Newer P90DL makes 662 hp at the battery!!!

[NSX1992]

Link please.

I have the magazine you can view when I return plus it should be on the Internet.

 

[NSX1992]

The analysis wasn't meant to be rigorous. My point was that you couldn't just look at the difference in the first 3 seconds. Both the 85 and 90 do hit a battery limited horsepower, but I would think a 90Kwh battery would have a higher max power. Less voltage sag, maybe. So what ever the 90 was able to do in the next 3 seconds, the 85 would take a little longer. Assuming the extra power is proportional to 90kwh/85kwh, the 85 should take about 3.17 seconds to achieve the same difference in speed above 60 that the 90 did in 3 seconds. As for the difference you quote for your car vs the fastest standard p90dl, I think that gets back to what this thread is about, different driver, different car with different weights and different tracks, etc.

In theory I agree but the results don't substantiate it. The top end speed is usually a measure of power but my P85DL 119.6 was even better than the big battery P90DL. I agree different weights, etc make a difference but I also have the pano roof and air suspension and we are comparing the best in each category.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Checking the photo shoot and written details on the Motor Trend tested P90DL it HAD $15,000 in options above the base $115,000 configuration AND it did have the PANO roof as far as I can tell from the photos. MT also says the car car "run 10.9 second quarters" essentially right off the showroom floor.

They tested two cars. The blue car they drove on the streets had a pano roof. The red car that they tested on the track didn't have a pano roof. You can tell from the rear view pictures of the two cars (picture #7 of the blue car vs picture #50 of the red one; note their gallery really sucks, and it's hard to click to picture number 50).

Also a critically important point a lot of people missed: "With a full charge, the P90D reliably rips through the quarter mile in 10.9 seconds, hitting 122.7 mph."

2015 Tesla Model S P90D w/Ludicrous Upgrade First Test

 

[bhzmark]

Mt has two cars for the photo shoot. one with pano and one without. The one without pano is the one that also has test equipment attached to it in some of the photos.

Another thread did a zapruder style analysis frame by frame.

 

[stopcrazypp]

For your information the difference between 10.9 and 10.999 is not 99 hundredths as you state but it is 99 thousands. There is no need to dig out a past comment as you like to do as I said if you are rounding to three digits then anything above a 10.949 would be 11.0 but I conceded that that a 10.999 is a run in the 10.9s in drag racing. How come you have not commented on my questions of why Tesla does not use MT 2.6 vs 2.8 and maybe the 2.8 could be 2.899? And how about the lady driver bettering the Model X time by .1 sec on her first time out? Maybe Tesla learned a lesson not to publish times that no one can achieve.

The 1/4 mile conventions in terms of timing do not apply to 0-60mph (since the drag strip doesn't test 0-60mph times). In the quarter mile times, truncation is the convention: 10.999 is considered a "10" while a 11.001 is considered "11".

For 0-60 mph there is no established convention (you can use rounding or you can use truncation). Rounding might actually be more common.

As for Tesla vs Motor Trend times, it seems you have the impression that Tesla waited for Motor Trend to do their tests and then posted those results in their website. The fact is that the Motor Trend results had no bearing on the Tesla's numbers. They were tested independently so there is no "using" of "Motor Trend" numbers. No where on Tesla's site did they say they used Motor Trend's results (and Tesla's numbers were posted before Motor Trend anyways, plus Tesla's site never linked to the article nor mentioned it).

 

[NSX1992]

They tested two cars. The blue car they drove on the streets had a pano roof. The red car that they tested on the track didn't have a pano roof. You can tell from the rear view pictures of the two cars (picture #7 of the blue car vs picture #50 of the red one; note their gallery really sucks, and it's hard to click to picture number 50).

Also a critically important point a lot of people missed: "With a full charge, the P90D reliably rips through the quarter mile in 10.9 seconds, hitting 122.7 mph."

