... whilst damaging the cells. This strategy is used sometimes (and not in EV's AFAIK) but not injudiciously. It is certainly not used as a matter of course.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Acceleration in Raven Model X slower than advertised.. Any explanation
- Thread starter Lee_B
- Start date
I appreciate the responses, but look, Tesla doesn't say that the car will do 0-60 at full charge, or at 30% charge. It doesn't say that lowering the suspension is required to achieve those numbers either.
That would be like Mercedes saying that their C63AMGS does 0-60 in 3.2 seconds...with 1 gallon of fuel in the tank.
Tesla needs to clarify to the owners HOW to achieve 0-60 and when they advertise 4.4 seconds, there needs to be a disclaimer...
That would be like Mercedes saying that their C63AMGS does 0-60 in 3.2 seconds...with 1 gallon of fuel in the tank.
Tesla needs to clarify to the owners HOW to achieve 0-60 and when they advertise 4.4 seconds, there needs to be a disclaimer...
Just put the car suspension in low or very low and you will have your 4.4 seconds (or 4.6 0-100 km/h). If not it does it in 5.5.. At least mine behaves like that. No need for 100% soc.. well that might shave off another tenth of a second or so, I've done my tests between 80 and 70 SOC.
It isn't a disclaimer. It is simply a statement as to the conditions under which the measured performance was obtained. Saying that the 0 to 60 time is x seconds implies that a test was run under standard conditions. Those conditions become part of the test and are part of the test result. As 0 to 60 speed is frequently used to specify car performance there is probably some standards body (SAE, ASTM...) or government agency that dictates what those conditions are.
Ok...please provide the documentation that shows where and under what conditions Tesla achieved the 0-60 time of 4.4 seconds. I am very interested in looking at that data.
forkee
Member
changing steering to sport only adjusts sensitivity when turning so i do not think it affects straight line acceleration
that is nothing compared to the ridiculousness of prepping the car for ludicrous+ mode and waiting 30 minutes for the battery to warm up (although instant power is felt before it is completely ready)
it should give you the most optimal outcome but when i dragy'd my P3D-, i found no significant improvement over 90%, 80%, or 70%
agreed. it's funny how they preach 90% but then to get actual 0-60 numbers it has to be above that? 15% would be pushing it though. i forgot the number but there is a bottom limit for ludicrous that if your % is too low, it won't even let you activate it just like cabin overheat protection and remote climate controls.
chill mode took twice as much time to reach 60 on my 3 so i imagine that to be around 7 or even 8 sec
You are going to have to research that for yourself. You can't afford my hourly rate. It shouldn't be hard to find. Start with SAE J1666_200210 (yours for $81 at their website). Of course what you really want is Tesla's test report.
Question asked and answered.
On any ICE vehicle which advertises 0-60 times do you see pages or even paragraphs about what it takes to do that? The number of factors can include weight of other people and luggage, temperature of climate, tires, and road. Can include tire pressure, on standard transmissions the shift point and how quickly the shifts are made. On automatic transmissions can include which transmission a certain model of the same car has.
Ya, Tesla has tricked us by having us put the car in the lower suspension setting to help protect from the shudder. You should hire a lawyer. He or she should include that it is outrageous that they don't specify all the other factors. I'll make the popcorn.
On any ICE vehicle which advertises 0-60 times do you see pages or even paragraphs about what it takes to do that? The number of factors can include weight of other people and luggage, temperature of climate, tires, and road. Can include tire pressure, on standard transmissions the shift point and how quickly the shifts are made. On automatic transmissions can include which transmission a certain model of the same car has.
Ya, Tesla has tricked us by having us put the car in the lower suspension setting to help protect from the shudder. You should hire a lawyer. He or she should include that it is outrageous that they don't specify all the other factors. I'll make the popcorn.
Yes, all those things can change the result you get dramatically and that's why, if those things aren't controlled the test and its result are less than useless. This is why we have standards and one of the most important functions of professional organizations such as SAE is to develop and promulgate those standards.
You don't have a clue what I can and cannot afford. That was a really ignorant statement on your part. Next time you get into a debate with me, come with facts and leave the personal bull$!@#$ behind.
I asked you a very simple question and my request was simply to back it up with data. I am going to assume that nobody knows the answer and I will wait for TFL to post a followup video.
