Calling P85D owners world-wide for survey and complaint letter

[Andyw2100]

I do not see how timing of Tesla statements is relevant regarding the issue at hand. P85D- 3.1s (formerly 3.2s). P85D matching performance of F1. Both statements can't be true, unless F1 time is with a rollout. And this is precisely what we are discussing, aren't we?

Yes, but I don't think you can get Tesla to confirm to day that the P85D accelerates as quick as the McLaren F1. But anyway, lets wait for McLarens answer and subsequently the answer from Motor Trend.

Safe flight

Just to clarify, I believe rns-e's point is that now that Tesla has acknowledged the use of 1-foot roll out in the time they had published for the P85D, they will no longer make the claim that the P85D matches or beats the 0-60 acceleration time of the McLaren F1.

 

[Krugerrand]

Just to clarify, I believe rns-e's point is that now that Tesla has acknowledged the use of 1-foot roll out in the time they had published for the P85D, they will no longer make the claim that the P85D matches or beats the 0-60 acceleration time of the McLaren F1.

In the scheme of things does that/would that really matter? Really? (Take a minute to realize we have no idea what Tesla will or will not claim in the next 5 seconds, 5 days, 5 weeks, 5 months or 5 years before answering.)

 

[Vuvision]

Actually, what I'm seeing here is more speculation, and people taking McLaren at their word (on a vehicle from the mid-90's), while disregarding Tesla's.

Seems a bit selective, IMHO.

Selective is dismissing an official written letter from a Maclaren's executive stating the F1 0-60 time was with no roll out, while ignoring Tesla's constant vacillating of the spec to fit their story for the day.

I honestly think you're doing Tesla a disservice by continuing to speculate the above.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

Selective is dismissing an official written letter from a Maclaren's executive stating the F1 0-60 time was with no roll out, while ignoring Tesla's constant vacillating of the spec to fit their story for the day.

I honestly think you're doing Tesla a disservice by continuing to speculate the above.

Well, I disagree.

Does anyone happen to know the circumstances surrounding the 0-60 time? Was it a professional driver, what was the margin of error in measuring equipment, was it a specialized track, how about tires?

The difference here is that most of these things are known for the P85D, you don't need a professional driver to attain the quoted results. People purchasing the F1 probably didn't actually get the times stated, but they probably didn't test them as people have done with the P85D, and if they did, probably would have chalked their lack of success up to their driving ability.

And again, yes, I think that taking the word of an executive of a company over the performance of a 20 year old vehicle is no more accurate than Tesla's stated metrics on the P85D.

You're welcome to disagree, but I'm not the one who has determined validity based on speculation and conjecture.

 

[sorka]

Why can't both be true? Mclaren claims 0-60 without rollout but a magazine tests it and can't achieve that claim unless they use rollout. This happens all the time where magazines can't quite achieve the manufacturer claimed 0-60.

 

[rns-e]

Why can't both be true? Mclaren claims 0-60 without rollout but a magazine tests it and can't achieve that claim unless they use rollout. This happens all the time where magazines can't quite achieve the manufacturer claimed 0-60.

Yes and no If Motor Trend is not able to achieve 3.2s without rollout, it does not necessarily mean the McLaren is wrong about the 3.2 without rollout. It just mean that Motor Trend did not achieve it, for whatever reason, when they tried.

It is more about Tesla vs McLaren. Will Tesla, with the new disclaimer about rollout, still claim they match the McLaren F1, and if so will McLaren be able to prove them wrong? My guess is that Tesla will not make that claim, although it will be a 'free' claim, since I do not believe McLaren will get into this 'feud'

 

[AmpedRealtor]

Selective is dismissing an official written letter from a Maclaren's executive stating the F1 0-60 time was with no roll out, while ignoring Tesla's constant vacillating of the spec to fit their story for the day.

I honestly think you're doing Tesla a disservice by continuing to speculate the above.

