Calling P85D owners world-wide for survey and complaint letter

[WarpedOne]

Why would Tesla then have the need to tell us that the P85D has more power than the P85 if they knew it was not possible

Because it does have more power - when the limiting factor was the motors, and not the battery, the P85D outputs much more power than P85 ever could (under 42mph, and above 75mph).
I bet tesla wanted to increase the max output of the battery only to find out that oldschool fuses are not reliable enough to actually do it safely and reliably.

however in Denmark used to word 'Ydelse' which translates to Performance, so it stated 700 hk performance. So they actually did say it would have 515kW

Complain to Tesla Denmark and their incompetent translators.

But hey, we are just a bunch of illiterates, right?

It is sad, really.

From reading the SAE specs that govern horsepower measurement.

And everyone reads those before sleep?

 

[wk057]

Seriously folks, the whole "motor power" excuse is getting really old.

There is no excuse whatsoever for Tesla to put a number that says "X HP" when advertising a *car* if the stock from the factory car can't actually put out that power at some point on the drive train. End of story. Any defense beyond that is just silly and really needs to just stop.

Regardless of where other vehicle HP numbers come from... SAE testing, manufacturer's testing, fairies, doesn't matter. There is something I can do to repeat that test and come up with a similar result to within a reasonable margin of error using only the vehicle I purchased as purchased. If that means disconnecting the crankshaft from the transmission and measuring there then so bit it, but I can get the advertised numbers. With the P85D I can not.

 

[lolachampcar]

Excuse, no.
Explanation, yes.
Elon's mouth got ahead of the engineering (again - it happens all the time).
I'm sure they were testing Ludicrous only to fail some contractors and likely a fuse or two. These items cost so there needs to be a charge to pay for it if you want the car to go faster then the one you ordered and payed for.

Saying you thought a BeV should perform like a 600 hp plus ICE over 80 mph is either a denial of reality or an unwillingness to understand the technology you are purchasing no matter what Elon says. The car does what a BeV does well at supercar levels; it launches hard thus Tesla delivered.

 

[sorka]

Oximoron.
If it was possible to get much more from the battery, there would be NO need for HW upgrades to the battery.
But there is such a need.

This doesn't imply a technical requirement by any means.

- - - Updated - - -

Far from it. Where would everyone learn this?
The specs are quiet about how the stated power was 'measured'. There is only "max power: XYZ kW". Not a word about where and how and what it means. Not a word about how much of it get to the wheels.

Nobody needs to "learn" it. What people learn is what a manufacturer claims the horsepower is of a car. It's always at the driveshaft. So if a consumer is comparing horsepower for two different cars and they believe the manufacturers claims, they believe they can make an apples to apples comparison. They don't need to know it's at the shaft, but they do believe it's done in a way that you can compare one car to another. For these comparison, power specifications are given at the motor shaft.

The P85D is capped at a theoretical 557 hp starting at the battery terminal. So no matter of testing method will ever produce more than that. Using no standard than just measuring HP at the motor shaft will achieve the highest possible value. Applying a new standard to account for things like not having to account for atmospheric corrections, or having to produce maximum horsepower from the battery system for x number of minutes will eventually lower what EV manufactures can claim. Right now they've got it easy because there's no new standard yet.

 

[wk057]

*sigh* I don't know why I bother sometimes. I really don't.

If anything I've lost a bit more faith in humanity reading the complete nonsense people on this forum have come up with to defend Tesla on this issue. I feel the need to point out that Tesla themselves hasn't even attempted to defend this at all and completely sidesteps the question at every turn so far despite dozens of emails, calls, and other contact. At no point has Tesla taken the position, with me or anyone else that I can find info about, that the "motor power" isn't an achievable power output on the vehicle as spec'd. This is something defenders here have pulled out of their.... well you get the idea.

As far as I'm concerned, unless some time around October '14 the definition of "horsepower" changed from 745.699872 watts or 550 foot-pounds per second to something like 575 watts instead, and I didn't get the memo, I'm pretty sure the number given my Tesla for the car does not match the vehicle's output. That's really all there is to this. There is nothing I can do with this car as it was sold to me to make it output the advertised horsepower. If I take the drive train components and hook them directly to a dynometer the car will still never put out the rated power or anything close to it. Tesla basically acknowledged this with the removal of the 691 number, then further confirmed it with the release of Ludicrous mode hardware updates (that have yet to materialize for existing owners). It doesn't get much clearer than this.

