0-60 MPH for new Long Range Model S WITH and WITHOUT "Drag Strip Mode"

[mpgxsvcd]

I only have one run for this post. This run basically proves to me that DSM (drag strip mode, DSMC (dragstrip mode w/cheetah) are pretty much worthless on the LR. My car had been sitting for several hours. Inside temp was 99 degrees. I got in the car, turned on the AC, rolled out to the nearest road at a max of 35 mph. While at the light, I connected Dragy and just hit the throttle when the light turned green.

AC was on, fan was at about a 7, lights were on and I was listening to music. Just gas it and go. SoC was 77% when I got in the car, didn't look before I made the run so could have been as low as 76% already. No warm up of the pack, no pre-conditioning of any sort, lower state of charge than earlier AC was on, lights on, radio on, absolutely less than ideal conditions.

Comparing the times, I am only .08 seconds slower than my best doing all the DSMC mumbo jumbo and with a lower SoC and all the accessory draw as well. So if DSMC makes a difference, I clearly am not seeing it in my runs and on the streets I am driving. As I mentioned upstream, I felt that it might benefit the Plaid but highly unlikely to make much of a difference on the LR. I think this last run pretty much proves that. Not to mention my earlier runs where the times were identical when I took it out of DSM. An argument could be made that the pack was still warm from DSM but it clearly showed cheetah made no difference. Here the car didn't even have a warm pack and had been sitting for hours and a low SoC.

If I have time, I'll make some runs with the SoC higher tomorrow. I will do some DSM and DSMC runs but I don't see any real benefit for far with the LR. At a minimum the C part is totally impractical on the street especially when I can't measure any significant difference so far.

For the sake of argument though I'll do with the assumption that the extra 20-30HP I might get from the higher SoC might somehow be enough extra power that cheetah mode will somehow have a benefit on the LR. /sarcasm

.View attachment 831333

Cheetah mode probably has more of an affect at higher speeds. It may not show a difference in 0-60 mph. However, you might see the difference once you start getting into triple digit speeds.

Those times do seem slow though. I am curious to see what it can do the 1/8 or 1/4 in with a full battery and full preconditioning.

 

[bhzmark]

Forget and stop wasting time with 0-60mph. Find a safe place with good traction and do 1/8 mile runs. The info will be much better and you will have the crucial 60 foot time also. And it will still show 0-60mph to satisfy your fetish for that if you insist.

Also, it's nice that you took the floor mats out, but how much do you weigh?

 

[Hayseed_MS]

Forget and stop wasting time with 0-60mph. Find a safe place with good traction and do 1/8 mile runs. The info will be much better and you will have the crucial 60 foot time also. And it will still show 0-60mph to satisfy your fetish for that if you insist.

Also, it's nice that you took the floor mats out, but how much do you weigh?

Are you kidding? I increased range by 20 miles on the last trip taking out the mats.

 

[DayTrippin]

Forget and stop wasting time with 0-60mph. Find a safe place with good traction and do 1/8 mile runs. The info will be much better and you will have the crucial 60 foot time also. And it will still show 0-60mph to satisfy your fetish for that if you insist.

Also, it's nice that you took the floor mats out, but how much do you weigh?

The problem with this is the speeds involved. Running an 1/8th gets me up in the speed area here were it is lose your license and go to jail. The vast majority of my time is spent between 0-85. That is why I also posted the 30-XX runs as it eliminates the soft launch impact. I have 60' times from other runs. They are all pretty much hovering around 1.90 +/- .02 so far.

I did make a few runs this morning but haven't had time to look in depth at the data. I did get in a complete 1/8th before I had to brake. I'll post those later.

 

[DayTrippin]

Here are the runs from today. I charged to 100%. I tried DSM, DSMC and just normal mode. I had some runs with the AC on as well but first runs were without AC or any other accessory draw.

