-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
DuncanWatson
Member
That is a fun review. the comments about the storage are very interesting. I have a co-worker who will want to read that. I really want a $30k version.
Norbert
TSLA will win
After 2 days of owning a Model S, this isn't a "first drive review" anymore, but anyway:
jason @Jason
Having driven the @teslamotors Roadster for 3+ years/15k miles, I can tell u Model S is 1000x better. Tesla has HUGE hit on its hands. Huge.
jason @Jason
Having driven the @teslamotors Roadster for 3+ years/15k miles, I can tell u Model S is 1000x better. Tesla has HUGE hit on its hands. Huge.
Nice find! Here are the summary test results:
0-60: 4.35 sec (4.3 on screen, 4.35 verbal) (Claimed: 4.4)
0-60 with 1-ft rollout: 4.0 sec
1/4-mile: 12.6 sec w/108.3 mph trap speed (Claimed: 12.6)
60-0: 108 ft
Slalom: 66.8 mph
Skidpad: 0.86 g
Color me impressed. That 4.0sec 0-60 w/rollout time has got to be among the fastest ever for a production sedan.
0-60: 4.35 sec (4.3 on screen, 4.35 verbal) (Claimed: 4.4)
0-60 with 1-ft rollout: 4.0 sec
1/4-mile: 12.6 sec w/108.3 mph trap speed (Claimed: 12.6)
60-0: 108 ft
Slalom: 66.8 mph
Skidpad: 0.86 g
Color me impressed. That 4.0sec 0-60 w/rollout time has got to be among the fastest ever for a production sedan.
CapitalistOppressor
Active Member
Eu-flippin-rika!
0-60 in 4.3 no rollout (which Edmunds will report)
0-60 in 4.0 w/rollout (Car and Driver will report this way. Probably even better because they like aggressive rollouts)
Quarter mile time - 12.6 seconds (likely no rollout, because this is Edmunds).
Just wow. I compared MSP to BMW M5 here -
Model S Performance vs BMW M5
The numbers reported by Edmunds are right in the wheelhouse of the M5, especially the manual t. Better than the 2012 or earlier M5, the same or a little slower than the 2013 model which has a true 0-60 time of between 4.1 and 4.3 seconds and 3.7-4.1 with various rollouts (these numbers are never cut and dried, as minute variables like temperature or size of driver have an effect).
http://www.roadandtrack.com/var/ezflow_site/storage_RT_NEW/storage/original/application/9bccd94b2e804299000526ed5127b74b.pdf
Edmunds also reports a true 12.6 quarter while M5 has been reported as anywhere between 11.9 and 12.3, but those organizations use a rollout that would likely put MSP at or below 12.3 as well. Probably a hair or two slower on average, but at that level reaction time is important and it takes a lot less skill for an MSP driver to make her time than someone driving an M5.
Bottom line, anyone driving an MSP on any given day at a drag strip has a shot to take a BMW M5 straight up. Race in Denver on a hot day and I'd consider wagering pink slips. If he's tall, heavy and jittery looking I'd wager pink slips AND a case of beer.
Unfortunately, the g-pad and slalom was not as flattering to MSP. The numbers are good for a big sports sedan, but not up to the standard of the 2013 M5 or the CTS-V (which along with M5 are the performance kings in this class). Seems likely to me that the big reason is in the tires. I believe M5 uses Pilot Super Sports, while MSP is using a less sticky tire that offers less rolling resistance and more range. That plus being 300lbs heavier is defeating the much lower Cg and width of MSP. Can't be the best in everything I guess
On the other hand, braking performance for the MSP is simply outstanding. The near perfect 50/50 weight distribution dominates both M5 and CTS-V with a 60-0 distance of 108 just flat out spanks M5 and CTS-V which stop in 115 and 116.
On balance MSP has excellent speed, decent lateral acceleration and handling and outstanding (possibly class leading?) braking. I still predict much better rolling acceleration numbers for Model S compared to it's competitors, but I was wrong about it's handling (stupid tires :cursing
.Bottom line (part deux), MSP is likely extremely competitive in any road race where speeds don't get over 110-120 mph, even against the best cars in it's class.
Last edited by a moderator:
mnx
2018 M3P
CapitalistOppressor
Active Member
It's very, very fast (read my extended post) but not fastest ever. Faster than 2012 M5 but not quite as fast as 2013 with the DCX (on most days).
The 4.35 number was the first try. Edmunds normally would run it multiple times and likely got very close to 4.3 if they did so. We don't know how heavy the driver was, but most people could expect to run a true 4.3-4.5 IRL.
The "with rollout" number is highly subjective. 12" is "standard" but if you are aggressive with positioning it can easily be more than that. I've heard Car and Driver's actual rollout is closer to 16"-18", which would readily explain why they (and others who do this) consistently get better times than folks like Edmunds who almost always will only print the true number in their spec sheet.
The rollout also cuts the time on the 1/4 mile, and it is extremely likely that Edmunds only reported the true number. They are very biased against reporting rollout at all, so if they only reported one time it likely is the true time. A "normal" rollout will cut .3 from most times, while aggressive positioning can wring maybe a tenth or two more. So MSP can likely pull anywhere from 12.1 to 12.4 in actual racing conditions.
The best in class 2013 M5 DCT has been clocked (aggressively) at 11.9 seconds. Thats at ~300 feet and 74 degrees on a calm day. At a higher elevation (>2,000ft), hotter day (~95 degrees) or with a decent headwind (~10-15mph) I wouldn't bet against the MSP at all. Outside of extreme conditions, the BMW would likely still have an edge, but not big enough to guarantee a win.
Last edited:
CapitalistOppressor
Active Member
Actually, I think it's likely that under identical conditions (same driver, same rollout, same environment) the MSP is the same or faster than CTS-V.
Also seems likely to beat CTS-V in a drag race if the Edmunds number doesn't include a rollout (which I think likely).
Edit: Or not. Edmunds has data on the CTS-V for the quarter mile which is 12.4. 0-60 is 4.3. Thats apples to apples since it's the same reviewer. Road and Track got a 12.5 and they typically use a rollout which is what I based my guesstimates on.
Environment and driver has a big effect on those numbers though so I still think R&T can go slower than Edmunds despite using a rollout. Edmunds printed a long article about why they hate and don't use rollout so I assume they did not use it for the quarter mile time.
Edit2: I can't emphasize enough, with the fudge factor involved in these numbers, MSP is extremely competitive in both 0-60 and quarter mile times. At worst a hair slower than the best in it's class despite being larger, heavier, quieter, more practical and infinitely more efficient. Also cheaper in the case of M5 and likely less expensive in 5 year total cost of ownership than even the CTS-V.
Last edited:
contaygious
Active Member
goyogi
Member
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
That's not the old banana leaf...it's the new matte obeche. This car is likely a relatively recent build.
gg_got_a_tesla
Model S: VIN 65513, Model 3: VIN 1913
Given the P85 badge (which has been done away with since, as seen on June 22) and the perf with silver wheels, I think this is Jurvetson's VIN #1?!
Details have been posted
Its posted now 2012 Tesla Model S Track Test
Here are the details from the above link
Its posted now 2012 Tesla Model S Track Test
Here are the details from the above link
Similar threads