Everything about the P85D has been "wait for this" or "wait for that." Autopilot? Still waiting. Advertised range? Waited months after delivery to get the ~89% of advertised range I get today. Next-gen seats that were paid for? Waited many months to finally receive them. Horsepower? Oh, you want me to pay more now just to get closer to what I already paid for?

Honestly, everything about the P85D aside from the increase in power from 0-40 MPH has been a huge disappointment and nothing like it was sold to be.

To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and feel the same, it would be nice to get a little more public support on this.

To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and are, for whatever reason, ignoring this and other issues... *scratches head*

To those of you who do not even own the car and are continually chiming in with uselessness against those of us who have the vehicle... I have a few four letter words for you that would probably end up as *'s.

But anyway, I'm done. It's obvious nothing anyone says is going to stop some people from having to have the last word on this issue in defense of Tesla. This thread and others like it have been one merry-go-round after another. The people who realize they didn't get what they pay for posting facts describing this and the unsolicited Tesla defenders having to reply to every single post with non-information trying to make us sound like we're crazy to expect what was advertised.

The only person so far that has even come close to making a valid point on the opposing side of this issue is @stopcrazypp who at least tries to put together evidence and data that appears to support the opposing view. While, no offense intended, most of it is unrelated directly to the issue and doesn't really prove anything, at least it's an attempt at using real data and available information to defend the position aside from people just saying that we're "whining and bitching" about a very real problem. So, kudos to you, stopcrazypp, for being constructive.

 

[sorka]

And for what then is it? Damage a new company?
Sell if you do not like the car and walk away.


Obviously faulty dynos, no other explanation fits such data.

The horrors: Powertrain performance graphs
A few random samples:
- BMW Z4, 252kW speced, only 236kW at the wheels (-7%)
- BMW M3 coupe, 252kW speced, ony 223kW at the wheels (-12%)
- BMW 645 Ci Aut, 245kW speced, only 210kW at the wheels (-14%)
- BMW 530i Aut -03, speced 170 kW, only 142kW at the wheels (-17%)
- Audi TT 3.2 S tronic, 184kW speced, only 154kW at the wheels (-16%)
- Audi S6 Avant aut, 320kW speced, only 259kW at the wheels (-19%)
- Audi RS4 ('06), 308kW speced, only 257kW at the wheels (-17%)
- Audi RS4 ('07), 308kW speced, only 245kW at the wheels (-21%)
- Audi A6 Avant 4.2q aut -05, 246kW speced , only 197kW at the wheels (-20%)
- Mercedes-Benz SL 500 Aut, 225kW speced, only 190kW at the wheels (-16%)
- Mercedes-Benz E320 Avantgarde Aut, 165kW speced, only 138kW at the wheels (-17%)
- Chrysler 300C Hemi Aut, 250kW speced, only 207kW at the wheels (-17%)
- Chrysler Grand Voyager LX V6 Aut, 128kW speced, only 104kW at the wheels (-19%)
- Hyundai Sonata 2.4 Aut, 105kW speced, only 86kW at the wheels (-18%)
- Jaguar S-Type 4.0 Aut, 203kW speced, only 165kW at the wheeels (-19%)
- Lexus RX300 Aut, 148kW speced, only 116kw at the wheels (-21%)
- Lexus LS 460, 280kW speced, only 233KW at the wheels (-17%)
- Porsche 911 Tiptronic S, 210kW, only 170kW at the wheels (-19%)
- Porsche Boxster Tiptronic 2.5, 150kW speced, only 124kW at the wheels (-17%)

So much about SAE measurements at the shaft (pure BS).
And so much about horrors of not understanding a thing about mechanics and cars.

All of those are well within line of the expected drivetrain loss. AWD systems used to typically lose 20 to 25%(as much as 30% several decades ago). It's remarkable that an Audio Quattro system can can only lose 17%.

Every car I've ever dynoed has made more power than claimed once you account for the expected drivetrain loss of that particular vehicle. Typical losses for general configurations. 10% FWD manual. 12% FWD auto. 15% RWD manual. 17% RWD auto. 20% AWD manual. 25% AWD auto. That said, automatic transmission have come really far in the last decade so there are many times now when the auto version is actually more efficient than the manual version.