DSM = drag strip mode
DSMC = drag strip mode + cheetah

Minor analysis and notes from runs:

• Ran the best time today so far. DSMC full charge, no AC or accessories. Time below of 3.28. It is still off the claimed 3.1 by almost 0.2 seconds.
• This is only .01 seconds better than an ~85% charge level with similar run parameters.
• It is only .09 seconds faster than just running it after it had set for hours and had a less than optimal temp battery, running AC, lights and radio, and no DSMC.
• Had my first complete 1/8th mile run, time below. Additionally another run ran later with no special prep, no DSMC and running AC and radio and just punch it and go.
• Also posting my 100% 30-XX times as well with 100% charge.

First full 1/8 mi run. DSMC, 99% SoC, no AC or accessory power
Next run is full 1/8 mi, 97% SoC, no DSMC and running AC and radio (only .09 seconds slower)

Best 0-60 run so far (3.28). DSMC, 100% SoC, no AC or accessory power. Only .01 seconds quicker than at 84% SoC
Next run was no DSMC and running AC and radio (only .09 seconds slower) - my best run so far w/o DSMC

All 30-XX runs are with DSMC, 100% SoC, no AC or accessory power. Have been my best times so far but not by a lot,
even compared to a lower SoC and running AC.

 

[DayTrippin]

TL: DR
My car is about 0.2 seconds slower to 60 mph than claimed. Ostensibly design choices to benefit the Plaid (drag strip mode (DSM) and cheetah (C)) have little or no impact on the LR for 0-60. SoC has has had little impact on 0-60 acceleration times (from 76-100%), not enough data for 1/8th or 1/4 mile.

Abbreviations used:
DSM = Drag strip mode
DSMC = Drag strip + cheetah

My thoughts so far:

• My MS LR is clearly not meeting the claimed 3.1 times no matter what I did. It is off by almost .2 seconds which is pretty significant as far as I am concerned. The Dragy runs posted over the last two days have been with almost everything that be removed out of the car taken out
• While there may be some measurable difference for using DSM or DSMC along with a high SoC, it clearly isn’t worth it the hassle for the street. Against anything other than a Tesla, it is unlikely to make enough of a difference to matter. To 60, I couldn't conclusively see any difference when using the cheetah stance. The lowered stance may help at much higher speeds BUT the lowered stance may increase the risk of ground strikes so to speak
• Car’s performance is pretty resilient regarding SoC. I saw very little benefit going to a 100% charge. Typically .01 seconds and maybe .02 seconds for most runs vs 84-85%. Might make more of a difference on the Plaid as it needs to pull more amps from the battery so maybe easier to accommodate the load from the LR given it was designed to supply the Plaid
• AC doesn’t seem to make a huge difference IF the car is already at the appropriate temp. Again might be an issue with the Plaid’s current demands but not seeing it as an issue with the LR
• The more I run the LR, the more I can see how soft the launches are as the M3P is clearly launching harder than the MS LR. Looking back through runs on my M3 LR w/boost, it is hanging right with my MS LR up to about 30 mph. Main takeaway here is a M3P will likely match or take the LR from a stop unless you have one that runs close to the claimed specs which I haven't seen yet. On much of a roll, the M3P has no chance.
• 
  
• The LR is not the Plaid but it has benefitted from the a lot of the design that went into the Plaid regarding the battery pack and ability to flow a lot of current repeatedly without much dropoff in performance. That is likely where I think where DSM has the most benefit; for repeated back to back runs
• I don’t see traction being an issue on the LR so far. I tried several different road surfaces and no issue or significant variance in times. Maybe at the track it might be quicker so I’ll try someday
• I plan get something to interface with the system and see if I can log data. Hopefully I can see if my LR is really putting down the claimed HP Tesla says it has
• My eighth mile time doesn’t seem terrible compared to what Car and Driver ran with their Plaid last year; LR = 7.15 sec @ 104.57 (1.89 60’, 4.8 330’) Plaid = 6.19 sec @ 122.77 mph (1.69 60’, 4.16 330’). You can see though the difference the HP is making in the trap speeds already thought
• I am pretty much done doing any more tests for a while. I may test again when I put the lightweight 20" wheels on with better tires
• I would like to know why my car isn't meeting the times claimed. My other Teslas were very close to the claimed times and almost all the demo cars I tested last year were very close to their claimed times and one even beat the claimed times

 

[bhzmark]

how much do you weigh?