Did Tesla state whose F1 time they actually used?

 

[dsm363]

Why can't both be true? Mclaren claims 0-60 without rollout but a magazine tests it and can't achieve that claim unless they use rollout. This happens all the time where magazines can't quite achieve the manufacturer claimed 0-60.

And we'll likely never know. If someone did find an F1 and couldn't achieve the 3.2 second time then someone would say 'well it's a 20 year old car now' or the conditions were not the same. Either way Tesla is close to 'matching' the performance to 60 which is I believe what they said at the event although later I think they said they beat it.

 

[Andyw2100]

In the scheme of things does that/would that really matter? Really? (Take a minute to realize we have no idea what Tesla will or will not claim in the next 5 seconds, 5 days, 5 weeks, 5 months or 5 years before answering.)

In this case that would matter, because if correct, it means that the P85D was never as fast as the McLaren F1 0-60, which had been a claim Tesla had been making. I'm not making my own guess as to whether or not Tesla will stick to the original claim or not. I was just attempting to clarify what I believed rns-e was saying.

- - - Updated - - -

Either way Tesla is close to 'matching' the performance to 60 which is I believe what they said at the event although later j think they said they beat it.

That's almost correct. To be fair, at the event Musk actually only said that equaling the McLaren's 0-60 time was a goal, and while people easily could have inferred the goal was achieved, based on the way Musk was speaking, etc., he actually never stated that it was. Later, however, there was a blog post that did include the details.

 

[jpet]

To me the 0-60 time of my P85D compared to the F1 is not really an issue. Elon had first hand experience with his F1 and because it was such an incredible car, he probably still profoundly loves and respects it. Being able to build an electric car that can be compared to an F1 is something Tesla engineers can be (should be) very proud of. Being able to launch a mechanical F1 to achieve 3.2 was probably an artform that only few could master. By comparison, a toddler could launch a P85D (which is an achievement in itself) so kudos to Tesla!

Now, I don't have to explain those driving a P85D that above 60 our car does not perform as expected and *that*, for me, is the bigger issue. When a car advertised as 691 hp (700 hp using European metrics), produces 415 kW max at the input in stead of the expected 515 kW, is it abnormal to ask the company producing the car to please explain this difference?

I don't want to speak for my Danish colleagues, but the fact that Tesla seemingly does not want to clarify any "misunderstandings" about this difference is annoying more and more owners. The longer our legit questions remain unanswered, the more Tesla fans will get annoyed. I for one no longer advise prospective buyers to buy the P85D. Someone expecting a 700 hp car quickly realises something's wrong after the first couple of days of insane launches.

It's time for Tesla to wake up and bring clarity on a few things so that existing P85D buyers can again feel good about having paid a significant premium to receive the top of the line model S.

 

[Krugerrand]

In this case that would matter, because if correct, it means that the P85D was never as fast as the McLaren F1 0-60, which had been a claim Tesla had been making.

By a whole .1 of a second? Hold the presses!

 

[Han Chen]

When a car advertised as 691 hp (700 hp using European metrics), produces 415 kW max at the input in stead of the expected 515 kW, is it abnormal to ask the company producing the car to please explain this difference?

I don't want to speak for my Danish colleagues, but the fact that Tesla seemingly does not want to clarify any "misunderstandings" about this difference is annoying more and more owners. The longer our legit questions remain unanswered, the more Tesla fans will get annoyed. I for one no longer advise prospective buyers to buy the P85D. Someone expecting a 700 hp car quickly realises something's wrong after the first couple of days of insane launches.

It's time for Tesla to wake up and bring clarity on a few things so that existing P85D buyers can again feel good about having paid a significant premium to receive the top of the line model S.

This is where I have a problem with Tesla. I don't even have a problem with not having the "expected" performance @30mph+. It is not a conventional ICE so I'm fine with it not having the same power delivery characteristics as one. Where I do have a problem is where there is no way to actually achieve 691hp at any point in time. I don't care if it comes at 0mph or 150mph but at some point I should have my 691hp.