I'm not sure why you decided to pull that Jedi mind trick when you know that manufacturers rate horsepower at the drive shaft and not the wheels. Did you think there was zero loss? Even if you didn't know this, didn't you read any of the previous posts in this thread that already cover that???? Seriously?

- - - Updated - - -

What is getting old is continuous complaints from pretty much same posters. Again and again.
We get it, you are upset. No go and do something about it. Sell the car, demand the money back, or finally file the lawsuit.

It will be progress, whatever it is. Whining and bitching some more is no progress.

It's not that we're complaining over and over. We're just responding to people like you telling us that we don't have a legitimate beef.

You guys ARE Tesla's worst nightmare. They'd have loved for these threads to die a quiet death after a few P85D folks complained. But your continued insistence that the P85D's power wasn't overstated for one BS reason after another has resulted in literally THOUSANDS of messages that I'm sure Tesla would rather not have had happen. The threads have concentrated mountains of evidence with more on the way. I don't need to spell out why that's not good for Tesla.

 

[tezzla]

*sigh* I don't know why I bother sometimes. I really don't...

To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and feel the same, it would be nice to get a little more public support on this...

I'm with you 100% on this and I've probably agreed with 99% of EVERYTHING you've posted. You've stated the true facts & I don't really have anything to add. I'm just confused as to why these people who don't have any skin in the game are so adamant that they are right and you (we) are wrong.

What's really disturbing is that over the top response to an email Tesla sent out about supercharging. For whatever reason, that's more important than truth in advertising?

 

[Canuck]

What is getting old is continuous complaints from pretty much same posters. Again and again.
We get it, you are upset. No go and do something about it. Sell the car, demand the money back, or finally file the lawsuit.

It will be progress, whatever it is. Whining and bitching some more is no progress.

So true! But they won't demand their money back or commence a lawsuit because they really (really!) like the car, and don't want their money back. More importantly, they know if they do that, they can't just buy a new one, and they will be banned from buying another Tesla for life. So the only option is to complain and it's wearing thin. Also, some people thrive on conflict. It gives them a purpose, especially a justified conflict like this one. Of course, there are option but in reality it's a minor issue and deep down they know it. If the car performed exactly the same but the tests on the machines showed the hp specs as advertised, it would not be an issue. Sad really.

 

[jpet]

To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and feel the same, it would be nice to get a little more public support on this.

I feel the same and agree 100% with your remarks. Still love my car but I have lost some faith in Tesla given the way they simply ignore our legit questioning of the real life performance of the P85D.

They are ignoring questions and complaints by people that bought their top-of-the-line product. The last thing I would do in my company is ignore those customers.

The funny thing is, that because we have an early built P85D, we seem to be the lucky ones since current P85Ds apparently no longer come with a staggered setup and sport suspension. So it seems to be getting worse still.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Everything about the P85D has been "wait for this" or "wait for that." Autopilot? Still waiting. Advertised range? Waited months after delivery to get the ~89% of advertised range I get today. Next-gen seats that were paid for? Waited many months to finally receive them. Horsepower? Oh, you want me to pay more now just to get closer to what I already paid for?

When focusing on the HP issue, it's easy to forget what else P85D owners have gone through with their cars. Shame on Tesla.

I do hope you receive the resolution that you seek. I hope you try and take this to Elon Musk directly with an overnight letter, or perhaps even an open letter published in a high profile newspaper. I don't think anything is going to be resolved until Tesla is put on the spot one way or another - either publicly, where it could get messy, or privately, where Tesla can still choose to do right by its customers.

 

[davidc18]

We really like our Tesla, but, they are falling short on so many levels. CPO program, autopilot, X, superchargers ... it seems kind of sad.

 

[legislator]

Neither the P85D press release or Elons speech mentioned horsepower or 691hp in October. Elon even specifically kept it short and only said 50% more torque and better acceleration. Marketing somehow got ahead of engineering and added up the front motor and the rear motor horsepower. Why Elon later has said "yes" when asked about 691hp I have no clue.

 

[Trustno1]

To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and feel the same, it would be nice to get a little more public support on this.