My car is about 0.2 seconds slower to 60 mph than claimed.

You still haven't answered: how much do you weigh?

 

[DayTrippin]

You still haven't answered: how much do you weigh?

I take it you never studied physics. Well to slow the car that much (0.2 seconds to 60) I'd have to be about 300 over the weight of an "average man of 180 pounds to slow the car about 0.2 seconds.That is the best estimate given what I think the HP of the car is putting to the wheels.

I weigh 225 so I really doubt the extra 45 pounds is the issue. Especially since my M3 LR runs pretty much the quoted time with me in it and comparably I'd make a bigger difference in it than the MS given the lower curb weight. The S is big and heavy so even adding 100 pounds doesn't make a huge difference in the car's power to weight ratio.

Not to mention I haven't seen a single run anywhere they achieved a 3.1 second 0-60. Since there was never any claimed 1/4 mile times, no other way to compare the car's performance against what Tesla promised.

Take some time, plug in some numbers and see how much extra weight it would take to go from 3.1 to 3.3 seconds. Model S LR is about 4561 pounds and supposedly 670 HP. Add in a driver of 180 pounds and see what you get. Use AWD for drive and I'd suggest dual clutch for trans as it shifts quickest and would be closest to the Tesla which has no shifts.

0-60 mph Calculator for Cars | Calculate Estimated 0-60 Times

Calculate an estimated 0-60 mph time by entering horsepower, curb weight, drive type, and transmission type. Formula and rating factors based upon real world data.

www.carspecs.us

 

[Kan-O-Z]

I take it you never studied physics. Well to slow the car that much (0.2 seconds to 60) I'd have to be about 300 over the weight of an "average man of 180 pounds to slow the car about 0.2 seconds.That is the best estimate given what I think the HP of the car is putting to the wheels.

I weigh 225 so I really doubt the extra 45 pounds is the issue. Especially since my M3 LR runs pretty much the quoted time with me in it and comparably I'd make a bigger difference in it than the MS given the lower curb weight. The S is big and heavy so even adding 100 pounds doesn't make a huge difference in the car's power to weight ratio.

Not to mention I haven't seen a single run anywhere they achieved a 3.1 second 0-60. Since there was never any claimed 1/4 mile times, no other way to compare the car's performance against what Tesla promised.

Take some time, plug in some numbers and see how much extra weight it would take to go from 3.1 to 3.3 seconds. Model S LR is about 4561 pounds and supposedly 670 HP. Add in a driver of 180 pounds and see what you get. Use AWD for drive and I'd suggest dual clutch for trans as it shifts quickest and would be closest to the Tesla which has no shifts.

0-60 mph Calculator for Cars | Calculate Estimated 0-60 Times

Calculate an estimated 0-60 mph time by entering horsepower, curb weight, drive type, and transmission type. Formula and rating factors based upon real world data.

www.carspecs.us

There is a big difference if you stomp on the pedal at 0mph and 20+mph. At 20+mph you can feel 100% instant torque. At 0mph, there is certainly a soft limiter. I think Tesla will put out an update or something to unlock it (likely a paid option). I really really think they didnt want this car in the 2s because it would seem too close to the Plaid.

That being said, the car is like a rocket when you hit the throttle at 20+ or 30+mph. It's even strong at 60 and It's thrilling! I also just saw a video that the 60-120mph was FASTER that the Porsche Taycan Turbo S which used to be the king of acceration for a short time before the Plaid came out. If you look at the specs of the Taycan Turbo S and then the Model S LR, the LR actually has more horsepower. Weight is about the same.

