"Acceleration Boost" option, discussion as to which models and how much quicker

[N54TT]

Wow this thread has hit the crapper and tesla still hasn’t put back the fineprint for my P3d. Unsubscribing from this thread.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Would a moderator please split the 980/990 motor discussion out of this thread? This threat is about Acceleration Boost option.

What else is there to discuss acceleration boost?

I learn a lot from side discussions.

We certainly dont want separate threads for everything mentioned.

This thread alone would have already produced at least 20 different threads in TMC. That would be ridiculous.

 

[mreynolds767]

Really wish a mod would separate the motor talk non-sense into another thread.
Since that has not happened I will add fuel to the fire.

It would not shock me if 980 and 990 were different, nor would it if they are the same.
Is it not possible Telsa just numbers them different to keep track of for reliably aspects?
Put one numbered 990 into AWD which are receiving less stress
Put one numbered 980 into Performance which are being more taxed
This way they can see if that extra performance is causing more issues, helps them price the model, figure out a future cost for extended warranty if they need to charge more for the Performance.

Telsa values the software update they gave us today at $2K
They also value the P3D- at $2K more than AWD (if the motor cost is different than they are valuing that software at less than $2K)

Also if the 990 motor cost less than the 980 why would they not put that one in the SR cars ; that is Telsa's cheapest car but they use their more expensive motor solely intended for the Performance cars?

I really have no clue ; there are no facts in this debate just opinions.

I am almost certain Telsa will never offer a different upgrade for AWD 980 owners compared to AWD 990 owners.
This makes the mere discussion of 980 vs 990 almost pointless to begin with!

It would surprise me if Tesla even knows exactly which AWD's have 980 vs. 990 ; which is in my opinion why they are changing any 980 failures in AWD to 990

 

[robski]

Of course 1980 was better than 1990.

 

[CMoZ]

I'm provably not though.




But EPA docs confirm they aren't the same functionally.

no they don't they confirm that the max output of that motor in each model is different at time of reporting, they confirm nothing more

If you can cite any place in the Tesla parts catalog though where functionally identical parts for the same vehicle have different PNs- please do so.

I don't need to I'm citing that that's pretty standard practice there's a lot of standard practices around how part numbers work in general not just the automotive industry and Tesla appears to follow those. I'm saying you have no more proof to say they're functionally different than to say they are functionally identical. I have no idea and I contend we can't say for sure until we se them bench tested without software in the way.

I
Tesla uses revision codes for minor, non-functionality, changes.

The current 980 is revision G for example. You can't order anything less than G, because that's the current part- but revisions have been made all along the way that don't change the functionality (but might improve long term reliability- or easy of service, or might be as simple as "using screws from a different, cheaper vendor"

The actual core PN only changes if the part is not functionally the same thing (to avoid, say, the wrong replacement part going into a vehicle)

You're making assumptions here based solely on my example, those are just that examples. It may be functionally just as capable but have some other major design change Tesla might want to be able to keep track of long term to monitor say failure rates, heat dissipation numbers, whatever. I'm saying you can't say with any certainty the 990 is incapable of the same performance numbers as the 980 there is 0 actual evidence of that either way and until someone pulls one out and tests the motor in isolation there won't be and until then it's just as probable that the revision is functionally identical.

Hypothetically it could be as simple as it is new and improved design with all the same performance capabilities but they continue to use the 980's in the P because they're proven and battle tested at this point and they feel more comfortable real world proving the 990 on lower $$ figure customers, and at some point they'll slowly cut over production and put the 990 in everything.

 

[Knightshade]

Really wish a mod would separate the motor talk non-sense into another thread.
Since that has not happened I will add fuel to the fire.

It would not shock me if 980 and 990 were different, nor would it if they are the same.
Is it not possible Telsa just numbers them different to keep track of for reliably aspects?

They can already easily track that since they know which VINs are requiring drive unit service, and if it's a P or not.

In fact this type of data would've been among what they analyzied when deciding to offer the two free 5% power bumps... they found the data showed a 5% bump to everyone, including P, was safe- so they pushed one. Then they found another to everyone was safe too. So they pushed one.

Likewise their data shows the 990 can handle at least this half-unlock (the 980 obviously can since it's half the upgrade the 980 is already known to be able to handle)

Adding a PN just to get data they already have is adding complexity and cost for no upside.

Also if the 990 motor cost less than the 980 why would they not put that one in the SR cars ; that is Telsa's cheapest car but they use their more expensive motor solely intended for the Performance cars?

The rear DU is listed as higher spec output in all RWD cars compared to the AWD (even when they all had the same physical part) because the rear DU is going 100% of the work in RWD cars.

It would surprise me if Tesla even knows exactly which AWD's have 980 vs. 990 ; which is in my opinion why they are changing any 980 failures in AWD to 990

They absolutely know. This is MFG 101.

Each finished product you build has a BOM (bill of materials) with a list of every part that went into it.

That's how they know which VINs needs a specific recall or service bulletin- since they know exactly what parts went into what car.