You have my complete support. Allthough I have a bit more relaxed attitude towards this issue, I believe that Tesla has underdelivered on my P85D (order placed in october 2014, delivered march 2015, long wait since I live in Norway)

What I am dissapointed in so far:
- Underperforming at high speed, nowhere near the 700hp as advertised
- Autopilot still not released, allmost a year after I placed the order
- No auto-closing charging port as advertised. (This is not delivered on EU cars)
- Range is less than my old P85, even though they said it would be increased. (This has became better in later firmware, but still I have 5-10% higher lifetime usage than I had on my old P85)

I am considering the Ludicrous upgrade, but feeling a bit cheated by Tesla since this only will bring the car closer to the power number originally stated by Tesla.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

We really like our Tesla, but, they are falling short on so many levels. CPO program, autopilot, X, superchargers ... it seems kind of sad.

I didn't feel this way a year ago, or two years ago. But I'm feeling more and more like this with every passing day. The saddest part about it is that Tesla didn't have to do any of this. It didn't have to spec the P85D at 691 HP. It didn't have to launch the car when it did, before it was ready for prime time. Service centers are now reaching out quietly to owners who received the stupidly worded Supercharger email to apologize. And you're right. It's completely and totally SAD that my favorite company of all time has inflicted so many wounds upon itself in the last 10 months.

Oh, and let's not forget sensorgate as well - owners picking up cars on the same day, some with Autopilot sensors, others without, and the delivery staff being completely clueless about all of it. A lot of people got shafted with that, although many handled it graciously and made no fuss. I know one such owner here in Arizona who fell into this situation, yet she marches on like a trooper and tries to enjoy the car she does have. But you can still sense her disappointment. I don't think owners should be put through these kinds of wringers just to buy a Tesla car. Many have spent the most they'd ever spent on a car, only to have it obsolete the day they took delivery while the person next to them got the latest and greatest. Should anyone spending over $80k on a car be treated like this?

I defend Tesla lot. I do so because I'm trying to be understanding of their situation and what a difficult challenge they have in front of them. However, the issues that we are dealing with here and the missteps Tesla has made in the last year boil down to problems with management. Communications have sucked for years and appear to be getting worse, not better. The one guy at Tesla who could have stepped in to make this better, or at least provide some context, is on leave of absence through the end of the year for unspecified reasons, and when asked about it, Tesla declines to comment.

Maybe the less obsessive Tesla owner at large, who doesn't participate in the forums and doesn't hang on Tesla's every word, doesn't see what I am seeing. I don't know. But one thing I can say is that I have less faith in Tesla's management today than I did a year ago, or two years ago when Tesla was in a much more precarious position. I almost feel like the organization has gotten ahead of management's ability to manage.

 

[AWDtsla]

I am considering the Ludicrous upgrade, but feeling a bit cheated by Tesla since this only will bring the car closer to the power number originally stated by Tesla.

Closer? 0.4 seconds faster to 60 and a second faster in the quarter mile than the car was announced with for less than 4% of the original purchase price? I mean that in itself is ludicrous. What auto manufacturer has ever done anything like that? You could spent as much on BMW M performance parts and go home with your extra 4 horsepower.

 

[Trustno1]

Closer? 0.4 seconds faster to 60 and a second faster in the quarter mile than the car was announced with for less than 4% of the original purchase price? I mean that in itself is ludicrous. What auto manufacturer has ever done anything like that? You could spent as much on BMW M performance parts and go home with your extra 4 horsepower.

I said closer to the advertised power number. That is 691hp (or 700 in European standards) or about 515kW. My car is far from this number, there is numerous evidence of this.
If ludicrous will surpass this number or not remains to be seen.

 

[LetsGoFast]

The only person so far that has even come close to making a valid point on the opposing side of this issue is @stopcrazypp who at least tries to put together evidence and data that appears to support the opposing view. While, no offense intended, most of it is unrelated directly to the issue and doesn't really prove anything, at least it's an attempt at using real data and available information to defend the position aside from people just saying that we're "whining and bitching" about a very real problem. So, kudos to you, stopcrazypp, for being constructive.