I wouldn't get too upset about the initial launch. I am certain Tesla will provide us with some update to unlock that and I'm sure it will cost something lol. Regardless the car is actually fast where it counts.

 

[DayTrippin]

I am thoroughly happy with the mid range pull. I've said that in a lot of threads. It is basically pulling like a 750 super bike which is pretty solid.

I just want what was promised. I don't want to have to pay to unlock where it should have been from the factory. Now if I paid to unlock AND it promised me, let's say for the sake of the argument, to knock 0.4 seconds off the 0-60 time, to 2.7. Then if I did that boost on my car and it went from 3.3 to 2.7, then I am all in.

I want my car to run like I was promised. As I said, a large part of my buying decision was based up the car running 3.1 and would be quicker than the M3P but it isn't. It is like buying the new Corvette and getting beat by a Camaro with a worse power to weight ratio.

I'll give an example from another company. I know Tesla will never do this but it is an illustration of handling thing the right way. I bought an AMG Benz the claimed a certain level of performance. It didn't do it and I spent a lot of money for the car and expected to get what I asked for. I took it back to the dealer and they told me that I needed to do X,Y and Z. Well I did that. Then they said it must be the way I launched the car, and then some other reason. So I said take the car out, do what you want, and see if you can do better than what I had.

Nope, they didn't, and they did much worse. They called up the home office, they sent over someone to check out the car. The engineer said that the specs for the car were pretty much worse case scenario and allowed for product variation and were in fact pretty conservative for what their internal testing of the car showed. They wanted to make sure the numbers they quoted, most any car of the line could meet and potentially beat.

They kept my car for about 2 weeks. I got it back and in the first 100' I knew the car was better. Not only would my car meet the times, it would beat the times by almost 2 tenths. It is like they found the 50-70 HP that was missing. I remained a long time and loyal customer of MB after that. In this case I expect Tesla to do the opposite of what MB did. That is also why I went to the trouble of documenting everything and all the different scenarios. Very hard for them to refute the amount of evidence I have. Whether it will matter in the end, I don't know. They shouldn't publish specs if the car can't meet them.

I expect any day, Tesla will just put the little stupid asterisk next to the time like they do for the Plaids, M3P and MYP, and then adjusting for rollout, it is running 3.1. That is how Tesla would likely play it. Don't want to give them any ideas but I could see that happening.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

I am thoroughly happy with the mid range pull. I've said that in a lot of threads. It is basically pulling like a 750 super bike which is pretty solid.

I just want what was promised. I don't want to have to pay to unlock where it should have been from the factory. Now if I paid to unlock AND it promised me, let's say for the sake of the argument, to knock 0.4 seconds off the 0-60 time, to 2.7. Then if I did that boost on my car and it went from 3.3 to 2.7, then I am all in.

I want my car to run like I was promised. As I said, a large part of my buying decision was based up the car running 3.1 and would be quicker than the M3P but it isn't. It is like buying the new Corvette and getting beat by a Camaro with a worse power to weight ratio.

I'll give an example from another company. I know Tesla will never do this but it is an illustration of handling thing the right way. I bought an AMG Benz the claimed a certain level of performance. It didn't do it and I spent a lot of money for the car and expected to get what I asked for. I took it back to the dealer and they told me that I needed to do X,Y and Z. Well I did that. Then they said it must be the way I launched the car, and then some other reason. So I said take the car out, do what you want, and see if you can do better than what I had.

Nope, they didn't, and they did much worse. They called up the home office, they sent over someone to check out the car. The engineer said that the specs for the car were pretty much worse case scenario and allowed for product variation and were in fact pretty conservative for what their internal testing of the car showed. They wanted to make sure the numbers they quoted, most any car of the line could meet and potentially beat.

They kept my car for about 2 weeks. I got it back and in the first 100' I knew the car was better. Not only would my car meet the times, it would beat the times by almost 2 tenths. It is like they found the 50-70 HP that was missing. I remained a long time and loyal customer of MB after that. In this case I expect Tesla to do the opposite of what MB did. That is also why I went to the trouble of documenting everything and all the different scenarios. Very hard for them to refute the amount of evidence I have. Whether it will matter in the end, I don't know. They shouldn't publish specs if the car can't meet them.

