P3D horsepower?

[AlanSubie4Life]

Taycan uses two permanent magnet motors. That is what I though @AlanSubie4Life meant.

That was one misconception I intended to correct with my link, since it was stated as a fact that Porsche used AC motors, and then implied they needed the gearbox to keep them out of the slip region or something like that. In any case, I don’t care about efficiency (even if I am “Efficiency Obsessed”), and explicitly stated a couple days ago, above, that I was not making comments about that - this thread is about horsepower.

(Exact details of how it works out depend on the efficiency vs. speed of the motor, which is a different question than power vs. speed)

 

[MagnusMako]

...the Porsche beats the MS in 1/4 mile times

Against the Raven powertrain it does not.

I'm assuming you got your "data" about the Taycan from the Top Gear comparison test? Just so you know, that one has been proven falsified and debunked. The Raven S Performance runs mid 11's in the 1/4 mile in full launch mode, with many dragtimes time slips doing faster than the Taycan at 11.5s. And with the upcoming 50hp via OTA, it will gap the Taycan even more.

 

[WilliamG]

Against the Raven powertrain it does not.

I'm assuming you got your "data" about the Taycan from the Top Gear comparison test? Just so you know, that one has been proven falsified and debunked. The Raven S Performance runs mid 11's in the 1/4 mile in full launch mode, with many dragtimes time slips doing faster than the Taycan at 11.5s. And with the upcoming 50hp via OTA, it will gap the Taycan even more.

Don’t you mean mid 10s in the quarter?

 

[Daniel in SD]

Against the Raven powertrain it does not.

I'm assuming you got your "data" about the Taycan from the Top Gear comparison test? Just so you know, that one has been proven falsified and debunked. The Raven S Performance runs mid 11's in the 1/4 mile in full launch mode, with many dragtimes time slips doing faster than the Taycan at 11.5s. And with the upcoming 50hp via OTA, it will gap the Taycan even more.

That remains to be seen. Top Gear appears to have tested without using one foot rolllout and not on a drag strip. The trap speed also suggests that the Taycan is capable of a much faster time than Top Gear got.

 

[MagnusMako]

Don’t you mean mid 10s in the quarter?

Erm, yeah I meant mid 10's thanks for catching me. Don't know why I said mid 11's. Sleepy late night posting ftl.

That remains to be seen. Top Gear appears to have tested without using one foot rolllout and not on a drag strip. The trap speed also suggests that the Taycan is capable of a much faster time than Top Gear got.

And DragTimes tested on the street as well and no one foot rollout. It hardly even matters as the S hooks up just as well on just about any half decent surface.

I'll give you that the trap speed was higher in the Porsche and it may very well have a chance of winning in a 1/2 mile race (I'd love to see that) but for 1/4 mile the times should be pretty much a neck and neck drivers race.

 

[Daniel in SD]

And DragTimes tested on the street as well and no one foot rollout.

DragTimes used Dragy which has 1 foot rollout for 1/4 mile times and no rollout for 0-60. Top Gear used a Vbox which has a 1 foot rollout option but uses the same setting for 0-60 and 1/4 mile so it's very likely that they did not use 1 foot rollout.
Anyway, we'll know soon enough!

 

[SammichLover]

That "flatness" is a software limitation (which limits the input power!).

That is nonsensical distinction because that’s true of the RWD & P, too (and basically any remotely modern electrical motor). “Software limitation” is a misleading & empty phrase.

And no ICE drivetrain output looks anything like that save for to some extent CVTs (that nobody has managed to create a non-sucky one of), because of the inherent properties of the two different types of motors.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

That is nonsensical distinction because that’s true of the RWD & P, too (and basically any remotely modern electrical motor). “Software limitation” is a misleading & empty phrase.

And no ICE drivetrain output looks anything like that save for to some extent CVTs (that nobody has managed to create a non-sucky one of), because of the inherent properties of the two different types of motors.

If it was not clear, I was comparing the AWD to the P HP curves, and commenting on the reason for the difference, and the relative flatness of the two. Are you saying that difference is not due to software? Both are fairly broad relative to an ICE motor I suppose.