 

[Urbancowboy]

STOP!! Or start a new thread.

Geez, it’s like a cancer.

 

[Knightshade]

no they don't they confirm that the max output of that motor in each model is different at time of reporting, they confirm nothing more

False.

They confirm the efficiency of the motor in the range/mileage data. How much power it consumers under identical conditions far less than max output to the power consumed by the other motor.

And they're different.

Which is impossible if they are the same motor.


That has nothing to do with the max output #s.

Again- this is discssed, as length, with links to all the EPA data, in the other thread if you want to dig into it.

I'm saying you have no more proof to say they're functionally different than to say they are functionally identical.

yes, and what you're saying is directly debunked by the EPA data showing they're functionally different parts.

 

[Garlan Garner]

STOP!! Or start a new thread.

Geez, it’s like a cancer.

What else do you want to hear about Acceleration boost? There is really nothing left to say about that.

Ignore the thread if its really that bad.

 

[Star Platinum]

What else do you want to hear about Acceleration boost? There is really nothing left to say about that.

Ignore the thread if its really that bad.

Like how does the boost feel. If people feel the motion sickness felt on the performance model that’s not felt on the LR AWD. Yea a bit subjective but that would be something that may sway people like me to buy the dlc. We need more people’s opinion on their purchase rather than listening to this dumb debate about 980 vs 990.

 

[mreynolds767]

What else do you want to hear about Acceleration boost? There is really nothing left to say about that.

Ignore the thread if its really that bad.

I think the most interesting thing about the Acceleration Boost is that it is sending much more power to the front, before the AWD had a larger proportion of power from the rear.

The other big takeaway was it was a power (HP) and also a Torque Boost.
The 2 free power boosts earlier this year did not increase the Torque.
The torque is what you feel.

 

[LACALawyer]

I'm comparing the Dual Motor ( upgrade ) to Performance.

Dual Motor now has Performance numbers for $2k.

Performance was supposed to include "burned in" ( physically different ) motors.
https://electrek.co/2018/05/19/tesl...-version-ac-induction-permanent-magnet-motor/

Really? Let me know when you hit 3.02 seconds without rollout, like I did in my p3d

 

[Candleflame]

The text shows up for me, a P3D- owner, and it’s unclear whether it was supposed to be hidden for people with my trim or whether it is an option everyone can buy. Especially if it’s $2k, which is exactly the premium over the LR AWD to get a stealth...

View attachment 489612

the stealth is still around 0.4s quicker (its like 3.5s without rollout i think)

 

[LACALawyer]

Impressive, do you think there is any power left on the table in our P3s without programming in a harder launch and risking snapping the half shafts? If possible, I would rather see if they could extract a bit more power in the 70 -120mph range to help prevent high horsepower ICE based vehicles from chasing us down at the end of the 1/4 mile.

I sure hope so!

 

[Candleflame]

Really? Let me know when you hit 3.02 seconds without rollout, like I did in my p3d

that is rediculous. i thought it does 2.9 with rollout atm?

 

[Garlan Garner]

Really? Let me know when you hit 3.02 seconds without rollout, like I did in my p3d

I was officially timed at 2.8 at the Joliet Illinois Autobahn race track this past March.

 

[MattUNI]

If Tesla decides to match the stealth P speed with this upgrade at some point, since you can already get a stealth P for $2K in upgrades when buying new, at that point, I'll buy the update. Because it is half of the speed/power update of a stealth P, I would expect it to be $1K - which I would think is fair for all parties involved.

Outside of that, I think paying $2K would actually depreciate my car, as again, for somebody looking to buy a car - why would they pay the same for my AWD+ when they could get a similar stealth P (assuming a similar one is available) for the same price? They likely wouldn't - meaning I'd need to drop the price of my car. Paying $1,000 for the upgrade vs $2,000 would help negate that depreciation issue.

As a September '18 buyer who has already seen the depreciation of my car sky rocket over the past year with the price adjustments, thanks, no thanks!

 

[Knightshade]

that is rediculous. i thought it does 2.9 with rollout atm?

Like 2.98 is the best I've seen evidence of so basically 3 flat... (Well, for everyone except Garner who claims his does 2.8 but hasn't posted anything to support the claim).

The AWD was about 3.9 measured same way before this $2000 boost (3.86 being the best I saw), and now it's about 3.5 measured same way (3.48 I think is best I've seen posted so far)

I was officially timed at 2.8 at the Joliet Illinois Autobahn race track this past March.

By whom, using what calibrated device, and where's the timeslip?

 

[LACALawyer]

I was officially timed at 2.8 at the Joliet Illinois Autobahn race track this past March.

Sweet!

 

[mrau]

Thanks. I had already updated the app before posting, but tried a log out and phone reboot. Nada. The app shows the right version, but no upgrade link.

You can always log into your account on the Tesla website and see the Upgrades there.

I had to reboot my iPhone to get the UPGRADES to appear in new app. Here is what it looks like once you get it (minus the big arrow).