I expect any day, Tesla will just put the little stupid asterisk next to the time like they do for the Plaids, M3P and MYP, and then adjusting for rollout, it is running 3.1. That is how Tesla would likely play it. Don't want to give them any ideas but I could see that happening.

Yeah I understand. I do think you are 'within spec' from what I see others getting. We all know this car has a very good power to weight ration, much much better than the M3P which is why it pulls so hard after about 20mph.

Almost 100% certain Tesla put a software limiter, you can actually feel when the car goes to full power around 20mph or so. But that initial launch is like it's in sport mode instead of insane.

Best case scenario, Tesla pushes an update (free) that increases launch performance. Additionally Tesla releases a "boost option" for maybe $5k to increase power to something like 720-750 range.

 

[NeuroRad]

I am thoroughly happy with the mid range pull. I've said that in a lot of threads. It is basically pulling like a 750 super bike which is pretty solid.

I just want what was promised. I don't want to have to pay to unlock where it should have been from the factory. Now if I paid to unlock AND it promised me, let's say for the sake of the argument, to knock 0.4 seconds off the 0-60 time, to 2.7. Then if I did that boost on my car and it went from 3.3 to 2.7, then I am all in.

I want my car to run like I was promised. As I said, a large part of my buying decision was based up the car running 3.1 and would be quicker than the M3P but it isn't. It is like buying the new Corvette and getting beat by a Camaro with a worse power to weight ratio.

I'll give an example from another company. I know Tesla will never do this but it is an illustration of handling thing the right way. I bought an AMG Benz the claimed a certain level of performance. It didn't do it and I spent a lot of money for the car and expected to get what I asked for. I took it back to the dealer and they told me that I needed to do X,Y and Z. Well I did that. Then they said it must be the way I launched the car, and then some other reason. So I said take the car out, do what you want, and see if you can do better than what I had.

Nope, they didn't, and they did much worse. They called up the home office, they sent over someone to check out the car. The engineer said that the specs for the car were pretty much worse case scenario and allowed for product variation and were in fact pretty conservative for what their internal testing of the car showed. They wanted to make sure the numbers they quoted, most any car of the line could meet and potentially beat.

They kept my car for about 2 weeks. I got it back and in the first 100' I knew the car was better. Not only would my car meet the times, it would beat the times by almost 2 tenths. It is like they found the 50-70 HP that was missing. I remained a long time and loyal customer of MB after that. In this case I expect Tesla to do the opposite of what MB did. That is also why I went to the trouble of documenting everything and all the different scenarios. Very hard for them to refute the amount of evidence I have. Whether it will matter in the end, I don't know. They shouldn't publish specs if the car can't meet them.

I expect any day, Tesla will just put the little stupid asterisk next to the time like they do for the Plaids, M3P and MYP, and then adjusting for rollout, it is running 3.1. That is how Tesla would likely play it. Don't want to give them any ideas but I could see that happening.

Man, that sounds like incredible customer service. I can see why you’re upset with the LR. You’re not getting what’s advertised. Perhaps Tesla thought no one would notice? Most LR owners I know could not care less about performance and just wanted a higher end car than the 3.

 

[bhzmark]

I haven't seen a single run anywhere they achieved a 3.1 second 0-60.

 

[DayTrippin]

I saw that earlier. Not to be pedantic, 3.18 is not 3.10. Also slightly downhill as well, even if valid according to Dragy. Not to mention a lot of M3Ps that ran better than the MS LR. A couple even in the high 2's. Not sure if it was actually an MYP, but someone ran 3.18 with it. As slow as mine is, it is one of the quicker ones posted which is pretty sad. And my best run was .22% slope uphill.

