-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
2019.32 - Improved performance...across ALL trims!
- Thread starter Speedr117
- Start date
DCEV
Member
of course..its tesla. its like 2-300.00 or so. what a joke for a 70-100k car.
Clearly you've never had to replace a key fob on a high end car before...
no i never have. If the new fob is a security issue to help keep the car safe it should be free or alot less.
Right, and since this an industry-wide problem that affects almost every key less entry system, I've heard of the free replacements all the car companies offering...
/s if it's not obvious.
Rogue Synapse
Member
Uhhh yeah, a new key fob from Mercedes is even more than $200-300.
Lhshockey24
Member
Same, but for long range S. I can’t seem to break 4s when rated at 3.7s. Let us know what you find post update.
Those Tesla 0-60 numbers aren’t correct. Tesla quotes the Motor Trend numbers which include a “1 foot roll out”. It makes absolutely no sense to use a 1 foot roll out for a 0-60 time. Motor Trend has foisted this falsehood upon the world and Tesla mindlessly parrots the numbers knowing full well the car cannot live up to this performance claim.
You would think 1 foot wouldn’t matter that much but it does. It is the slowest foot of travel. At the end of the first foot, the car is traveling at 5-8 or so miles per hour. The Tesla/Motor Trend numbers start the measurement at the end of the first foot, so they are actually measuring ~7-60 times, not 0-60 times.
Motor Trend started this using the 1 foot roll out to measure 1/4 mile times. The idea was to be more consistent with the times given the differences in the driver reaction times to the green light at the track. It probably makes sense to use the 1 foot roll out there, one foot in a quarter mile is an error of 1 foot in 1320 feet so well under 1/10 of 1 percent. It is different for the 0-60 times. With 0-60 times, the error is huge, and the quicker the car the more huge the error.
Does Motor Trend understand the difference? Of course they do. Even if the they were not bright enough to see it initially, it’s been criticized a lot since. Now they say they must report it with a roll out because they do that with all the cars so it gives a basis for comparison, a feeling echoed by Tesla.
In order to see the difference, imagine a performance S. It will be at 60 within a few car lengths. That one foot error isn’t spread out over 1/4 mile, it is very much less, and since that first foot is by far the slowest foot of travel, it is a disproportionately large error.
No one should see the 0-60 times that Tesla/Motor Trend claims. The cars cannot do 0-60 in the times that Tesla/MT claims because those claims aren’t 0-60 times at all. I understand why MT likes to claim cars are faster, I’m sure their advertisers love to see their cars with unrealistically fast times, but Tesla? They should be better than that so it’s disappointing. Musk’s engineers can put a craft into orbit, they can land a booster on a barge at sea. You don’t do that with near half second errors in 2.5 second calculations.
Anyway, no one should expect a Tesla to perform in the times Tesla quotes. Those times are bogus, and the quicker the car, the more bogus the number. Europeans don’t tolerate this sort of marketing, their 0-100 km/h times are accurate. I believe KBB reports accurate 0-60 times, they are very critical of Motor Trend’s deceptive measurements.
The cars are great. It’s a disservice to saddle such wonderful cars with dishonest performance claims.
Dragy makes a device thought to be very accurate. Dragy maintains a performance database of cars. I have not seen the numbers but that might be a place to turn for real Tesla 0-60 performance numbers.
You would think 1 foot wouldn’t matter that much but it does. It is the slowest foot of travel. At the end of the first foot, the car is traveling at 5-8 or so miles per hour. The Tesla/Motor Trend numbers start the measurement at the end of the first foot, so they are actually measuring ~7-60 times, not 0-60 times.
Motor Trend started this using the 1 foot roll out to measure 1/4 mile times. The idea was to be more consistent with the times given the differences in the driver reaction times to the green light at the track. It probably makes sense to use the 1 foot roll out there, one foot in a quarter mile is an error of 1 foot in 1320 feet so well under 1/10 of 1 percent. It is different for the 0-60 times. With 0-60 times, the error is huge, and the quicker the car the more huge the error.
Does Motor Trend understand the difference? Of course they do. Even if the they were not bright enough to see it initially, it’s been criticized a lot since. Now they say they must report it with a roll out because they do that with all the cars so it gives a basis for comparison, a feeling echoed by Tesla.
In order to see the difference, imagine a performance S. It will be at 60 within a few car lengths. That one foot error isn’t spread out over 1/4 mile, it is very much less, and since that first foot is by far the slowest foot of travel, it is a disproportionately large error.
No one should see the 0-60 times that Tesla/Motor Trend claims. The cars cannot do 0-60 in the times that Tesla/MT claims because those claims aren’t 0-60 times at all. I understand why MT likes to claim cars are faster, I’m sure their advertisers love to see their cars with unrealistically fast times, but Tesla? They should be better than that so it’s disappointing. Musk’s engineers can put a craft into orbit, they can land a booster on a barge at sea. You don’t do that with near half second errors in 2.5 second calculations.
Anyway, no one should expect a Tesla to perform in the times Tesla quotes. Those times are bogus, and the quicker the car, the more bogus the number. Europeans don’t tolerate this sort of marketing, their 0-100 km/h times are accurate. I believe KBB reports accurate 0-60 times, they are very critical of Motor Trend’s deceptive measurements.
The cars are great. It’s a disservice to saddle such wonderful cars with dishonest performance claims.
Dragy makes a device thought to be very accurate. Dragy maintains a performance database of cars. I have not seen the numbers but that might be a place to turn for real Tesla 0-60 performance numbers.
Lhshockey24
Member
So when you watch all those Tesla YouTube videos are they all using 1ft roll-out times? It seems the P100D can hit 2.4-2.5 0-60 pretty consistently.
I am in the UK and asked the Service Centre yesterday about the cost of a fob upgrade to v2. Answer was around £150 per fob. SC manager advised “just use PIN to drive and save your money”. I have followed his advice.
camthehombre
Member
You can do either. You can email them and request your Slacker login info, or you can login to your own account if you'd like. This update also broke my login. I tried to tap "login with Tesla account" and it doesn't actually do it. I was able to use the credentials I already had to login and it's working fine now.
I make no claims at all. If people can reach 2.4 to 2.5 in a bona fide 0-60 measurement, and if those are truly accurate and repeatable,
that’s remarkable. I remain skeptical, though. If the car was capable of genuine 2.4 second 0-60 time, Motor Trend would have reported the 0-60 times as sub 2 second and Tesla marketing would have mindlessly parroted that lower number.
I can’t speak to the YouTube videos. You’ll need to have a critical look and make up your own mind.
Lhshockey24
Member
That’s a valid point. I bet a YouTube video wouldn’t get nearly as many views with the title, “P100D IN A MODEST 2.9s 0-60!!!”
Dithermaster
Member
My Model S Performance Ludicrous Mode does not say anything about performance changes in the change notes. I think it's only for the non-performance variants.
Similar threads
