smac
Active Member
That's the EU's fault for not adopting US standards. :ducks:
It's the US's fault for trying to avoid paying taxes buy changing the size of a gallon :runs and hides:
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
That's the EU's fault for not adopting US standards. :ducks:
True. But as long as the vehicle performs the 0-60 time as advertised, I wouldn't care if Tesla expressed the metric in Hamster Power.
Hey, I thought Canadians were legally required to be polite? I'd rather not have to report you to Avril Lavigne.Just because you are willing to fold up like a wet paper bag on the intentional misleading HP rating doesn't mean others will. Even your prized 0-60 rating is FALSE and PHONEY. It's not from ZERO!
Just because you are willing to fold up like a wet paper bag on the intentional misleading HP rating doesn't mean others will. Even your prized 0-60 rating is FALSE and PHONEY. It's not from ZERO!
Your issue with those representations should be with the magazines, not Tesla.
For example, here is a "performance report" put out by Road & Track on the P85D. Note the "estimated" HP and torque graph. Everything on this sheet was put out by Road & Track, not Tesla. Check it out and see what you think...
View attachment 96427
Is it Tesla's fault that R&T is promoting 691 HP along with "estimated" HP and torque graphs in a document titled "Performance Report"?
Sorry, NO. The issue IS with Tesla. They are publishing PHONY HP ratings. A motors potential capability is not how cars are sold. An ICE may have a potential 1000 HPbut no manufacturer advertises this way.
What about on EU websites?
Sorry, NO. The issue IS with Tesla. They are publishing PHONY HP ratings. A motors potential capability is not how cars are sold. An ICE may have a potential 1000 HPbut no manufacturer advertises this way.
Honest question as I dont know the answer: does any of those other manufacturers have battery limitations making the advertised motor power HP unreachable in the real world?Road & Track published a completely faulty "estimated" acceleration and torque curve, so is that Tesla's fault too? That curve makes it look like they actually tested the car when they didn't. Can you tell me why other EV manufacturers also advertise motor power, yet that's okay for them but not Tesla?
A couple of points here: some continue to say horsepower claims by tesla dont matter but for many reasons it does.
and I won't repeat all of those.
The ONE no one can disagree on is the fact that car is listed at 700 hp by insurance companies and you pay for that.
Paying for a 700 hp car that only delivers 550 on the road is wrong. Would you want to pay taxes on a 5000 square-foot house thats only 3000 ft.²???
two: some here claim it is not teslas responsibility to correct media that said 691 hp versus 691 motor power.
Tesla can't have it both ways because they HAVE corrected media many times that have given negative reports that are incorrect.
they've even pointed out the ratio of car fires in teslas versus ice vehicles as they should and the media wasn't even wrong on that they just didn't include all the information. Do you see my point. You can't stand by and do nothing to correct positive misinformation while you are proactive in correcting negative misinformation.
also some of the attacks on Andy have been a bit much yet he's remained mature in his response.
From what I see so far in the EU it depends on certificate of conformity (CoC) and for EVs that is supposed to be based on motor power as Tesla measures it (ECE R85), so ~700hp is actually the correct measure there.The ONE no one can disagree on is the fact that car is listed at 700 hp by insurance companies and you pay for that.
Road & Track published a completely faulty "estimated" acceleration and torque curve, so is that Tesla's fault too? That curve makes it look like they actually tested the car when they didn't. Can you tell me why other EV manufacturers also advertise motor power, yet that's okay for them but not Tesla?
Who cares about the appeal to other auto makers. I bought a very expensive high performance Tesla based on intentionally advertised specs. To advertise the potential HP of a motor when there is no way it can deliver the rating is PHONY period. Perhaps an 550 HP ICE can hypothetically produce 1000 HP or some HP more than the actual true HP by adding a blower or other performance add ons but this but is not what I am buying or being sold on. This is what Tesla is doing with motor HP. The motor needs enhancements in order to deliver this rating and flat out cannot deliver without those enhancements.
This is intentionally flat out misleading. Many Magazines clearly took the intended advertised HP ratings and packaged it interesting ways and ran with it based on the specs Tesla provided.
Once again: where is the legal action?
...
The ONE no one can disagree on is the fact that car is listed at 700 hp by insurance companies and you pay for that.
Paying for a 700 hp car that only delivers 550 on the road is wrong.
Who cares about the appeal to other auto makers. I bought a very expensive high performance Tesla based on intentionally advertised specs. To advertise the potential HP of a motor when there is no way it can deliver the rating is PHONY period. Perhaps an 550 HP ICE can hypothetically produce 1000 HP or some HP more than the actual true HP by adding a blower or other performance add ons but this but is not what I am buying or being sold on. This is what Tesla is doing with motor HP. The motor needs enhancements in order to deliver this rating and flat out cannot deliver without those enhancements.
This is intentionally flat out misleading. Many Magazines clearly took the intended advertised HP ratings and packaged it interesting ways and ran with it based on the specs Tesla provided.