 

[mpgxsvcd]

I saw that earlier. Not to be pedantic, 3.18 is not 3.10. Also slightly downhill as well, even if valid according to Dragy. Not to mention a lot of M3Ps that ran better than the MS LR. A couple even in the high 2's. Not sure if it was actually an MYP, but someone ran 3.18 with it. As slow as mine is, it is one of the quicker ones posted which is pretty sad. And my best run was .22% slope uphill.

To be pedantic, Tesla advertises “3.1” for the 2022 Model S LR 0-60 mph. 3.19 0-60 mph without rollout satisfies that claim. If they had said “3.10” then it wouldn’t have been valid.

I also believe that a -.99% slope is going to be acceptable for their claim.

I get why this bugs you. If I bought a Model S thinking it would be faster than a Model 3 Performance but it wasn’t. I wouldn’t be too happy.

However, I believe your Model S is capable of hitting 3.19 seconds 0-60 mph if you set it up with all parameters optimized. If you give it a full battery, precondition, use optimal acceleration settings, have the optimal wheel and tire setup, and have the maximum allowable downhill slope I bet you too will see at least 3.19 for 0-60 mph.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

Actually Model S is a good bit faster than the M3 Performance. You don't see it in the 0-60 since they are close but take a look at the 1/4 mile. I like using motormatchup and find their simulation to be fairly accurate.

MS LR v M3P (start at 0mph to 1/4 mile)

Performance Simulations and Drag Race Simulator

Advanced drag strip simulator with support for 50,000+ vehicles

www.motormatchup.com

MS LR v. MS P100D (start at 0mph to 1/4 mile)

Performance Simulations and Drag Race Simulator

Advanced drag strip simulator with support for 50,000+ vehicles

www.motormatchup.com

Here the P100D barely wins the 1/4 mile by just .2sec while the LR is catching up rapidly trapping 131mph.

MS LR v. MS P100D (start at 30mph to 1/4 mile)

Performance Simulations and Drag Race Simulator

Advanced drag strip simulator with support for 50,000+ vehicles

www.motormatchup.com

Here is a rolling race between LR and P100D from roll at 30mph. They are tied up at 1/4 mile.

MS LR v. MS P100D (start at 50mph to 1/4 mile)

Performance Simulations and Drag Race Simulator

Advanced drag strip simulator with support for 50,000+ vehicles

www.motormatchup.com

Here is a rolling race between LR and P100D from roll at 50mph. LR pretty much takes out the P100D at all speeds here.


Tesla just needs to release an update for some more low end on the LR and this thing will be an even bigger beast.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

Another one. Porsche Taycan Turbo S v. Long Range.

50mph rolling race:

Performance Simulations and Drag Race Simulator

Advanced drag strip simulator with support for 50,000+ vehicles

www.motormatchup.com

The Long Range is pretty much a beast above 30mph, and even more so above 50mph beating the prior EV King Porsche Taycan Turbo S. Common Tesla, improve the 0-30mph!

 

[DayTrippin]

To be pedantic, Tesla advertises “3.1” for the 2022 Model S LR 0-60 mph. 3.19 0-60 mph without rollout satisfies that claim. If they had said “3.10” then it wouldn’t have been valid.

I also believe that a -.99% slope is going to be acceptable for their claim.

I get why this bugs you. If I bought a Model S thinking it would be faster than a Model 3 Performance but it wasn’t. I wouldn’t be too happy.

However, I believe your Model S is capable of hitting 3.19 seconds 0-60 mph if you set it up with all parameters optimized. If you give it a full battery, precondition, use optimal acceleration settings, have the optimal wheel and tire setup, and have the maximum allowable downhill slope I bet you too will see at least 3.19 for 0-60 mph.

I did all that, it didn't do it. My car isn't running 3.1 and it should. I paid for it, it was advertised, and it should do it. Look at the other times on the Dragy leaderboard. Currently, I think mine is probably 3 fastest. There is only ONE run that is below 3.2x. Then you look at all the M3P's that are easily beating the times of the MS LR.

