P90D owners - anyone upset yet at the 10.9 and 20% faster to 155mph claims?

[_TTT_]

We're roughly 3-4 months into P90Ds in the wild now. Besides the Motortrend car, we have only seen P90Ds trap around 116mph, right? There's a HUGE difference between 116mph and 122mph that MT ran.

It does seem there is a software update required to trap 122mph and/or reach 155mph 20% faster. At what point do owners start to get upset that this hasn't materialized? I have a P90D on order and am quite concerned that the performance isn't living up to the specs in the design studio...wanted to get other opinions. I know the car will be a blast to drive even without 10.9/20% faster to top speed, but any rational buyer should be hesitant to pay for something that may or may not ever materialize. I want to trust Tesla but don't want this to be a $10k mistake at the same time

Also...as a side note, I've been wondering if slip start could play any role in performance. I know that isn't its intended use but Motortrend talks about a launch control. While there's been speculation that they could be referring to warming the battery, could it be they just turned on slip start? Doubtful, but thought I'd throw it out there.

 

[vip gts]

We're roughly 3-4 months into P90Ds in the wild now. Besides the Motortrend car, we have only seen P90Ds trap around 116mph, right? There's a HUGE difference between 116mph and 122mph that MT ran.

It does seem there is a software update required to trap 122mph and/or reach 155mph 20% faster. At what point do owners start to get upset that this hasn't materialized? I have a P90D on order and am quite concerned that the performance isn't living up to the specs in the design studio...wanted to get other opinions. I know the car will be a blast to drive even without 10.9/20% faster to top speed, but any rational buyer should be hesitant to pay for something that may or may not ever materialize. I want to trust Tesla but don't want this to be a $10k mistake at the same time

Also...as a side note, I've been wondering if slip start could play any role in performance. I know that isn't its intended use but Motortrend talks about a launch control. While there's been speculation that they could be referring to warming the battery, could it be they just turned on slip start? Doubtful, but thought I'd throw it out there.

I was thinking the same thing about the slip start. I don't know if anyone has tried it . Hard to believe that it would make that much of a difference.

 

[sorka]

Not sure how they're going to get more power out of it since 456KW at 1500 amps is 304 volts. Given the 100 volt drop at 1300 amps from 403 volts, it shouldn't even be able to quite pull what it does at 1500 amps. If for some reason the new cells with silicon in their anodes has less voltage drop, then I suppose it's possible to pull more out of them, but adding silicon to anodes while increasing capacity usually increases IR and results in a higher voltage drop at equivalent current, temperature, and SOC.

I know MT had a pbox or vbox antenna on the roof so it seems like they did instrumented testing but now I wonder. I contacted Christian Seabaugh and asked him through the blog if he'd turn over the data files and he replied saying he'd see what he could do but never heard anything. I made a second attempt at his email yesterday at [email protected] so hopefully he'll reply and turn over those files.

Perhaps others could make an attempt as well in case he just gets too many emails to see mine.

I think some concluded that the weigh savings of the slick top was good for an extra tenth in the 1/4 but clearly that doesn't get you from 11.4 to 10.9.

 

[sorka]

I don't care. It's just an amazing car and leaves everyone else sitting still when I do launch in a few safe places. I drive it as much as I can every day. My poor Ferrari is just collecting dust in the garage waiting for a new momma to love her again.

I have an extra space in my heated garage for your poor neglected Ferrari

 

[JenniferQ]

I don't care. It's just such an amazing car and leaves everyone else sitting still when I do launch in a few safe places. I drive it as much as I can every day. Unless you are planning on tracking the car, there's really no reason to be disappointed, other than the "lie," if that's what it is.

It is just so responsive and nimble, both in traffic and from a standstill. Maybe I have no comparison as this is the only Tesla I have driven, but I really couldn't ask for anything more performance-wise. The trip nav def could use some help!

My poor Ferrari is just collecting dust in the garage waiting for a new momma to love her again.

- - - Updated - - -

I have an extra space in my heated garage for your poor neglected Ferrari

Ok, sorry. My browser freaked out and I double posted while I was still editing. Apologies.

But, sadly, you would not want to drive the Ferrari, I promise. So noisy! And slow...:wink: relatively speaking.

 

[Evee]

Maybe it's an Easter egg do the ludicrous button one then try it with a vbox . Totally stupid but hey I would still give it a shot haha.

 

[fiksegts]

I have tried slip start, doesn't make a difference, the car will NOT run 10's as it sits now...

 

[_TTT_]

I have tried slip start, doesn't make a difference, the car will NOT run 10's as it sits now...

Well that answers that question at least

I agree - there's no amount of weight savings in a specific config (such as body colored roof, 19s, standard audio, coil suspension, etc) that'll shave 0.4s off the 1/4 mile time (or increase the trap speed to nearly 123mph). But the stat that's even more of a mystery is the 20% faster to 155mph. I'm kinda putting two and two together looking at the limited data for speed/power taper at higher speeds but the car doesn't even seem remotely capable of this, right? Sorka?

I bet jpet or someone in Europe could get this figure for a P85D but not sure how we can get it on the P90D since they're only in the US at the moment....

