car and driver P90D 11.1 @ 121 MPH

[P85DEE]

Another one posted today vs a GTR:

An 11.27. Not even close to 10.9. Still an impressive show against the GTR.

Looks like that pass included a 1.617 60ft time.

2015 Tesla Model S P90D Ludicrous Timeslip Scan - DragTimes.com

According to the Drag Times site, the best quarter mile time so far is 11.244.

While still .245 seconds away from 10.9x, I see this as progress considering that when the car first came out, we were seeing 11.4.

11.2 will win a lot of races. Especially with a hole shot like that.

Furthermore, seeing this driver post up not one, but two 11.2 times, and two 1.61 60 ft times, gives me confidence that the 11.1 reported by C&D was on the up and up.

I'm beginning to wonder if a 1.60 or even a 1.599 60ft time, which is incredible for a street vehicle, might be possible.

 

[luvnMyTS]

I haven't tried it yet. Heck haven't even had my 2 month old P90D to the drag strip yet. But thinking way back to my early days of both street racing and racing at the drag strip....

Naturally, more gearing was better for getting the car off the line. Getting off the line is mostly what determines 0-60 and a good portion of the 1/4 mile time. That's why the Tesla probably has the slowest MPH for an 11.4 car out there. It gets off the line like a bat out of hell, but doesn't have the horsepower to carry it all the way down. But honestly, another 100 horsepower would probably only add 2, maybe 3 tenths to a 1/4 mile time and may do very little to the 1/8th mile time.

So my thinking is, take advantage of the car's strong point, it's launch capability. I know Saleen played around with the gearing on a P85+ and supposedly picked up a few 10ths of a second in the 1/4 mile. Am wondering if the same would be true with a P85D or P90D.

Naturally, changing the actual gearing on an electric car would be quite complex and certainly void your warranty. Would also affect the top end speed even more as 155 would likely be down to 140 with another full point gear ratio.

So again, back to my drag racing days. Was a poor kid looking for the cheapest way to go fast. Couldn't afford to change the gearing on on my car, so I cheated instead. Back then, 16" wheels were considered big, 17's were almost unheard of. I went and found a set of 13" wheels, put some fairly low profile slicks on them. Dropped the overall circumference by more than an inch and wow, it made a big difference off the line. Shift points were much sooner. It was a poor mans way of adding gearing to the car. Car looked pretty stupid, but it won me a lot of races.

So, being that it's unlikely anyone would want to change the actual gearing on their Tesla since I think very few, if any, bought their car solely to make it a drag race vehicle. If you were going to do that and void your warranty, may as well start yanking out the back seat, passenger seat, speakers, door panels, etc. to save weight.. Clearly not gonna happen on any Tesla, at least not any Tesla purchased to be a daily driver.

So, was thinking about finding a set of 16 inch wheels, slap some slicks or DOT drag tires on them. If the circumference overall is an inch or two less, that will add a ton of off the line gearing and make the thing launch even quicker out of the hole than it already does. It will fall on its face sooner down the straightaway, but you should have another 2 car lengths in your pocket by the time that happens. Watching all the drag videos, you see how long it takes most 700+ horsepower cars to catch the 532 HP Tesla after it already got its big lead. For most, they never do catch up with others catching up in the last few car lengths. So a better head start off the line, might be the difference in holding them off all the way to the finish line?

One of these days if I ever get time (I work way too much and am always travelling for work), I may give it a try. Would have to find the right balance so it doesn't fall on its face too soon. But certainly would expect to see at least a 2 to 3 tenth gain in 0-60 and the 1/8th mile with a 1 to 1 1/2 inch reduction in overall tire circumference. The beauty of it is, you get to change the gearing of the car without voiding the warranty. Before you head home from the track, put the stock wheels back on and it's like it never happened.

Would also help a little with the aero of the car as the car would sit lower to the ground. The Tesla is pretty smooth underneath, but less air under the car would be better. Would be a minimal gain, but a further gain none the less.

Just a thought.

 

[lolachampcar]

P85DEE,
Logged data suggests the car is incredibly repeatable up until the drive units starts to get warm and pull power. I saw this after a number of back to back 0-60s and C&D mentioned it in their turn around 1/4 mile runs. It also looks like motor torque and power draw dither a bit at lower speeds indicating better tires may help down low. I'm running Pilot Super Sports which usually perform better than the stock PS2s.

