-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
P3D horsepower?
- Thread starter 3LE-TRK
- Start date
why do people keep pretending that they can just upgrade the awd to the performance with a "software upgrade"...
different inverter can carry much more current..this is a major difference..nothing some software will overcome
different inverter can carry much more current..this is a major difference..nothing some software will overcome
kingtizzy007
Megatron
I’ve seen that posted numerous times in the forums. Software push ain’t gonna make their inverters larger. I’m just hoping this new update gets our HP & torque over 500 and drops 0-60 sprint down to a flat 3.0.
SammichLover
Banned
Because it still remains in question if it actually is a different power inverter in the AWD cars, rather than the same inverter that was put through nominally more rigorous QA testing. QA doesn't actually change the physical/electrical properties, it just means you're more confident of it. And the description given by Musk (albeit Twitter-brief) of the more rigorous QA was just "binning" (AKA labeling) and more burn-in time, and those inverters already shipped have now had plenty of burn-in in the field.
Last edited:
SammichLover
Banned
The question is by how much, Tesla's reporting of the gap is larger than when measuring both using the same method.
<edit> The curves found when they were put on a dyno are also consistent with a smaller gap than Tesla is listing on their site. The difference is almost exactly at LR-D having 80% of the torque of the P. An LR-D having a 4.4s 0-60 would therefore translate to a 3.5s 0-60 for the P, or the other way is a 3.2s 0-60 for the P would translate to 4.0s for the LR-D. These are +/- 0.1s what has been seen in actual measuring, the difference being roll-out vs no roll-out.
Last edited:
The P is pretty much 25% faster 0 to 60. Its not 30+% like advertised. Both are really fast the P is a lot faster.
Tesla measures P models differently than non Ps to make them seem EVEN faster than non Ps in advertised specs.
I still hope someday there is an unlock for at least the early AWDs.
Tesla measures P models differently than non Ps to make them seem EVEN faster than non Ps in advertised specs.
I still hope someday there is an unlock for at least the early AWDs.
Last edited:
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Because they (tesla) factually can- and in fact have done so on a number of cars that were delivered as AWD but the buyer actually wanted a P3D- so they flashed it to a P3D- with no hardware changes.
Some folks even got that pushed a day or two after pickup via OTA.
It would be if it were actually true.
The PNs are exactly the same though- so it's not.
DISCLAIMER- through 2018 there were exactly the same, both front and rear drive units (which include both motor and inverter)
Sometime in early-mid 2019 most US AWD cars starting being delivered with a different rear DU (990 rather than the 980). It remains unclear what the actual difference is.
But again even as recently as a couple months ago there were P3D- buyers picking up AWD cars (still with 980 rears AFAIK) on the lot and getting an OTA push a couple days later to turn it into a P.
What folks are looking for is Tesla to simply offer to sell to eligible AWD owners that same software unlock we know, for a fact, is possible and exists but they appear to only apply if you pay for it before delivery.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Yes, you have.
It's in post 29 in this very thread.
Where a user included the annotaed screen shot from the Model S where Tesla explicitly admits they measure the P using rollout- something they do not do for non P versions of the same car.
There's tons of them.
For example-
2018 Tesla Model 3 Long Range Dual Motor First Test Review - Motor Trend
They found in calibrated testing using the same testing method (ie with rollout) the AWD ran 4.0 flat. Not the 4.4 sandbagged no-rollout # Tesla claims.
A full 10% quicker than advertised.
Their P testing was only a 0.1 difference from advertised...since Tesla dishonestly uses rollout when advertising one but not the other.
As they've been doing since at least the P85- which again you can see in the attached screenshot from tesla.com in post 29.
MagnusMako
Member
Not sure why you keep talking like you know about the inverters unless you'd care to prove what you know about them and their power capabilities other than conjecture on some 3rd party site. You've done this before. Not to mention many UK LR AWD owners got a 20% power bump option during the whole ordering fiasco over there. So even just assuming they can't become a P for the sake of your argument, there is still plenty of power that the AWD could be given if Tesla wanted to.
WilliamG
Hinge Fanatic
Maybe I’m blind, but where in that post is Tesla explicitly (or not) admitting they use rollout for the P? I see the numbers in the attachment, I don’t see those numbers on Tesla’s site. There’s a lot of extrapolation going on here, is all I’m saying.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
You mean besides the part circled in red with arrows in the picture pointing to the bottom where they explicitly say that with a red underline?
C'mon dude are you trolling at this point or what?