2015 Tesla Model S P90D w/Ludicrous Upgrade First Test

The last paragraph states The P90D can run 10.9 second quarter mile times right out of the showroom. With a full charge (100%) will not produce the best times as proven at the strip. Hopefully everyone knows that power will decrease below 90% charge.

 

[NSX1992]

The 1/4 mile conventions in terms of timing do not apply to 0-60mph (since the drag strip doesn't test 0-60mph times). In the quarter mile times, truncation is the convention: 10.999 is considered a "10" while a 11.001 is considered "11".

For 0-60 mph there is no established convention (you can use rounding or you can use truncation). Rounding might actually be more common.

As for Tesla vs Motor Trend times, it seems you have the impression that Tesla waited for Motor Trend to do their tests and then posted those results in their website. The fact is that the Motor Trend results had no bearing on the Tesla's numbers. They were tested independently so there is no "using" of "Motor Trend" numbers. No where on Tesla's site did they say they used Motor Trend's results (and Tesla's numbers were posted before Motor Trend anyways, plus Tesla's site never linked to the article nor mentioned it).

I know all that but Tesla did refer to MT's way of testing (one foot rollout). MT is used as they are the only ones who have reported a 10.9.

 

[St Charles]

What tires do you have?

I have 19" standard wheels. I do not recall the tire brand but they are supposedly all seasons? I would have to go check to be sure.

What was your SOC when you got the 11.05 ?

SoC was 98% at the start of the run. It was my first run of the day and my battery was registered at max power and ready.

I let the car sit for several minutes after a short drive from the SuperCharger to let the motors cool.

 

[P85DEE]

For your information the difference between 10.9 and 10.999 is not 99 hundredths as you state but it is 99 thousands. There is no need to dig out a past comment as you like to do as I said if you are rounding to three digits then anything above a 10.949 would be 11.0 but I conceded that that a 10.999 is a run in the 10.9s in drag racing. How come you have not commented on my questions of why Tesla does not use MT 2.6 vs 2.8 and maybe the 2.8 could be 2.899? And how about the lady driver bettering the Model X time by .1 sec on her first time out? Maybe Tesla learned a lesson not to publish times that no one can achieve.

Well it's good to see you really do concede that a 10.99, 10.999, 10.9999 would satisfy the spec.

With regard to your first question you'd really have to ask Tesla.

However if I had to guess, my best guess would be that Tesla is using numbers they obtained in their testing and MT is using numbers they obtained in their testing.

With regard to the lady driver besting the Model X time, who knows?

But if you're asking me, and you are, again my thought would be that the spec becomes more difficult to reach the lower it gets.

Can we say that had the spec for the Model Xx been 10.9 in the quarter that she would have run 10.8?

 

[fiksegts]

very tiring, I'm not sure I've seen a topic beaten to death so badly....

summary for me is:

• Motor Trend numbers don't count for ****, no time slip from a real drag strip, no 10.999999999, end of story
• a newer P90DL car will go 10.99999 - (put a jockey in st. charles car)
  
• older P90DL cars are not as quick as newer ones and are clearly making less power - this is a problem for me as the published spec is the same for power and performance
• you really can't compare trap speeds between tracks, I've seen trap speeds vary at the same track between two different lanes by 3 MPH - same car, same night, even in a Tesla (which is very consistent)
• nobody has even addressed that Tesla says the Ludicrous option is 20% quicker to 155MPH - NO WAY, not even close

I cannot let this one slide..

I assume the only reason these guys arent writing in this particular thread at the moment is that they are simply tired of the topic, and especially tired of answering the same old arguments over and over and over and over. Also a big difference is that they have the original P90DL which still comes nowhere close to the 10.9-number from what I've seen. You are sitting on you high horse comparing two different sets of hardware where yours is actually able to ouput a lot more power.... Your new battery doesnt magically make the original P90DLs go any faster. The 10.9-claims doesnt magically go away for those cars even if Tesla is now finally able to now produce a 10.9-car a full year after launch of the model.

 

[NSX1992]

Well it's good to see you really do concede that a 10.99, 10.999, 10.9999 would satisfy the spec.