 

[P85DEE]

P85DEE,
Logged data suggests the car is incredibly repeatable up until the drive units starts to get warm and pull power. I saw this after a number of back to back 0-60s and C&D mentioned it in their turn around 1/4 mile runs. It also looks like motor torque and power draw dither a bit at lower speeds indicating better tires may help down low. I'm running Pilot Super Sports which usually perform better than the stock PS2s.

I'm thinking that better tires might help down low as well.

I was just comparing the latest times by fiksgts to those run by J-P90DL and jak a few months ago.

Fast Tesla Model-Ss 1/4 Mile 0-60 Drag Racing - DragTimes.com

If you click on the results here, the time slips will come up too.

60ft time/quarter mile ET

fiksgts.

1.619/11.244

1.617/11.274

1.642/11.301

=========

J-P90DL

1.627/11.384

=======

jak

1.677/11.403

1.631/11.426

1.691/11.446

1.682/11.476

I don't know what the various states of charge were for the cars on those particular passes, or how hot the drive units were, and of course different days/different tracks, but a general overview of the 60ft times show that even a few hundredths is of benefit toward making it closer to the 10.9 mark.

 

[sorka]

While still .245 seconds away from 10.9x, I see this as progress considering that when the car first came out, we were seeing 11.4.

I don't see any progress. We've been seeing 11.3s and 11.4's from fully charged battery warmed P90DLs since the beginning. An 11.274 is close enough to 11.3 that it's just in the noise. Eventually after enough runs were reported, you were going to get a few that dipped below 11.3...just barely.

Is there some reason to believe Tesla has released a software update that upped the power of the P90DL?

- - - Updated - - -

So my thinking is, take advantage of the car's strong point, it's launch capability. I know Saleen played around with the gearing on a P85+ and supposedly picked up a few 10ths of a second in the 1/4 mile. Am wondering if the same would be true with a P85D or P90D.

Please explain how shortening or lengthening the final drive ratio on the P90DL could improve the launch when it's already traction limited??? Lengthening the might help the trap speed as the motor starting to lose efficiency, but only a little, by the time it exceeds 100 MPH.

 

[luvnMyTS]

- - - Updated - - -



Please explain how shortening or lengthening the final drive ratio on the P90DL could improve the launch when it's already traction limited??? Lengthening the might help the trap speed as the motor starting to lose efficiency, but only a little, by the time it exceeds 100 MPH.

Better tires, as I mentioned, use either a slick tire or dot rated drag race tire and the car will have better grip off the line. More gear can then be handled.

 

[fiksegts]

11.24, but who's counting.... no chance of 10's in current form, that's all that matters...

I don't see any progress. We've been seeing 11.3s and 11.4's from fully charged battery warmed P90DLs since the beginning. An 11.274 is close enough to 11.3 that it's just in the noise. Eventually after enough runs were reported, you were going to get a few that dipped below 11.3...just barely.
.

 

[P85DEE]

I don't see any progress. We've been seeing 11.3s and 11.4's from fully charged battery warmed P90DLs since the beginning.

And now we're seeing 11.2s.

Among the very first runs that we saw, 28 October, 2015, was 11.403. Before that, September 27, 2015 the best reported was 11.384.

Now we are seeing a best of 11.244 seconds, which is .140 seconds improved over that, and on a similar 60ft time.

The tenths come harder as you go closer to the 10s.

I'll take 11.2 over 11.4 and call it improvement.

2015 Tesla Model S P90D Ludicrous Timeslip Scan - DragTimes.com

An 11.274 is close enough to 11.3 that it's just in the noise.

And an 11.244 is far enough away from 11.3 to give me optimism.

Eventually after enough runs were reported, you were going to get a few that dipped below 11.3...just barely.

Why?? :biggrin:

So using that line of reasoning, after enough runs of 11.2 are reported, you are going to get a few which dip below 11.2.....just barely.

Is there some reason to believe Tesla has released a software update that upped the power of the P90DL?

I don't believe that the improvement that we are seeing, is the result of increased power, and the trap speeds do not bear that out either.

I think that it might be due to a few other things.

Driver familiarity, car break in, tire break in, track conditions, drive unit temps, tire pressures to name some.

