-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Letter To Elon Musk Regarding P85D Horsepower – Discussion Thread
- Thread starter Andyw2100
- Start date
No problem. Thanks.
- - - Updated - - -
Tesla doesn't have model years so to follow this line of advice they'd never be able to improve the car.
The P85D is on life support as it is. Who is really going to buy one now you don't get the kudos of having the "Top of the Line" (which can't be underestimated) because you can already order a P90DL? (And the S90D is so close in performance, yet cheaper).
The people I feel most sorry for are those that took delivery a month or so ago, there's missing the boat, and the boat leaving port with the captain giving you the bird! (As was my case with autopilot hardware being delivered on the second batch of UK cars, 4 weeks after my 14 month wait for delivery
) This does lead onto a subtle issue, and one I think is a real problem Tesla face from a customer satisfaction POV, is this steadfast reluctance to discount models they are about to kill, yet offer no product road map. At the end of the day who wants an obsolete model? There is no incentive to buy through discounting, and these updates are dropped with zero warning, often within months of initial sales deliveries
More broadly speaking, I really suspect the 85's days are numbered across the board anyway, the range gap is too narrow now the 70 is here. So use the old battery tech cells in the 70s, and put the new tech in all the bigger packs makes a lot of production sense.
I would sign the letter, as I do feel Tesla need to start being more upfront. However as a non P85D owner, I really don't think I'm qualified to.
Anyway I blame this all on those pesky Falcon doors
Citations please.
Yeah.
I get upset about this stuff mainly because I see the consistent communications failures as a serious risk to the company, and I want to see Tesla Motors succeed. If I didn't care about the survival of the company, I wouldn't get upset.
I believe that it's a standard rule of publicity that *the coverup or delay in admitting a problem is worse publicity than the initial error*. I've tried to explain this before in several ways and it really seems to be a hard concept to get across. I don't even have a P model, I don't care about horsepower, and I didn't sign the letter, but I think the people who are writing the letter are doing the most friendly thing they can do for Tesla. If you can't get things resolved privately quickly, public airing of problems or potential problems *earlier* is far superior to having them come out years later, which sounds like "coverups" even if there wasn't a coverup.
If you agree with the letter, we'd certainly like to have you join us and sign it. I purposely wrote the letter in such a way that non-P85D owners, as well as non-Tesla car owners, and even non-investors--people who just are interested in Tesla's future--could easily sign it.
As of now we have about 65 signers. While the majority are P85D owners, we definitely have several signers who own other Tesla models, as well as one signer who does not own a Tesla.
Krugerrand
Meow
A lie requires intent to deceive and that's a road most everyone has claimed to not be interested in going down. Or have we changed our minds?
Andy I know you are not looking to amend the letter, but the section about not correcting the press when they post numbers, should maybe include reference to this
As far as I can see, we are just lining up for this sort of debate all over again in a few months time
Of course once this sort of stuff gets out, it spreads like wildfire, and already YouTube commentators are spouting this as cast iron fact.
So yes technically and legally Tesla can hide behind this sort of stuff, as they didn't actually commit to any of it, I feel it's damaging to the brand never the less. To be honest it's all about expectation management, and a backdrop like this is not helping.
(BTW I do occasionally post corrections when I see them, unfortunately I often get slammed by fans )
As far as I can see, we are just lining up for this sort of debate all over again in a few months time
Of course once this sort of stuff gets out, it spreads like wildfire, and already YouTube commentators are spouting this as cast iron fact.
So yes technically and legally Tesla can hide behind this sort of stuff, as they didn't actually commit to any of it, I feel it's damaging to the brand never the less. To be honest it's all about expectation management, and a backdrop like this is not helping.
(BTW I do occasionally post corrections when I see them, unfortunately I often get slammed by fans
)
I certainly don't think Tesla intended to mislead us, and I made sure to point out in the letter that most, if not all of the signers felt that way. This is the sentence I'm referring to from the letter:
"Most, if not all, of the signers of this letter do not believe that Tesla intentionally misled anyone at any time."
"We" have certainly not changed our minds. I can't speak for any individuals, of course, but all the signers of the letter signed it with that language in place.
And as for what heems posted, we're certainly not "keen on ruining a great company." We agree that Tesla is a great company, and that they made mistakes. A great company corrects their mistakes. We're not asking for entitlements. We're simply asking for the mistakes to be corrected so that we get what was advertised, and what we paid for.
Specifically, the letter really only asks for one thing: it asks that Elon Musk give the matter his personal attention. It does close by saying that we trust that he will come up with a solution that works for Tesla, and for the affected customers. Two relevant sentences are:
"Every signer of this letter wants Tesla to continue to grow, to prosper, and to succeed in changing the world! We trust that with the information we have provided, you will come up with a solution that works for Tesla and for the affected customers."
Personally, I --DO-- trust Elon Musk to do the right thing. I don't know to what extent he has been made aware of the issue--how it is affecting customers, and how at least some customers feel about it. I really think that Musk will come up with a solution that works.