With regard to your first question you'd really have to ask Tesla.

However if I had to guess, my best guess would be that Tesla is using numbers they obtained in their testing and MT is using numbers they obtained in their testing.

With regard to the lady driver besting the Model X time, who knows?

But if you're asking me, and you are, again my thought would be that the spec becomes more difficult to reach the lower it gets.

Can we say that had the spec for the Model Xx been 10.9 in the quarter that she would have run 10.8?

No we can't. My purpose was simply to state that for the Model X P90DL Tesla stated a realistic time of 11.7 that was easily bettered by her but the unrealistic time of 10.9 for the original P90DL has not. But thanks for your replies.

 

[Snerruc]

Gentlemen, time to lighten up a bit ... we are getting very close to maximum plaid.

View attachment 186007

Gentlemen, time to lighten up a bit ... we are getting very close to maximum plaid.

View attachment 186007

Well it's good to see you really do concede that a 10.99, 10.999, 10.9999 would satisfy the spec.

With regard to your first question you'd really have to ask Tesla.

However if I had to guess, my best guess would be that Tesla is using numbers they obtained in their testing and MT is using numbers they obtained in their testing.

With regard to the lady driver besting the Model X time, who knows?

But if you're asking me, and you are, again my thought would be that the spec becomes more difficult to reach the lower it gets.

Can we say that had the spec for the Model Xx been 10.9 in the quarter that she would have run 10.8?

i hate to say it to you guys, but could the lady know something about these cars you don't ? She may have discovered or know something intuitatively that is a better way to drive the car. Put her in one of your P 90 DL's and see what she gets.

 

[msnow]

very tiring, I'm not sure I've seen a topic beaten to death so badly....

summary for me is:

• Motor Trend numbers don't count for ****, no time slip from a real drag strip, no 10.999999999, end of story
• a newer P90DL car will go 10.99999 - (put a jockey in st. charles car)
  
• older P90DL cars are not as quick as newer ones and are clearly making less power - this is a problem for me as the published spec is the same for power and performance
• you really can't compare trap speeds between tracks, I've seen trap speeds vary at the same track between two different lanes by 3 MPH - same car, same night, even in a Tesla (which is very consistent)
• nobody has even addressed that Tesla says the Ludicrous option is 20% quicker to 155MPH - NO WAY, not even close

Both the quote and this response pretty much sums it up. Tesla not living up to promises (not just this one) is a problem for a lot of people. Hopefully they will get back on track and make it right somehow.

 

[FlatSix911]

This guy has the right idea for a track monster ... ‘Tesla Hacker’ building a 1,000hp electric car using Tesla drivetrain and Chevy Volt batteries

He got his hands on two Tesla performance drive units. Even Tesla’s top performance model, the Model S P90D Ludicrous, only has one of these units – in the back. The other motor is a smaller less powerful unit in the front. Hughes will instead use two performance drive units, one in the front and one in the back. He should be able to get about 500 HP from each for short periods of times. He made a custom control board in order to control the 2 motors. He expects to get 850 kW peak output from the custom pack.

In term of energy capacity, The Chevy Volt packs are 16 kWh each and a Tesla module is about 5 kWh each for a total of around 62 kWh. Hughes expects the range to be around 120-150 miles, which is not bad for what will essentially be a drag racing monster.

 

[stopcrazypp]

The last paragraph states The P90D can run 10.9 second quarter mile times right out of the showroom.

That refers to the configuration, not the SOC. AFAIK both MotorTrend and C&D tested at "fully charge" (which is presumably 100% SOC). That is critical information in terms of test conditions.

With a full charge (100%) will not produce the best times as proven at the strip. Hopefully everyone knows that power will decrease below 90% charge.

Citation required. So far the best time achieved (11.05) is at 98% SOC as St Charles noted above. I have not seen indication that a lower SOC (like 90% or 80%) will yield better times (from the power spreadsheet 100% SOC yields more power than 90% SOC). Also, it is my impression that a vast majority of runs were done at well under 90% SOC.