Yes. Good question but I have had 4 Tesla’s since 2016 and I’m quite family with them. I put it to lower it feels faster but still slower than 4.6. I’m going to test thoroughly this weekend
The facts are that there is an SAE standard
Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Procedure
which, would give you some idea as to what's involved or at least get you started. This standard has been canceled presumably to be replaced by something more current. I can look into this for you but I'll be charging you $250/hr (no overhead in that - I won't charge you overhead). Clearly you have no exposure to how professional engineers work. As such I'd suggest that you would be wasting your money. A prudent man would say "Oh, there was an SAE standard that covered that. This is where I should start my research." I've lead you to the head of the path. I'm not going down it for you for free.
Electric Vehicle Acceleration, Gradeability, and Deceleration Test Procedure
which, would give you some idea as to what's involved or at least get you started. This standard has been canceled presumably to be replaced by something more current. I can look into this for you but I'll be charging you $250/hr (no overhead in that - I won't charge you overhead). Clearly you have no exposure to how professional engineers work. As such I'd suggest that you would be wasting your money. A prudent man would say "Oh, there was an SAE standard that covered that. This is where I should start my research." I've lead you to the head of the path. I'm not going down it for you for free.
When someone, as he has done with No. 32 disagrees with a post the writer doesn't know, if there is more than one factual statement, which of the the poster disagrees with. So, if you don't mind:
Are you saying that there are no engineering standards that cover this type of testing?
Or that I should research this for free for this guy?
Or that the guy has exhibited familiarity with engineering practices?
Or that my consulting services aren't worth $250/hr unburdened?
Are you saying that there are no engineering standards that cover this type of testing?
Or that I should research this for free for this guy?
Or that the guy has exhibited familiarity with engineering practices?
Or that my consulting services aren't worth $250/hr unburdened?
Alphaininity asked a question. Ajdelange answered to the best of his knowledge and then pointed in the direction Alphainfinity might attain a more definitive answer. Alphainfinity then responded to a person trying to help with a very rude answer. On a personal level I will be less inclined to help Alphainfinity if he has any further questions.
forkee
Member
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
y'all need to stop polluting Lee_B's thread with your pissing contest
let's deconstruct this clusterfck of a thread because, why not i'm bored. i'll even do it for free
i would have responded similarly to the following statement
that's just uncalled for. nobody asked how much you will charge for expert services. i would feel offended. why would you bring someone's personal finances into this. this just sounds like you are putting yourself higher than others and just sounds pretentious. we are all here to learn from each other and there you are saying you supposedly make sooo much money by charging an amount that other's can't afford? not cool
ooooh boy.....i get it, you're mad. but just let it go. now you're saying ajdelange is dumb because he didn't have proof so supposedly doesn't know the answer and just inviting a comeback, you're on your own from here..
response addressing the personal attack cleverly hidden within an initially scripted informational answer. dayummmm...now you're saying he dumb
passive aggressive much?
just leave it alone you two. you're both just pissing against the wind not making any situation better, let alone the OP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
going back to the thread
it's very common that advertised numbers are posted with the assumption that they are the best numbers obtained and actual results may vary depending on condition. commercials always say this in tiny illegible letters. "Do not attempt", "closed course", "your results may vary". nothing anywhere is concrete, especially in marketing. people will always put their best foot forward. dating profiles will have peoples best look, food commercials show food that never looks like what you actually get, gym memberships thrive on the "better looking" clients showing what you could look like (but let's face it....you won't), and car companies will get pretty good numbers and post it, mostly as an accomplishment. nothing is guaranteed if results vary, unless things can be proven to not work, and all concrete numbers are really just estimates, averages, means, best conditions, etc.
y'all need to stop polluting Lee_B's thread with your pissing contest
let's deconstruct this clusterfck of a thread because, why not i'm bored. i'll even do it for free
i would have responded similarly to the following statement
that's just uncalled for. nobody asked how much you will charge for expert services. i would feel offended. why would you bring someone's personal finances into this. this just sounds like you are putting yourself higher than others and just sounds pretentious. we are all here to learn from each other and there you are saying you supposedly make sooo much money by charging an amount that other's can't afford? not cool
ooooh boy.....i get it, you're mad. but just let it go. now you're saying ajdelange is dumb because he didn't have proof so supposedly doesn't know the answer and just inviting a comeback, you're on your own from here..