Last edited:
WilliamG
Hinge Fanatic
Can you link me to Tesla.com where it states that for current models? P85D is years old. I’m clearly not trolling, so don’t go there, please, - it’s not helpful.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
That's weird- since in your last post you claimed you looked but didn't see it in the picture I cited right in this thread
So, yeah, increasingly sounds like some trolling going on....
Anyway, that's a screen cap from Tesla.com when they sold the P85 (their first P vehicle)
They don't sell the P85 anymore... they no longer include the explicit clarification- but they still use the same practice on their P cars- as repeatedly confirmed by every single calibrated test of P and non-P cars done by everyone.
What was weird was when the 3 first came out they did NOT do this- they honestly listed the P without using rollout- 3.5 seconds... and the AWD same way, 4.5 seconds.
Then a few months later they went back to old, dishonest, habits, and the P suddenly was listed at 3.3 without any actual change in performance or software as they switched back to using rollout for the P on the 3 listings, but not the other versions of the 3.
After the first 5% bump the P dropped to the current listed 3.2, and the AWD to 4.4...which continues to dishonestly show a significantly larger gap in actual performance than exists.
At launch, apples to apples, the P was 1 second quicker (again Tesla was honest about this for the first couple months then gave up on honest I guess). After the 5% bump, apples to apples, it's 0.9 seconds quicker. Confirmed by numerous owners here and car magazines in calibrated testing as already cited elsewhere.
But tesla.com continues to dishonestly use 2 different measurements to suggest they're about 20-25% further apart than that.
(2nd 5% bump impact unknown right now)
Last edited:
I can't believe you guys are splitting hair over roll out on 0-60 times. The P has significantly more power and torque. This has been dyno proven and is "self reported" over the API and the CAN bus. Marketing is marketing. Plenty of ICE makers get in trouble for their horsepower ratings. Ford famously got sued for the old Mustang Cobras, and Mazda for the Rx-8, for overstating power claims.
ICE cars heatsoak and have repeatability problems, especially those with turbos and superchargers. Many new cars are affected by this. Over time the engines age and lose compression, or the turbos wear out. And holding back on power is very common on ICE cars. Look at a low end luxury car like a BMW 320 - they are limited in part by software (less turbo boost), so that you have an incentive to buy the higher spec.
Tesla's marketing and "product differentiation" are industry standard stuff.
ICE cars heatsoak and have repeatability problems, especially those with turbos and superchargers. Many new cars are affected by this. Over time the engines age and lose compression, or the turbos wear out. And holding back on power is very common on ICE cars. Look at a low end luxury car like a BMW 320 - they are limited in part by software (less turbo boost), so that you have an incentive to buy the higher spec.
Tesla's marketing and "product differentiation" are industry standard stuff.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
We're not. We're pointing out Tesla is being dishonest using 2 different ways of measuring for the 2 cars to make one look quicker in comparison to the other than it is in real life.
no other car company does that
Literally nobody has said otherwise. You don't seem to understand the point of the discussion.
Please show me any other car where they use 2 different 0-60 measurements for the times on different trims of the same model.
Go ahead.
We'll wait.
Even with HP ratings on ICE cars they don't advertise ONE trim with wheel HP and then the more expensive one with crank HP to make it look better. They use the same type of measurement for all trims.
Tesla doesn't.
NOBODY BUT YOU AND A COUPLE OTHER IDIOTS CARE ABOUT THE ROLLOUT.
I took a look on a few other car manufactures sites and could ONLY find 0-60 for the performance varient of the vehicles. They all list HP, torque, emissions etc for all but can’t find actual acceleration information. I’m talking S series Audi, M series BMW, then neither Ford or Dodge listed any at all for Mustangs or Chargers that I could find.
Knightshade
Well-Known Member
Weird- I had no issue finding this for the first one on your list- The non-S version of the Audi 4 series lists 0-60 right on the main page-
2019 Audi A4: Performance | Audi USA
But back to the point- Tesla doesn't list HP or torque....just 0-60. (They did list HP at one time- and got caught lying about it on the P and had to pay out a bunch of money to various lawsuits- so stopped doing so- see again the P85 debacle and screen caps from tesla.com in post 29)
The point was everyone else for the specs they do list use the same standard of measurement
When Audi lists the A4 0-60 vs the S4 0-60 they don't use rollout for one but not the other.
Tesla, dishonestly, does not use the same measurements for P and non-P.
I'm baffled anybody is still confused about this at this point.
Similar threads