 

[rns-e]

By a whole .1 of a second? Hold the presses!

They actually held the presses for those tens of a second, remember this headline: 'Tesla Model S P85D not quite as insane as promised'?

We get that you find this trivial and that you did not shell out an extra $20k+ to get those tens of a second, but to some people they are desireble to the point where they will pay tens of thousands of dollars to gets those tens of a second. But when paying those kind of money, we would like to get what we paid for even though other people think we should feel otherwise

 

[Krugerrand]

They actually held the presses for those tens of a second, remember this headline: 'Tesla Model S P85D not quite as insane as promised'?

What they did was not test the same way as Tesla did. That was the difference, and when done the way Tesla did it...voila.

We get that you find this trivial and that you did not shell out an extra $20k+ to get those tens of a second, but to some people they are desireble to the point where they will pay tens of thousands of dollars to gets those tens of a second. But when paying those kind of money, we would like to get what we paid for even though other people think we should feel otherwise

I am not buying that argument no matter how hard you drill it. Model S is a FAMILY 4- door sedan. Those who are seriously serious about 0-60 times et al... know a) about roll out measuring on specific performance vehicles, and b) aren't shopping a family sedan on that metric alone or primarily. And yes, I believe people should get what they pay for - just to nip that in the bud.

 

[Andyw2100]

By a whole .1 of a second? Hold the presses!

Pretty sure we're talking about 3 tenths of a second.

I'm not particularly concerned about this issue. Again, I was just trying to clarify the statement made by rns-e, and then explain why it actually would matter when you suggested it wouldn't.

The fact that the P85D is a family sedan and the McLaren F1 is a sports car is irrelevant. When Tesla says the P85D is faster than the McLaren F1 0-60, it should be. Period. For you to say, "well, they measured differently" or "one is a family sedan and the other a sports car" makes no sense. Either the original claim is accurate (and it may well be) or it isn't. There's really no gray area on this.

 

[legislator]

Pretty sure we're talking about 3 tenths of a second.
When Tesla says the P85D is faster than the McLaren F1 0-60, it should be. Period.

I agree, but Tesla didn't say faster. They said AWD is better than RWD: "We combined our new front drive unit and our P85 rear motor with the objective of outperforming one of the greatest supercars of all time, the McLaren F1. With P85D’s 0 to 60 mph performance of 3.2 seconds, we have succeeded."

 

[cynix]

I agree, but Tesla didn't say faster. They said AWD is better than RWD: "We combined our new front drive unit and our P85 rear motor with the objective of outperforming one of the greatest supercars of all time, the McLaren F1. With P85D’s 0 to 60 mph performance of 3.2 seconds, we have succeeded."

How can they succeed in outperforming the F1 if it isn't faster?

 

[Andyw2100]

I agree, but Tesla didn't say faster. They said AWD is better than RWD: "We combined our new front drive unit and our P85 rear motor with the objective of outperforming one of the greatest supercars of all time, the McLaren F1. With P85D’s 0 to 60 mph performance of 3.2 seconds, we have succeeded."

That's a fair point.

And again, my main concern on the 1-foot roll out issue was the inconsistency in testing different models, and the lack of disclosure until very recently. And none of that is particularly important at all when compared to the hp issue.

But yes, I can see how a slightly slower car that is AWD would be a "better performing" car than a real wheel drive car that is slightly faster, so I'm willing to give Tesla that one.

 

[JohnSnowNW]

How can they succeed in outperforming the F1 if it isn't faster?

How is it not faster? Oh, right, an e-mail from a McLaren executive...

 

[dsm363]

How can they succeed in outperforming the F1 if it isn't faster?

They knew they had a software update coming to drop it to 3.1 seconds with the one foot rollout. It's entirely possible they thought the F1 had been tested that way from the way the Road and Track article sounded.