1.617 and 1.619 60 ft times are not an everyday occurrence. I believe that the trick is in optimizing those times, and figuring out what was done to obtain 60ft times like that, and how to obtain 60ft times like that, or slightly better, with consistency.

Something caused that driver to obtain better 60ft times than his predecessors.

Different tracks, different days, etc., but a 1.627 60ft, yielded an 11.384 Sept 15, 2015. Again, I emphasize, different day, different track, but January 31, 2016, an improvement to a 1.617 60 ft time, or an improvement in 60ft time of .010 seconds, produced an 11.274. That's an ET difference of .110 seconds.

So now I'm wondering what another .010 seconds improvement in 60ft time , or say a 1.609 60ft or better, will produce as far as an ET.

- - - Updated - - -

11.24, but who's counting.... no chance of 10's in current form, that's all that matters...

I don't think that 10.9 is going to happen in current form.

But I do believe that 11.1x might be possible, and have interest in the results obtained by Car and Driver, and the thread title here, and their validity, vs what are probably inaccurate reports of 10.9 from Motor Trend.

The 10.9, by M/T, no. But the 11.1 by C&D, I'm thinking, possibly.

 

[mkspeedr]

11.24 is still better than my 427 (stroked 351) 68 Cougar and it has carpool stickers.

10.9 seconds would be absolutely incredible. I love this car.

 

[P85DEE]

11.24 is still better than my 427 (stroked 351) 68 Cougar and it has carpool stickers.

10.9 seconds would be absolutely incredible. I love this car.

10.9 is incredible for this car.

11.2, 11.1 is fantastic.

10.9 was promised though.

If somehow my car will run 11.2, I don't care if it's an 11.299, "who's counting", after the $5K Ludicrous upgrade, I'd be tickled pink.

But then mine is not a P90D with Ludicrous, and the expectation was that my car would not make it to 10.9 anyway.

The other thing I'm wondering out loud here now, is, if we've seen 11.244, then what would Tesla have to do in terms of an update to shave off those last .245 seconds or so?

 

[sorka]

Driver familiarity, car break in, tire break in, track conditions, drive unit temps, tire pressures to name some.

1.617 and 1.619 60 ft times are not an everyday occurrence. I believe that the trick is in optimizing those times, and figuring out what was done to obtain 60ft times like that, and how to obtain 60ft times like that, or slightly better, with consistency.

Something caused that driver to obtain better 60ft times than his predecessors.

You're way over thinking this. As more samples collect, they're going to be more outliers. I think there will be a bigger difference due to individual vehicles rather than break in. Eventually a copy comes a long that is just a little bit faster than the rest due to the magical alignment of how the coils were wrapped in the inverter, various tolerances, etc.

A 150 ms maximum difference between all runs (which is incredibly consistent) is within the noise. There has been no improvement in the P90DL runs as a whole.

- - - Updated - - -

The other thing I'm wondering out loud here now, is, if we've seen 11.244, then what would Tesla have to do in terms of an update to shave off those last .245 seconds or so?

More power below 30 or 40 MPH which should be possible as the power is limited up to that point for traction. Such an update would require the use of 21s and the rears would have to be the larger 9" wide ones. This might shave an additional 1/4 second off the 0-40. 0-60 would have to be no more than 2.6 seconds. Couple that with a pano delete.

That said, any P90DL in any configuration should be able to hit 10.9s. If not, then the 10.9 would have to have been qualified (requires x wheel option, and no panoramic roof).

 

[P85DEE]

You're way over thinking this. As more samples collect, they're going to be more outliers. I think there will be a bigger difference due to individual vehicles rather than break in. Eventually a copy comes a long that is just a little bit faster than the rest due to the magical alignment of how the coils were wrapped in the inverter, various tolerances, etc.

A 150 ms maximum difference between all runs (which is incredibly consistent) is within the noise. There has been no improvement in the P90DL runs as a whole.

With regard to your first paragraph, I don't think so.

I've seen enough to convince me otherwise.

Even the most subtle differences, cumulatively, can make a total difference, and I tend to think that this is what we are seeing here.

I believe that fiksgt was running in the mid to high 11.3s on his vbox on the street.

Now on the track, he has managed to run a pair of 11.2s.