Anyway it is what it is but this is the kind of stuff that will definitely ensure I shop all the other options when I replace one of my Teslas. My friend bought a Taycan Turbo. It will click off the claimed acceleration times with no issues. It will consistently beat the claimed 3.0 with no issue. Not a 3.3 or 3.2x, but 2.9 and he hasn't taken everything out of the car as I have. It even does that at a lower state of charge than full. He said it even made the claimed 3.0 at 75% charge. I even ran his car when he was at 50% and I was at almost 100% and he would still pull me to 60. He hasn't tested below 25% as it loses launch mode somewhere around there but it still ran better at 25% than any time I've seen from anyone with a refreshed Model S LR. That is pretty impressive that even with 25% charge, it is still running 3.1 to 60.

 

[Kan-O-Z]

I did all that, it didn't do it. My car isn't running 3.1 and it should. I paid for it, it was advertised, and it should do it. Look at the other times on the Dragy leaderboard. Currently, I think mine is probably 3 fastest. There is only ONE run that is below 3.2x. Then you look at all the M3P's that are easily beating the times of the MS LR.

Anyway it is what it is but this is the kind of stuff that will definitely ensure I shop all the other options when I replace one of my Teslas. My friend bought a Taycan Turbo. It will click off the claimed acceleration times with no issues. It will consistently beat the claimed 3.0 with no issue. Not a 3.3 or 3.2x, but 2.9 and he hasn't taken everything out of the car as I have. It even does that at a lower state of charge than full. He said it even made the claimed 3.0 at 75% charge. I even ran his car when he was at 50% and I was at almost 100% and he would still pull me to 60. He hasn't tested below 25% as it loses launch mode somewhere around there but it still ran better at 25% than any time I've seen from anyone with a refreshed Model S LR. That is pretty impressive that even with 25% charge, it is still running 3.1 to 60.

Too bad you are not going past 60, you will beat him if you go to 100. The S LR is even slightly faster than the Taycan Turbo S after 50mph.

You will also find that in these new Model Ss, the state of charge doesn't matter much either which is a great thing. That being said he probably paid Tesla Plaid price and basically got a car about as fast as yours.

Try a rolling race, 30-70, you will take him. You will also take him 0-100. Those are the strong suits of the car. Rolling or go to 100.

I know I keep saying this but I think the soft limiter that Tesla put on the car 0-30 is too much. Hoping they will unlock that limiter soon.

 

[DayTrippin]

Too bad you are not going past 60, you will beat him if you go to 100. The S LR is even slightly faster than the Taycan Turbo S after 50mph.

You will also find that in these new Model Ss, the state of charge doesn't matter much either which is a great thing. That being said he probably paid Tesla Plaid price and basically got a car about as fast as yours.

Try a rolling race, 30-70, you will take him. You will also take him 0-100. Those are the strong suits of the car. Rolling or go to 100.

I know I keep saying this but I think the soft limiter that Tesla put on the car 0-30 is too much. Hoping they will unlock that limiter soon.

Bang for the buck, the LR is a good deal. Honestly, though the Porsche is a far better car to drive if you want to carve up the backroads or drive aggressively. You can tell the heritage of the car. Yes, there are things they could improve, it costs a lot more money, etc. etc.

My past experiences with the Porsches I've owned is that they are pretty conservative with their claims for the most part. It seemed like pretty much any car that rolled off the assembly could meet their numbers, if not beat them. I think for the Taycan Turbo S, it was claimed 2.6 0-60 and Car and Driver got a 2.4 with it. If you promise performance numbers, any random car off the assembly line should be able to run those numbers.

As I've said before, I am happy with the midrange pull. However there is nothing promised by Tesla here. Also I live where I can't really take advantage of the top end pull that much anyway, and by then you are in license-losing territory. The Plaids I see on the streets here are like have a racehorse in shackles. Totally useless when the vast majority of the time you are luck to go over 60-70 on the highways with all the traffic.