Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

AWD (Non P) - Will you buy the $2k "Acceleration Boost" to get 0-60 mph in 3.9s (from current 4.4s)?

  • Yes, this is what I've been waiting for!

    Votes: 65 7.9%
  • Yes, I want a full uncork to Stealth Performance but this is better than nothing

    Votes: 220 26.7%
  • Yes, for other reasons

    Votes: 14 1.7%
  • No, I only want a full uncork to Stealth Performance

    Votes: 182 22.1%
  • No, I don't want or care to pay for any additional performance

    Votes: 140 17.0%
  • No, for other reasons

    Votes: 44 5.3%
  • I'm not a Non-P AWD owner, but just want to vote

    Votes: 158 19.2%

  • Total voters
    823
  • Poll closed .
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I saw these certificates a week ago. Can you explain what this test group signifies?
It signifies the the group of cars the epa tests were submitted for. In 2019 the test group was comprised of the LR AWD models and the Performance models however only a performance model was tested. The certificate indicates but doesn’t definitively prove the same method was followed.

I’m just extremely skeptical about the so called proof that the 990 is any less performant than the 980

the arguments I’ve heard so far are

the part number is different.
All that means is there’s a design change, they could use 4 bolts instead of 6 somewhere it could sit slightly higher to accommodate the lower ride height of the P etc nothing says the difference has to be related to its capability

the epa numbers.
So far I can find 0 evidence the P has ever actually even been tested. EPA numbers are all about “fuel efficiency” they’re looking at the whole car as a unit not measuring the efficiencies of individual components. If you buy a mustang that can be upgraded with a chip you don’t see the chipped numbers in the epa filing you see the numbers of the car as it rolls off the production line.

Elon says they’re physically different. I haven’t seen the quote or context myself but this can be both true and the motors still be equivalently performant. The motors could be slightly different designs with the same or similar specs


Nobody that I’ve seen has done any testing on the motors themselves. If someone was a spare 990 and 980 lying around send them over and I’ll do it myself and document the whole process.

but everyone who’s claiming with any certainty that the motors definitely are/are not capable of the same performance. Doesn’t understand the totality of the currently available information. And is making a lot of leaps and assumptions.
 
But the MR, SR+ and SR are all in the same test group and they definitely had different tests in the past.

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=48625&flag=1

So the fact that they were submitted in the same test group does not appear to say much one way or the other.

Hopefully the full documents will be posted soon and then we’ll know. My money is on there being separate tests. I can’t explain the EPA data file otherwise.
 
But the MR, SR+ and SR are all in the same test group and they definitely had different tests in the past.
https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=48625&flag=1
https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=48625&flag=1

So the fact that they were submitted in the same test group does not appear to say much one way or the other.

Hopefully the full documents will be posted soon and then we’ll know. My money is on there being separate tests. I can’t explain the EPA data file otherwise.

Ya that’s why it’s not definitive yet, but based on the certificate it looks like nothing has changed since the 2019 filing and the 2019 filing was only the single test. As well to reiterate a point in my other post the epa filing doesn’t prove anything one way or another anyway as the test is whole car no motor test is done. The EPA ratings are fuel economy based kWh/100mi this isn’t a measure of the motors performance potential for that we need a raw measurement from each motor in kW or hp at a static known input which isn’t in the EPA reporting or a graph of the kW or HP over a full input range
 
If there was a physical difference between the P and AWD model rear motor/inverters I find it strange that Tesla does not communicate this clearly. I guess they are close to equal.
Tesla even put unplugged heated seats in the SR+ to save money on assembly. Why should they act differently on the motors/inverters on the P/AWD ? Makes no sense. And the P is even just about 20% of the sales.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Reactions: K1Woods and CMoZ
Just went out and gave it my first try. SoC 70% and entering on a HOV ramp with a down grade. Color me UNIMPRESSED. Didn't feel any different. To make it worse I used my crappy Stats to measure and I thought it said 3.15s and started getting a little excited.....but...... Of course it's NOT right in any way since I got to about 80MPH before I let off. Still at BEST it only felt a tinge faster all due to my lighter wallet. May have to buy Draggy to confirm that I'm getting what I paid for.

Will hopefully find a good spot tomorrow and test again but a very anticlimactic first feel.