I don't believe that his improvement was a "fluke" or an outlier.........because he backed it up. He did it twice. And he nailed a 1.619 and followed that with a 1.617. And then he got a 1.642.

So now what was it that caused his 1.642, and what was it that got him his 1.619 and his 1.617???

Had he done it one time, then I could see your point. But he did it twice. And the end results were very similar.

There is something that either he did, or something, or "some things" about the car, the tires, that allowed that.

The trick is in finding out what it was. So there is some repeatability, since he repeated it, but the question is in what is it that needs to be repeated?

Again, I emphasize that no way, now how, do I believe that 10.9 is feasible in this car.

However I am convinced that 11.2, and possibly 11.1 is attainable with it.

And perhaps even with some degree of predictability, once it is figured out just what happened on those runs.

 

[fiksegts]

11.24 on the vbox a few weeks ago, not at a drag strip...

 

[P85DEE]

11.24 on the vbox a few weeks ago, not at a drag strip...

Damn......

Wow, thanks fiksgts.

You just keep delivering. They ought to call you the mailman. Or the UPS man.

So that's two 11.2s on the track, and one on the street.

That is no fluke Sorka.

So now I definitely believe that a high 11.1 is possible with the P90D Ludicrous, and strongly believe Car and Driver's results were on the up and up depending on equipment calibration, or other possible variability or introduced error, I can put stock into their report of 11.1.

So from that image above we know, that you need an ambient temp of about 70* F, about 40lbs of tire pressure all the way around, and what, about a 98% SOC, and that's just for starters?

That folks, is a starting point. And even though it may seem trivial, it is still data of value and at the very least a minor starting point, if you are looking to get your best results.

So now you know better than to try and produce your best quarter mile times in 40-50 or perhaps even 60 degree weather, and with under inflated tires in an attempt to gain traction.

 

[sorka]

With regard to your first paragraph, I don't think so.

I've seen enough to convince me otherwise.

Even the most subtle differences, cumulatively, can make a total difference, and I tend to think that this is what we are seeing here.

I believe that fiksgt was running in the mid to high 11.3s on his vbox on the street.

Now on the track, he has managed to run a pair of 11.2s.

I don't believe that his improvement was a "fluke" or an outlier.........because he backed it up. He did it twice. And he nailed a 1.619 and followed that with a 1.617. And then he got a 1.642.

So now what was it that caused his 1.642, and what was it that got him his 1.619 and his 1.617???

Had he done it one time, then I could see your point. But he did it twice. And the end results were very similar.

There is something that either he did, or something, or "some things" about the car, the tires, that allowed that.

The trick is in finding out what it was. So there is some repeatability, since he repeated it, but the question is in what is it that needs to be repeated?

Again, I emphasize that no way, now how, do I believe that 10.9 is feasible in this car.

However I am convinced that 11.2, and possibly 11.1 is attainable with it.

And perhaps even with some degree of predictability, once it is figured out just what happened on those runs.

I repeat, you're overthinking it and assigning significance to a statistically meaningless sample. Before you get all excited, you should probably wait and see if all the other P90DLS start running high 11.2s as well. And then we'll only be a 1/4 second off the 10.9s

 

[McRat]

It's not unusual for an AWD to nail 1.6x sixties on DOT tires. Thank God for VHT.
I cut 1.5x's in a 6420lb 4x4.

Even "cheap" cars can go 1.6x with AWD with a little turbo tweaking.

2 things can cause bad 60's on the slip:
Lack of traction.
Rolling too far into the lights while staging.

Note that not all tracks are created equal. Some are faster than others. Most the records are set at 3 tracks.

 

[P85DEE]

I repeat, you're overthinking it and assigning significance to a statistically meaningless sample. Before you get all excited, you should probably wait and see if all the other P90DLS start running high 11.2s as well. And then we'll only be a 1/4 second off the 10.9s

Well, for the record, I repeat that I'm not "overthinking it", and the same driver has produced not one, not two, but three, 11.2 quarter mile times now. One on the street. No VHT.

He didn't start out doing this when he first got the car. You may see that as insignificant. I don't.

So it's time to admit that some familiarity with the car, some break in, etc, has led to a measurable improvement in it's quarter mile results.

Of course all of that said, I want to make it clear that it is not my position that this car, as is, has 10.9 in it.

BUT, it does have better than 11.4 in it, which is what we were initially seeing when it first came out.