 

[St Charles]

So far the best time achieved (11.05) is at 98% SOC as St Charles noted above. I have not seen indication that a lower SOC (like 90% or 80%) will yield better times (from the power spreadsheet 100% SOC yields more power than 90% SOC). Also, it is my impression that a vast majority of runs were done at well under 90% SOC.

I'm trying to come up with a way to get to the track with 100% SoC. So far, AAA seems the easiest bet, assuming that a flatbed is capable of towing the Model S undamaged.

 

[bhzmark]

Need to plug in at track.

I also have a vbox that I haven't unwrapped yet. Might play with that. Ideally use at drag strip and compare.

Unless motor trend screwed up the correction, I trust motor trend testing (in two directions to control for tail wind, and multiple trials) at least as much as a drag strip which might have a tailwind or weird one time track anomoly.

 

[P85DEE]

I'm trying to come up with a way to get to the track with 100% SoC. So far, AAA seems the easiest bet, assuming that a flatbed is capable of towing the Model S undamaged.

Not many options. I have a trailer and I won't trailer mine because of its weight, my trailer's weight and the towing capability of my truck, I can't trailer it safely.

Need to plug in at track.

I also have a vbox that I haven't unwrapped yet. Might play with that. Ideally use at drag strip and compare.

Unless motor trend screwed up the correction, I trust motor trend testing (in two directions to control for tail wind, and multiple trials) at least as much as a drag strip which might have a tailwind or weird one time track anomoly.

Good point.

 

[bhzmark]

Info re Motor Trend testing: It seems pretty good as long as the weather correction doesn't screw up electric cars. Testing, Testing - The Motor Trend Way - Motor Trend

The Basics
Where: Flat, level, surface with consistent pavement. For straight-line testing it needs to be at least 1/2-mile long. For handling tests, the ideal minimum “black lake” size is 300 x 800 feet. We try to use the same venue whenever possible for ultimate repeatability. Today, California Speedway is used for most tests, with manufacturer and supplier Proving Ground facilities filling in for special tests and testing outside California. In a pinch, we’ll use local dragstrips, but we usually don’t use the burnout boxes or the launch areas, which are coated in non-representative traction aids. [suggesting that they don't use the timing lights either -- they use their own tech described below]

When: In dry, temperate, still weather for the most part. Our Southern California home usually cooperates on the first two fronts, and when winds kick up, they’re generally in the direction of our dragstrip area, so running in two directions and averaging the results mostly cancels the wind effect. Some testing takes place in extremely cold, hot, or humid weather, and the effects of these parameters are compensated for with our weather correction protocol (more about which follows).

Who: Only select Motor Trend Technical Department personnel are trained in the rigors of test driving. There’s a definite skill to launching a car on street tires and to shifting quickly, not to mention operating and troubleshooting our complex test equipment.

How:
Acceleration Testing
We typically switch off traction-control systems and experiment with launch-control systems when offered, but we do not pull fuses to deactivate any such systems.We run from zero to the maximum practical speed increment above the quarter mile. We subtract a one-foot rollout from the launch to simulate dragstrip performance (dragstrip runs started the whole quarter-mile acceleration craze and remain the only practical way for most owners to test their own cars, so we want our numbers to match those acquired in this way). We experiment with launch techniques (brake-torquing automatics, varying amounts of wheelspin on manuals, etc.), then shift as quickly as possible, while depressing the clutch and lifting off the throttle in three-pedal manuals. We use either a Stalker radar device that measures speed based on the Doppler shift of reflected radio waves or a Racepak unit that relies on the Doppler-shift in radio signals arriving from four to eight GPS satellites. The two systems return incredibly similar performance results.