I was away this past weekend, so had a lot less time to read and respond to all the posts on this. (I was also busy trying to deal with the signer issues--formatting, responding, etc.) But a common theme among the people who have been attacking the letter and those of us signing it seems to be that we're making demands and trying to get something for free. I think the two sentences I highlighted above demonstrate pretty clearly that we're not demanding anything. We're simply bringing the issue to Musk's attention, and saying that we trust him to come up with a good and fair solution. That seems pretty reasonable to me.
Andy:
I know you to be a good guy and believe you are sincere in your efforts.
However, the letter is unclear in its intent. If you net it our you (the collective you) are approaching a group of very smart, very passionate folks and asserting that they are either incompetent (they don't know how to measure hp on their own powertrain) or deceptive (they know the number is wrong and are using it anyway). You are doing it very publicly and not leaving any room for the fact that you might be mistaken, which in turn leaves them with limited options for a response.
My wife taught me a long time ago the value of prepending "I believe" to declarative statements--it saves a lot of grief in the long run. Until you understand Tesla's testing methodology, you really cannot refute the number. You have your "professional data loggers", but I have yet to see anyone document the appropriate test methodology and instrumentation requirements for a dual-motor electric drivetrain nor identify if there is a standard way to denote the power output of a multi motor/engine drivetrain. One data point as context, the folks over at Ferrari, whom I assume know a thing or two about drivetrain power and specs, say their Ferrari LaFerrari has 963cv (i.e. metric horsepower): 800cv from a V12 and 163cv from the electric motor. There is a world of difference between "it doesn't make 691hp" and "it doesn't seem to make 691hp, would love to understand how you got there" in terms of driving a productive conversation.
To be honest, this comes across as a bit arrogant and condescending. Teslas engineers likely know as much as anyone about high performance electric drivetrains--considering they have actual shipping product, you could argue they have access to more theoretical and operational data than anyone else; therefore, it seems a bit presumptuous to be lecturing them about the performance characteristics of their own drivetrain. I also think, after navigating, Broder, battery fires and the like, the mgmt team has shown itself to be reasonably competent at dealing with crisis, well, perhaps with the exception of the self-inflicted ones. Again, you might get further by asking them to help you reconcile the differences between your observations and theirs, versus assuming you have the monopoly of valid data.
Why would they need to correct a figure they believe is correct. With the second sentence, you are accusing them of explicit deception if not outright fraud.
I guess at the end of the day, what bothers me about this letter is you have a level of certainly that I feel is unwarranted--you leave no room for the possibility that you might be mistaken in your assumptions, or testing, or your due diligence, or recognizing a dual-motor, single speed drivetrain is going to behave and drive differently than a single-engine multi-speed drivetrain.
I think the letter paints both parties into a corner. If Tesla can reasonably defend their numbers, they are in the difficult position of gently telling their customers they are wrong and you have no further recourse as the whole premise of the letter is that your data is better than their data.
I know you to be a good guy and believe you are sincere in your efforts.
However, the letter is unclear in its intent. If you net it our you (the collective you) are approaching a group of very smart, very passionate folks and asserting that they are either incompetent (they don't know how to measure hp on their own powertrain) or deceptive (they know the number is wrong and are using it anyway). You are doing it very publicly and not leaving any room for the fact that you might be mistaken, which in turn leaves them with limited options for a response.
My wife taught me a long time ago the value of prepending "I believe" to declarative statements--it saves a lot of grief in the long run
. Until you understand Tesla's testing methodology, you really cannot refute the number. You have your "professional data loggers", but I have yet to see anyone document the appropriate test methodology and instrumentation requirements for a dual-motor electric drivetrain nor identify if there is a standard way to denote the power output of a multi motor/engine drivetrain. One data point as context, the folks over at Ferrari, whom I assume know a thing or two about drivetrain power and specs, say their Ferrari LaFerrari has 963cv (i.e. metric horsepower): 800cv from a V12 and 163cv from the electric motor. There is a world of difference between "it doesn't make 691hp" and "it doesn't seem to make 691hp, would love to understand how you got there" in terms of driving a productive conversation.To be honest, this comes across as a bit arrogant and condescending. Teslas engineers likely know as much as anyone about high performance electric drivetrains--considering they have actual shipping product, you could argue they have access to more theoretical and operational data than anyone else; therefore, it seems a bit presumptuous to be lecturing them about the performance characteristics of their own drivetrain. I also think, after navigating, Broder, battery fires and the like, the mgmt team has shown itself to be reasonably competent at dealing with crisis, well, perhaps with the exception of the self-inflicted ones. Again, you might get further by asking them to help you reconcile the differences between your observations and theirs, versus assuming you have the monopoly of valid data.
Why would they need to correct a figure they believe is correct. With the second sentence, you are accusing them of explicit deception if not outright fraud.
I guess at the end of the day, what bothers me about this letter is you have a level of certainly that I feel is unwarranted--you leave no room for the possibility that you might be mistaken in your assumptions, or testing, or your due diligence, or recognizing a dual-motor, single speed drivetrain is going to behave and drive differently than a single-engine multi-speed drivetrain.