 

[sorka]

Maybe Tesla has done something like only allow it on certain configurations to at least meet the spec but not have most of them capable of 10.9's in order to keep warranty repairs down. Perhaps you have to have the non pano roof and since there aren't too many of those, they can keep costs down. Perhaps it's only 21" wheels and non pano roof.....the enthusiast configuration which is also lighter by a few hundred lbs.

 

[fiksegts]

it's not a few hundred pounds in any config difference.... I talked to someone who weighed the pano glass panes and it's about 60 pounds... they are considering making a carbon rear panel replacement, so you keep the sunroof, but lose the rear glass panel....

Maybe Tesla has done something like only allow it on certain configurations to at least meet the spec but not have most of them capable of 10.9's in order to keep warranty repairs down. Perhaps you have to have the non pano roof and since there aren't too many of those, they can keep costs down. Perhaps it's only 21" wheels and non pano roof.....the enthusiast configuration which is also lighter by a few hundred lbs.

 

[MuppetOwl]

it's not a few hundred pounds in any config difference.... I talked to someone who weighed the pano glass panes and it's about 60 pounds... they are considering making a carbon rear panel replacement, so you keep the sunroof, but lose the rear glass panel....

I have weighed my own and a friends P85D on a car weight. Only difference was no panoroof and no double charger on my car. Everything else like wheels ++ was the same. My car was 145 pounds lighter.

 

[sorka]

it's not a few hundred pounds in any config difference.... I talked to someone who weighed the pano glass panes and it's about 60 pounds... they are considering making a carbon rear panel replacement, so you keep the sunroof, but lose the rear glass panel....

Right, that came from speculation in a previous thread because MT listed the weight of their P90D test car as 4,689 lbs.

There's a lot more the pano roof than glass panels. I could believe the panels weight 60 lbs alone. The frame, where stiffness is needed should weigh a lot more than that.

- - - Updated - - -

I have weighed my own and a friends P85D on a car weight. Only difference was no panoroof and no double charger on my car. Everything else like wheels ++ was the same. My car was 145 pounds lighter.

Was another P85D with the pano roof weighed on the same scale?

 

[MuppetOwl]

Right, that came from speculation in a previous thread because MT listed the weight of their P90D test car as 4,689 lbs.

- - - Updated - - -



Was another P85D with the pano roof weighed on the same scale?

No did not try another P85D with panoroof. Both cars where P85D and that car scale was even able to weight me correctly so it was very exact

 

[fiksegts]

He said there isn't anything like that in the roof area.... my P85 weighed in at 4,690 and my P85D was 4,812 both have pano. I will weigh the P90D soon...

Right, that came from speculation in a previous thread because MT listed the weight of their P90D test car as 4,689 lbs.

There's a lot more the pano roof than glass panels. I could believe the panels weight 60 lbs alone. The frame, where stiffness is needed should weigh a lot more than that.

- - - Updated - - -



Was another P85D with the pano roof weighed on the same scale?

 

[sorka]

He said there isn't anything like that in the roof area.... my P85 weighed in at 4,690 and my P85D was 4,812 both have pano. I will weigh the P90D soon...



View attachment 103064

If that was on the same scale as your P85 then I would have to concede that the pano roof can't add that much at all.

So with your best run of 11.325 seconds, we'd need to drop 0.326 seconds to get to 10.999, right? Then technically it could be called a 10.9 second car?

 

[mdevp]

I bet jpet or someone in Europe could get this figure for a P85D but not sure how we can get it on the P90D since they're only in the US at the moment....

I wonder how many Europeans are not ordering the P90DL b/c none of them are hitting sub 11s, it would be interesting to get a few to sound off on this. If I were considering buying one, I'd definitely be put off until Tesla delivered MT's quarter times.

 

[fiksegts]

yea, same scale, of course a lot of time between the two weigh ins....

I'll be super happy with a 10.99999999

10's is 10's..

If that was on the same scale as your P85 then I would have to concede that the pano roof can't add that much at all.

So with your best run of 11.325 seconds, we'd need to drop 0.326 seconds to get to 10.999, right? Then technically it could be called a 10.9 second car?

 

[P85DEE]

yea, same scale, of course a lot of time between the two weigh ins....

I'll be super happy with a 10.99999999

10's is 10's..

Tough to figure, that's for sure. Even if Motor Trend prepped the entire quarter mile length of the track with VHT, it would still be hard to see how they came up with 10.9.

 

[_TTT_]

Tough to figure, that's for sure. Even if Motor Trend prepped the entire quarter mile length of the track with VHT, it would still be hard to see how they came up with 10.9.

Prepping the whole track with VHT won't add 4mph to the trap speed though

Still...encouraging to see a 118mph trap!

 

[P85DEE]

Prepping the whole track with VHT won't add 4mph to the trap speed though

Still...encouraging to see a 118mph trap!

Exactly. I don't believe it would drop .326 seconds either.

Certainly it would help vs running the car on non treated asphalt or road concrete as most of these Vbox runs are made. But .326 seconds, I doubt.

I don't know how MT managed to get 10.9 at 122.7 mph

That said though, it would be interesting to see what one of these cars would run at Atco or MIR where track prep is typically top notch.