding the rollout.

Who reported times not including the 1 ft rollout? The pbox display only displays with 1 ft rollout. If you take the data file from it or a vbox you can extract it with and without the 1 ft rollout but it's more work and most don't.

If the TRC guy got 2.389, I'll take that as legit. Still, in this 0-60 time range 0.12 seconds is a huge difference.
 

Mach Schnell!

P100D Pilot & future Tri-Motor CyberTruck Driver
Oct 27, 2016
105
76
San Francisco Bay Area
The other interesting piece is Motor Trend is stating (SAE net) combined motor output power is 680 hp. I haven't seen this stated before, just individual max motor hp (which aren't necessarily achieved simultaneously).
 

Attachments

  • IMG_1860.PNG
    IMG_1860.PNG
    628.5 KB · Views: 23
  • Like
Reactions: NSX1992

Products we're discussing on TMC...