I think the letter paints both parties into a corner. If Tesla can reasonably defend their numbers, they are in the difficult position of gently telling their customers they are wrong and you have no further recourse as the whole premise of the letter is that your data is better than their data.
Last edited:
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
I appreciate that. Thank you!
There's a third possibility: they intended the car to make 691 HP, but it was never able to actually achieve that number. As for "using it anyway", they did, to some extent, stop using it.
The "very publicly" part was unintentional. As I said right after the story came out, perhaps I should have been able to anticipate that, but I didn't. I hope it's clear from the way the letter is written, and from the fact that we're going to be sending it directly to Mr. Musk, (as opposed to, say, some media organization), that it was never intended to be any sort of public indictment.
As for leaving room that we might be mistaken, I guess I'm just going on the assumption that Tesla has already recognized, internally, the main fact in question, and that that aspect of it isn't really in dispute. I'm basing that on a few things. For starters, they did remove the information from their website. They also respond to all questions directed to servicehelpna (or the equivalent) at teslamotors.com, but respond to none on this topic. They have known of the existence of threads discussing this for months. I think it is fair to assume that if the car really made 691 HP, they would have said so by now.
I'm also relying on the posters with a lot more technical expertise than I possess, who are very certain that the laws of physics would have to be broken in order for the car to be making 691 HP. There's really only one piece of data required to support that claim, and we have it: the car's maximum energy output has been measured at 415 KW. The maximum horsepower that can be produced from that is 550 horsepower.
To be honest, I also didn't want the letter to become too adversarial, with us laying out argument after argument and supplying every piece of evidence we could put together to show that the car did not make 691 HP. In retrospect I'm glad I didn't, since that might have made things worse, in light of what happened.
I really hope the letter is not taken as being arrogant or condescending. I'm not going to say I've never been arrogant or condescending towards anyone ever, but I certainly would not intentionally want to come anywhere close to being arrogant or condescending towards Elon Musk! I think perhaps a major reason we are viewing the tone of the letter differently is that you are assuming Tesla will want to defend the 691 HP number, and I am assuming they already know that the car doesn't make it. So what I view as just stating a fact that we know that they know, you view as an attack.
I was hoping this letter might help Tesla avoid any sort of crisis. But if it doesn't, I think this would definitely fall under the category of "self-inflicted one."
All of the quote above makes perfect sense if you think Tesla is going to try to defend their number. For the reasons I gave above, I don't believe that's what they'll be doing, and I wrote the letter that way.
It's possible I could have crafted the letter better. I tried to have it make some statements, and still be something many people would be able to comfortably sign, while still having it be very clear that we supported Tesla. It was not an easy letter to write. I don't think tweaking it now would accomplish much of anything, though. I have to assume Elon Musk has already gotten wind of the letter, as published online in the link someone posted in this thread. And any changes would mean allowing everyone who has signed time to "un-sign", which would delay actually being able to send the letter, and wind up prolonging this.
I definitely do appreciate your input!
They very fact there is a discussion, especially from some multiple Tesla owning die hard enthusiasts, surely does?
You can't make all of the people happy all of the time, but I have to say the TMC vibe has changed noticeably in the last 6 months, there's a real risk of things snowballing
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
They very fact there is a discussion, especially from some multiple Tesla owning die hard enthusiasts, surely does?
You can't make all of the people happy all of the time, but I have to say the TMC vibe has changed noticeably in the last 6 months, there's a real risk of things snowballing
The implication is that Tesla has actually done something wrong. What they may have done is not chosen their wording well, but that hardly means they will have to do anything other than provide the necessary information to show how this whole situation is absurd.
Until we know how Tesla arrived at their numbers, there can be no discussion on what Tesla can do to "fix" anything. Outside of providing some insight.
Here's what Tesla can do: provide an actual power number for the P85D/P90D/P90D, like they currently do the 70, 70D, 85 and 85D. Even better, provide the speed range at which this power is available (like they kinda did before by giving the RPM range for max torque and max power). In short, provide fairly basic information to prospective buyers.
I would agree to this, and the unfortunate thing here is that Tesla has done nothing to explain have they arrive at any number, either hp or 0-60 mph numbers, even though multiple people have writting letters, e-mails, had their cars checked and double checked by Tesla to find out if anything is wrong with their car. At no point have Tesla replied to any of the letters, given any explanation to performance questions or in any other way tried to educate any of these customers as to where they are misunderstanding, assuming or due wrong math. Not a single word from Tesla, and this has been going on since the first cars was delivered.
So lets agree that the one Tesla has done wrong, is not just provide their customers with valid data and information to assure them they got what they paid for, since it is obviously not possible to use known standards or ways of verifying their claims.
So there is actually two fixes Tesla can provide
1: A fix for the missing documentation to how they arrive at the hp and 0-60 mph claims
2: If 1 is not possible, a fix to the missing performance
I just didn't expect that, mainly because there were so many more negative things "the media" could have picked up on if their intention was to make Tesla look bad. I wrote more about being wrong, and what my thought process was, in this thread on Friday evening:
Similar threads