I disagree with your analysis of the state of your opposition. I do agree with you on many points, but I remain on the fence with regard to the horsepower question. The two most compelling points are that the EU publishes an official standard and as best I can determine from the posts in this thread, Tesla claims a max power consistent with the 691 HP rating and it was tested and accepted by the EU regulators. That is pretty significant and seemingly uncontested.

The second issue is that there is no clear equivalent in the ICE world. If you have an imaginary ICE car with a front engine that produces 400 HP at the crank and an independent 300 HP at the crank in the rear that for whatever reason (different gearing, fuel limitations, etc) only produces a maximum simultaneous HP of 550 at any specific portion of the torque curve, I'm honestly unsure that there is a false advertising claim. It might be misleading or it might just be a failure of existing metrics to accurately measure the car, but I'm just not able to get quite as angry as the rest of you about it.

Further, the fact that it did a quarter mile at 11.6 with a trap speed of 115 (which was widely available information) or even the combination of a 3.2 second 0-60 and an 11.6 second 1/4 really did tell the story to anyone who was paying attention.

I just drove my 911 Turbo again today. It reminded me how awesome the P85D is. I wish Tesla was better at a lot of things and I applaud you guys for trying to get them there, but I'm not really willing to wade into these threads over and over and wrestle over it. I'm simply not that invested in the question.

 

[wk057]

First... thanks for the quick show of support folks. I was starting to worry that I was quickly becoming only one few left defending this subject.

---

I disagree with your analysis of the state of your opposition. I do agree with you on many points, but I remain on the fence with regard to the horsepower question. The two most compelling points are that the EU publishes an official standard and as best I can determine from the posts in this thread, Tesla claims a max power consistent with the 691 HP rating and it was tested and accepted by the EU regulators. That is pretty significant and seemingly uncontested.

The second issue is that there is no clear equivalent in the ICE world. If you have an imaginary ICE car with a front engine that produces 400 HP at the crank and an independent 300 HP at the crank in the rear that for whatever reason (different gearing, fuel limitations, etc) only produces a maximum simultaneous HP of 550 at any specific portion of the torque curve, I'm honestly unsure that there is a false advertising claim. It might be misleading or it might just be a failure of existing metrics to accurately measure the car, but I'm just not able to get quite as angry as the rest of you about it.

Further, the fact that it did a quarter mile at 11.6 with a trap speed of 115 (which was widely available information) or even the combination of a 3.2 second 0-60 and an 11.6 second 1/4 really did tell the story to anyone who was paying attention.

I just drove my 911 Turbo again today. It reminded me how awesome the P85D is. I wish Tesla was better at a lot of things and I applaud you guys for trying to get them there, but I'm not really willing to wade into these threads over and over and wrestle over it. I'm simply not that invested in the question.

I'm not 100% sure why comparisons to ICE are relevant. Horsepower is independent of the source of that power be it an electric motor, ICE, steam engine, or a few actual horses. It doesn't matter, the power is either available or it is not. In this case with only 415kW available, 691 HP is not possible even at 100% efficiency.

The only comparison to ICE that seems relevant is that to the best of anyone's knowledge ICE manufacturers report a horsepower number that is actually achievable on the vehicle being sold with decent accuracy, unlike Tesla's 691 HP number for the P85D.

 

[kseitzberg]

@WK057: +1!!

*sigh* I don't know why I bother sometimes. I really don't.


To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and feel the same, it would be nice to get a little more public support on this.

To those of you who bought 2014 P85Ds and are, for whatever reason, ignoring this and other issues... *scratches head*

The only person so far that has even come close to making a valid point on the opposing side of this issue is @stopcrazypp who at least tries to put together evidence and data that appears to support the opposing view. While, no offense intended, most of it is unrelated directly to the issue and doesn't really prove anything, at least it's an attempt at using real data and available information to defend the position aside from people just saying that we're "whining and bitching" about a very real problem. So, kudos to you, stopcrazypp, for being constructive.

 

[wk057]

Neither the P85D press release or Elons speech mentioned horsepower or 691hp in October. Elon even specifically kept it short and only said 50% more torque and better acceleration. Marketing somehow got ahead of engineering and added up the front motor and the rear motor horsepower. Why Elon later has said "yes" when asked about 691hp I have no clue.

Actually, Elon's words at the event were "half a gain as much power."