Weather Correction
In an attempt to ensure fair comparisons between cars tested in the high desert heat of summer and the dense cold of a Michigan winter, we record the weather conditions using a Computech RaceAir system and then use the SAE’s J1349 procedure as a guide to correct all test results to standard operating conditions of 77 degrees F, 29.32 inches mercury barometric pressure, and zero-percent humidity. This procedure also levels the field for multiple cars tested on a certain day that may start out cool and become blazing hot for the 10th car tested. To the best of our knowledge, only one competitor uses this same correction method. Another is believed to be using a different system to correct results to 60-degree dry air at 29.93 inches of mercury. Most others do not correct. Other than car-to-car variations, this is the main reason published test numbers vary for a given model of vehicle. It’s worth noting that the correction factor is reduced for turbocharged engines and for hybrids, because electric motors and turbochargers are not affected much by swings in barometric pressure (turbos reach a preset boost pressure regardless of intake air pressure).


Road Test: Motor Trend Testing Procedures Video

 

[msnow]

Info re Motor Trend testing: It seems pretty good as long as the weather correction doesn't screw up electric cars. Testing, Testing - The Motor Trend Way - Motor Trend

The Basics
Where: Flat, level, surface with consistent pavement. For straight-line testing it needs to be at least 1/2-mile long. For handling tests, the ideal minimum “black lake” size is 300 x 800 feet. We try to use the same venue whenever possible for ultimate repeatability. Today, California Speedway is used for most tests, with manufacturer and supplier Proving Ground facilities filling in for special tests and testing outside California. In a pinch, we’ll use local dragstrips, but we usually don’t use the burnout boxes or the launch areas, which are coated in non-representative traction aids. [suggesting that they don't use the timing lights either -- they use their own tech described below]

When: In dry, temperate, still weather for the most part. Our Southern California home usually cooperates on the first two fronts, and when winds kick up, they’re generally in the direction of our dragstrip area, so running in two directions and averaging the results mostly cancels the wind effect. Some testing takes place in extremely cold, hot, or humid weather, and the effects of these parameters are compensated for with our weather correction protocol (more about which follows).

Who: Only select Motor Trend Technical Department personnel are trained in the rigors of test driving. There’s a definite skill to launching a car on street tires and to shifting quickly, not to mention operating and troubleshooting our complex test equipment.

How:
Acceleration Testing
We typically switch off traction-control systems and experiment with launch-control systems when offered, but we do not pull fuses to deactivate any such systems.We run from zero to the maximum practical speed increment above the quarter mile. We subtract a one-foot rollout from the launch to simulate dragstrip performance (dragstrip runs started the whole quarter-mile acceleration craze and remain the only practical way for most owners to test their own cars, so we want our numbers to match those acquired in this way). We experiment with launch techniques (brake-torquing automatics, varying amounts of wheelspin on manuals, etc.), then shift as quickly as possible, while depressing the clutch and lifting off the throttle in three-pedal manuals. We use either a Stalker radar device that measures speed based on the Doppler shift of reflected radio waves or a Racepak unit that relies on the Doppler-shift in radio signals arriving from four to eight GPS satellites. The two systems return incredibly similar performance results.

Weather Correction
In an attempt to ensure fair comparisons between cars tested in the high desert heat of summer and the dense cold of a Michigan winter, we record the weather conditions using a Computech RaceAir system and then use the SAE’s J1349 procedure as a guide to correct all test results to standard operating conditions of 77 degrees F, 29.32 inches mercury barometric pressure, and zero-percent humidity. This procedure also levels the field for multiple cars tested on a certain day that may start out cool and become blazing hot for the 10th car tested. To the best of our knowledge, only one competitor uses this same correction method. Another is believed to be using a different system to correct results to 60-degree dry air at 29.93 inches of mercury. Most others do not correct. Other than car-to-car variations, this is the main reason published test numbers vary for a given model of vehicle. It’s worth noting that the correction factor is reduced for turbocharged engines and for hybrids, because electric motors and turbochargers are not affected much by swings in barometric pressure (turbos reach a preset boost pressure regardless of intake air pressure).


Road Test: Motor Trend Testing Procedures Video

I think this is important because MT uses Stalker or Racepack technology and the people here are getting their times and speed from lights. I don't know how much it impacts the quarter mile time but it is different.