IMG_2968.jpeg
 
Just went out and gave it my first try. SoC 70% and entering on a HOV ramp with a down grade. Color me UNIMPRESSED. Didn't feel any different. To make it worse I used my crappy Stats to measure and I thought it said 3.15s and started getting a little excited.....but...... Of course it's NOT right in any way since I got to about 80MPH before I let off. Still at BEST it only felt a tinge faster all due to my lighter wallet. May have to buy Draggy to confirm that I'm getting what I paid for.

Will hopefully find a good spot tomorrow and test again but a very anticlimactic first feel.



View attachment 494216

Sucks for you, I personally thought it was worth it
 
Just went out and gave it my first try. SoC 70% and entering on a HOV ramp with a down grade. Color me UNIMPRESSED. Didn't feel any different. To make it worse I used my crappy Stats to measure and I thought it said 3.15s and started getting a little excited.....but...... Of course it's NOT right in any way since I got to about 80MPH before I let off. Still at BEST it only felt a tinge faster all due to my lighter wallet. May have to buy Draggy to confirm that I'm getting what I paid for.

Will hopefully find a good spot tomorrow and test again but a very anticlimactic first feel.



View attachment 494216

It is half a second faster, which is noticeable by anyone, IF you have the car correctly set up to feel it.

If you need help with how to precondition the battery, or what SOC is best for this test, or the best way to test a 0-60 run, just ask.
Once you get the above set up correct, you will feel it.
How long have you owned the car ?
 
Tried again today with mixed results. I downloaded an app named Speedometer to try. First heading to work I went on an HOV ramp that has an aggressive downslope and just floored it from a slight roll (no app). It felt stronger (of course feeling are subjective) and I was feeling optimistic. I planed on measuring coming back. The HOV ramp is still a downslope but much more gradual and usually less traffic. I was at SoC 58% and came to stop and had app open. Naturally 2 cars pulled in behind me and I had to go. I hit it and it felt the same pre again. So I circled around to try again this time at SoC 56%. Hit it and again it din't feel any faster. Top that off and the app failed to even give a 0-60MPH (or 0-100kph) reading. May have to buy a Draggy to confirm if I truly got my $2K's worth.

IMG_2976 (1).jpeg
 
Tried again today with mixed results. I downloaded an app named Speedometer to try. First heading to work I went on an HOV ramp that has an aggressive downslope and just floored it from a slight roll (no app). It felt stronger (of course feeling are subjective) and I was feeling optimistic. I planed on measuring coming back. The HOV ramp is still a downslope but much more gradual and usually less traffic. I was at SoC 58% and came to stop and had app open. Naturally 2 cars pulled in behind me and I had to go. I hit it and it felt the same pre again. So I circled around to try again this time at SoC 56%. Hit it and again it din't feel any faster. Top that off and the app failed to even give a 0-60MPH (or 0-100kph) reading. May have to buy a Draggy to confirm if I truly got my $2K's worth.

View attachment 494448

So if you’re going to test this out, why not charge to at least 70%, warm the battery up, and try it.
The higher the SOC, the more you will feel it.
 
So if you’re going to test this out, why not charge to at least 70%, warm the battery up, and try it.
The higher the SOC, the more you will feel it.

Hmm, so the advice folks are giving is “warm up battery”, “charge to higher SoC”, “learn how to precondition your car”, “drive in chill and then try it” (that is my favorite one :p).

It seems the acceleration boost may only really be a boost under specific conditions... which I’m sure is still worth it to a lot of people. I’m still on the fence, but I’m thinking there will be a lot of good things coming from Tesla in 2020, I may take a wait and see approach. :rolleyes:
 
  • Like
Reactions: MattUNI
Acceleration is something you get used to
Set your car into chill mode for a week and then try it out and see if you feel it ; or could drive a regular ICE sedan for a couple of days.

Yes this is why I said it didn't feel subjectively faster. Everyone else raved about how obvious it was so I at least expected a little awareness (literal gut feeling) over what it did the day before. I will have to get a Draggy to test.
So if you’re going to test this out, why not charge to at least 70%, warm the battery up, and try it.
The higher the SOC, the more you will feel it.

READ my original post (#1471). I was at 70% SoC and was also fresh from a Supercharger (73%), had driven for about 20 minutes and the outside temp was about 70ºF. This is a close to ideal as you can get when using Lit-Ion tech.