A lot of ICE motors these days have very flat torque output (ramping HP), which is also a software “limitation” on the small turbo, to make the car more driveable. Yes ICE motors can be very very peaky.

 

[SammichLover]

If it was not clear, I was comparing the AWD to the P HP curves, and commenting on the reason for the difference, and the relative flatness of the two. Are you saying that difference is not due to software? Both are fairly broad relative to an ICE motor I suppose.

A lot of ICE motors these days have very flat torque output (ramping HP), which is also a software “limitation” on the small turbo, to make the car more driveable. Yes ICE motors can be very very peaky.

It was very clear to me what you were gibberishing on about.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

“Software limitation” is a misleading & empty phrase.

I am interested in further explanation on this. I guess I am missing what you are trying to highlight. It’s ok to get technical, if you need to.

 

[MTSN]

DragTimes used Dragy which has 1 foot rollout for 1/4 mile times and no rollout for 0-60. Top Gear used a Vbox which has a 1 foot rollout option but uses the same setting for 0-60 and 1/4 mile so it's very likely that they did not use 1 foot rollout.
Anyway, we'll know soon enough!

Dragy now gives you both your 0-60 with and without rollout:

 

[SammichLover]

I am interested in further explanation on this. I guess I am missing what you are trying to highlight. It’s ok to get technical, if you need to.

I’m trying to highlight how your attempted pedantry is Not even wrong - Wikipedia .

 

[Daniel in SD]

Dragy now gives you both your 0-60 with and without rollout:

Yeah I saw that. So, add 0.21s to the Dragy 1/4 mile time to get the time without rollout.
BTW that's a fast time! Is this after the software update?

 

[Urbancowboy]

I’m trying to highlight how your attempted pedantry is Not even wrong - Wikipedia .

All you have highlighted is that you either don’t know what you’re talking about or are too lazy to finish what you started.

If that’s your rebuttal, the onus is on you to explain where his reasoning and premises are invalid and why.

 

[yerEVan]

Sort of off topic but i was going to test my 36.2.1 stealth p3d- 0-60, as I have a vbox sport. Anyone recommend a better app than the vbox one for iOS? The vbox app leaves a bit to be desired.

 

[SammichLover]

All you have highlighted is that you either don’t know what you’re talking about or are too lazy to finish what you started.

If that’s your rebuttal, the onus is on you to explain where his reasoning and premises are invalid and why.

I already covered it days ago.

“Rebuttal” of nonsense is going to look, and in best interests be, brief. There’s not really anything there to get a handle on. As per the link, “and thus cannot be discussed in a rigorous and scientific sense”.

 

[CA_Car_Guy]

Here is a half mile pull against and Audi R8 v10 performance plus. 4 sec to 60 topping out at 130mph. I was at a 35% SOC

 

[hoang51]

Hmmm, maybe the one I linked is from post-bump, then? Because it matches the one in the last link you have. The file is dated February 9th on my computer, wasn't the power bump after that? Or was that when the bump happened?

Here's one that is dated Dec 2, 2018. Pretty sure that last link is showing the curve BEFORE the first "5%" bump but claiming it is post-bump.

The graph you've posted is from my dyno run found here. That dyno run was prior to the first software power increase because I dyno'd the car in late 2018 while the first software power increase happened in Q1Y2019.

 

[SammichLover]

The graph you've posted is from my dyno run found here. That dyno run was prior to the first software power increase because I dyno'd the car in late 2018 while the first software power increase happened in Q1Y2019.

Did you enter in any fudge factor (or does the dyno software have baked in a fudge factor you can’t zero out) to convert from at-the-wheel to a supposed crankshaft numbers, or is that data raw at-the-wheel?

 

[hoang51]

Did you enter in any fudge factor (or does the dyno software have baked in a fudge factor you can’t zero out) to convert from at-the-wheel to a supposed crankshaft numbers, or is that data raw at-the-wheel?

The numbers reported from the dyno is what is measured at the wheels. The data does not reflect guestimating at the crankshaft to my knowledge nor was it ever explained. You can watch the video when George explains how the dyno collects the data. Look at the timeline in the description of the video to find relevant parts you want to watch to see if it further answers your questions.