You can't tell me that 11.24, not once, but three times, is not improvement over the results that we were seeing when this car first came out. We were seeing as bad as 11.5s when this car first came out.

- - - Updated - - -

It's not unusual for an AWD to nail 1.6x sixties on DOT tires. Thank God for VHT.
I cut 1.5x's in a 6420lb 4x4.

Even "cheap" cars can go 1.6x with AWD with a little turbo tweaking.

2 things can cause bad 60's on the slip:
Lack of traction.
Rolling too far into the lights while staging.

Note that not all tracks are created equal. Some are faster than others. Most the records are set at 3 tracks.

Very well put.

I am hoping to see a 1.5xx 60 in this car, and see what kinds of results a 60ft time like that produces.

But my comments earlier were taking into account that previously, with the P85D we were seeing in the neighborhood of high 1.6 and low 1.7 60ft times, and the prior 60ft times for the P90D with Ludicrous were typically not in the 1.61 range like what fiksgt got.

Those 1.61x 60ft times that he got, were some of the best, if not the best, that I have ever seen for this car.

 

[MuppetOwl]

Damn......

Wow, thanks fiksgts.

You just keep delivering. They ought to call you the mailman. Or the UPS man.

So that's two 11.2s on the track, and one on the street.

That is no fluke Sorka.

So now I definitely believe that a high 11.1 is possible with the P90D Ludicrous, and strongly believe Car and Driver's results were on the up and up depending on equipment calibration, or other possible variability or introduced error, I can put stock into their report of 11.1.

So from that we know, that you need an ambient temp of about 70* F, about 40lbs of tire pressure all the way around, and what, about a 98% SOC for starters?

Looks like the P90D they did test did not have panoramic roof. That save some weight and can explain a 0.05-0.1 sec better time. The panoramic roof and dual charger weights 58 kg (127 lbs) more.

 

[P85DEE]

Looks like the P90D they did test did not have panoramic roof. That save some weight and can explain a 0.05-0.1 sec better time. The panoramic roof and dual charger weights 58 kg (127 lbs) more.

Good point......Excellent point. That's almost like having another passenger in the car. So again, I'm definitely believing C&D's 11.1.

I want to say here, to Sorka and others, I want to know what the bottom line capability for this car is right now, and as things stand right now.

Thanks to Fiksgts, he has demonstrated that it is "at least" 11.2, (and that's in, I believe, a fully loaded car options wise) and Car and Driver is saying 11.1.

Fiksgt has demonstrated, that the P90D with Ludicrous, with current power levels, has a bottom line potential of 11.2 seconds in the quarter mile.

I think that knowledge is of tremendous value in the current context.

Some may not want to know how far off from the promise of 10.9 we are. All they care about is that we are not at 10.9 seconds yet, and that's fine. I understand that.

But I want to know, I want to have an idea of just how far off that mark we currently are, and it appears to be somewhere between 2 and 2.5 tenths of a second.

I also recognize that no owner is going to routinely run, nor can routinely expect 11.2s with this car, and even IF this car had a current 10.9 capability, that no owner could expect to consistently run that.

However I am pleased to know that it can at least run a repeatable 11.2 under the right circumstances.

So while we can't yet claim 10.9, we can legitimately claim 11.1 in a stripped down version of the car, and for me......that's improvement. Whereas before, I couldn't tell anyone with a straight face, that the car was a 10.9 car. In any configuration.

 

[McRat]

If I was serious about shaving a couple tenths, looking at the traps for the P90D, I'd see if there was a way of fitting 16" lightweight rims (CCW in Florida will make anything), then going with the 275/55-16? M&H DOT drag radials. You can run them at 30 psi 'ish to start, if you get spin, you can drop it a bit at a time. They are going to slightly taller, and lighter than factory tires. But the best news is they "grow" at speeds over 100mph because they have tall profiles, which will improve your 1/8 to 1/4 split times, and allow you to launch with great anger. On a 7100lb 4x4 with only 540rwhp, these make 1.6's easy. Probably mid 1.5's on a Tesla if traction can improve the 60'.

16" rims are dependent on caliper clearance. CCW's have a good amount of clearance, but I don't know how big the brakes are on a Tesla. I do know they fit on the rear of a C5 Corvette Z06 which has some good sized brakes.