response addressing the personal attack cleverly hidden within an initially scripted informational answer. dayummmm...now you're saying he dumb
passive aggressive much?
just leave it alone you two. you're both just pissing against the wind not making any situation better, let alone the OP.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
going back to the thread
it's very common that advertised numbers are posted with the assumption that they are the best numbers obtained and actual results may vary depending on condition. commercials always say this in tiny illegible letters. "Do not attempt", "closed course", "your results may vary". nothing anywhere is concrete, especially in marketing. people will always put their best foot forward. dating profiles will have peoples best look, food commercials show food that never looks like what you actually get, gym memberships thrive on the "better looking" clients showing what you could look like (but let's face it....you won't), and car companies will get pretty good numbers and post it, mostly as an accomplishment. nothing is guaranteed if results vary, unless things can be proven to not work, and all concrete numbers are really just estimates, averages, means, best conditions, etc.
What has this got to do with his personal finances? At this point I had not said what I would charge. I come from a long background in engineering and when someone came up with a question that he could have easily answered himself (customer) and expected us to answer it for him this was the response he often got. No reflection on his ability to pay was intended (it was usually the USG who could, in fact, easily afford our rates).
Nope. You have completely misinterpreted this. The usual response to this particular comment was laughter all around and that's what my intention was. My error was in assuming that that this bit of Beltway culture was known outside the Beltway.
What does that mean? Is it some pop psy term?
That may be true is some cases but you don't put YMMV on the quoted APR rate for a loan. Similarly for the EPA rating. It is based on a carefully managed test procedure designed to prevent manufacturers from "putting their best foot forward in reporting it" to the extent possible. Note: in the case of the EPA rating the manufacturer is allowed to make some choices with regard to the brake programming on the dynamometer but he must justify those to and get approval from the EPA.
Given that the SAE has published a standard I assume that the manufacturers would adhere to this standard. Perhaps they don't. If they don't then the results are WORTHLESS. If the manufacturer is allowed to arrange his test to "put his best foot forward" assume that he took the seats out, emptied the frunk, removed the mirrors and put special tires on the vehicle. You could try that to see if you get the numbers Tesla advertises.
Paul8810
Longtime Member
GalaxySurfer
Life, The Universe and Everything.
If its standard, you dont have a "launch mode" that being said: to hit your best acceleration make sure your battery is above 90% (as near 100% as possible below 90% there is a noticeable difference) and batteries have had a chance to warmup. Make sure your suspension is in low or very low. Then do a "generic launch" hold the brake pedal down, and then acceleration pedal, message "both pedals pressed" is displayed on your display. Then just release the brake. If you do all of those things you will achieve the beat acceleration your car can do. The most important is having battery % as high as possible. Usually unless theres a charger nearby, you will only get 2-3 good runs before time starts to slip.
You might also like to check out the following thread:
Raven (non-performance) Maximum Power Output vs 100D
I plan to do another 0-60 PowerTools run with my S Raven long range this weekend. Latest software and suspension set to low. My Raven feels a little slower than my 2018 100D did above 40mph, which appears to be confirmed in graphs I’ve plotted from PowerTools data. The initial 1ft rollout might be slower too, taking around 0.45 seconds. According to Teslas advertising, I was expecting more power and faster acceleration however that has not been the case so far and I’ve made several runs in both cars at different states of charge. For a while there was sever tire slip upon hard acceleration which Tesla eventually resolved through updates. I’m hoping updates will fix slower acceleration than expected issue. Watertown Mass Service Center is involved.
Raven (non-performance) Maximum Power Output vs 100D
I plan to do another 0-60 PowerTools run with my S Raven long range this weekend. Latest software and suspension set to low. My Raven feels a little slower than my 2018 100D did above 40mph, which appears to be confirmed in graphs I’ve plotted from PowerTools data. The initial 1ft rollout might be slower too, taking around 0.45 seconds. According to Teslas advertising, I was expecting more power and faster acceleration however that has not been the case so far and I’ve made several runs in both cars at different states of charge. For a while there was sever tire slip upon hard acceleration which Tesla eventually resolved through updates. I’m hoping updates will fix slower acceleration than expected issue. Watertown Mass Service Center is involved.
Similar threads
