Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I would probably recommend that Tesla stop trying to cater to the uber-technical, gotta have the biggest... number size... crowd and focus on the experience like Apple does. They're finding out just how... difficult... that crowd can be. The marginal benefit appears to be shrinking every day.

Hmm, see I wish they'd still do the just plain straight talk like they did back when they won me over in the 07 timeframe. They always has their moments of going silent, but it feels like they are happening more often and for longer , and it seems to me that more and more they are using "straight talk" as a marketing tool, or just Elon speaking off the cuff. Both of which is fine by me, *when followed up* with honest plain spoken communication, even if something they claimed has to be backed off of.

I don't think that's catering to the uber-technical so much as staying true to their roots and dreams. To me, communicating like the best of what they've done in the past is nearly as much of a demonstration of a different kind of company (esp. Automobile company) as the technology itself.

I know, growth requires yada yada and etc. ;) but *shrug* what can I say - it's still what I want to see from them.
 
You rang ? :tongue:

:)

Just a note to explain my intention - it's not intended to be a personal statement or attack, but rather one of marketing angle. In other things, I'm a technical geek that obsesses over a lot of details as well and I would hate to be the company that markets to me in those veins.

Apple doesn't have the strongest hardware on the planet. They don't expose all the tweaks and knobs that can be done in a far more technical platform (although sometimes, strangely, they expose "good enough" because of their underlying platform). Yet they clean the clocks of their technical competitors in the experience department for most consumers. This is where Tesla excels, and very well.

In many ways, I think Tesla needs to figure out how they're going to approach these customer bases. And the techies are tough - very tough.

- - - Updated - - -

Hmm, see I wish they'd still do the just plain straight talk like they did back when they won me over in the 07 timeframe. They always has their moments of going silent, but it feels like they are happening more often and for longer , and it seems to me that more and more they are using "straight talk" as a marketing tool, or just Elon speaking off the cuff. Both of which is fine by me, *when followed up* with honest plain spoken communication, even if something they claimed has to be backed off of.

I think two things about this: first, in those days it was all engineering, all the time, and that won't last through scaling the company. There are many times I do wish Tesla would expose their engineers directly to technology oriented customers more often. Why not allow someone like sorka and/or lolachampcar to engage on the occasional details when it's clear that he has the expertise to do so? I've seen this work in my field; I've seen it work in satellite broadcasting; I've seen it work in other deep technical forums. Perhaps Tesla learns the best way to communicate in that model, except we know it's not a strong suit of theirs - and it doesn't help when there's a group of people who threaten to "sue sue sue!" when Tesla uses one standard and they use another.

The second, related thought is that - and we've seen it in this forum - the moment Elon says something that should/would/could be possible in the future, that little nugget is saved and dragged out constantly as the word of God, as opposed to something that may have to be walked back. Some in the 90 kW supercharging thread obsessed over whether Tesla disclosed the 90 kW limitation or not as part of the announcement and argued that because he didn't list it as an exception during the introduction, that everyone should get a free battery pack upgrade. That type of behavior only pushes Tesla to become more quiet.

We have a bit of responsibility here too.
 
I would probably recommend that Tesla stop trying to cater to the uber-technical, gotta have the biggest... number size... crowd and focus on the experience like Apple does. They're finding out just how... difficult... that crowd can be. The marginal benefit appears to be shrinking every day.
Though I don't want to discourage Tesla from continuing to offer the P85DL hardware upgrade. Offering the upgrade may be pandering the the uber-technical, etc. crowd, but since I am part of that crowd and own a P85D, I want it!:biggrin:
 
I mostly agree with your point regarding marketing angle. I just don't think these issues of late have as much to do with that angle as with the lack of explanation of the gap between what's said and what's real. If there were no gap, that'd be great. If there was a gap, then explaining (promptly and without evasion) and amending the words if not tech to close the gap helps the issue.

I believe this is their goal and that they achieve it more than most - but that's a low bar and they aim higher than that. I think they need to take a hard look at how they can better reach that goal more often because from my perspective some of their (lack of) actions are inexplicable to me given the courage they've shown with so many other things they've done and said.

---
Edit, sorka replied as I was replying, etc. re: we have responsibility too and much of the rest of your reply post... Yeah, all good points and agreed, though I still want that better and different communication, and as you pointed out, some levels of that do exist in other companies and industries. It's been done before and *they've* done it before, and they continue to push the envelope in other ways of talking and action.
 
Last edited:
Though I don't want to discourage Tesla from continuing to offer the P85DL hardware upgrade. Offering the upgrade may be pandering the the uber-technical, etc. crowd, but since I am part of that crowd and own a P85D, I want it!:biggrin:

Tesla can position it either way. I don't think they're pandering to the uber-technical with the upgrade offer - they only pander to them when they try to market it with numbers that can be interpreted a million ways from Sunday. If they were to market it from the experience angle - without reams of technical numbers where they try to attract the super-tuner crowd - they can still sell a hell of a lot of cars.
 
Musk is always ambitious with firmware general availability dates. By months. Suspect it's firmware, not weight or any other tricks. Hope they haven't run into a serious snag. Motor trend would be top of the irate list if they were given beta that turns out impractical. So far tesla engineers have met every challenge... Eventually.

Well 5+ months for a software release to meet a spec after it is announced and sold should be scary. Things can happen like "oops we can't do that with software alone". The more time goes by the more I expect to see a necessary hardware upgrade.
 
Taking up the 691 hp issue with Tesla requires a small amount of effort given Tesla's claim is actually based on some standard somewhere. Common sense would tell the average person there is no "cover" in that story but at least there is something.

The 10.9 1/4 miles is black and white. This is especially true when you consider Tesla has, up until this point, always met and many times bettered their published 1/4 mile times.

I'm not saying there is not merit to the hp discussion. I'm just pointing out that there simply is no place to hide at all on the 1/4 mile number.

Agree. This one is pretty cut and dry.
 
Whilst I agree with you that many (most) don't buy a Model S (anywhere) for either drag strip nor ring racing, I disagree with your sentiment that the Model S is "not yet ready for prime time since at speed, it is not on par with the German brands.

The majority of folks are buying the car to use as a regular car / daily driver (not a track car), then the P85D in its current state is certainly good enough and ready for primetime.

The "drag strip" component (fast acceleration from a stopped position, whether "flat out", or not) is used by many in daily driving...ring racing speeds are basically a non entity in daily driving.

Yes, we would all like a little more oomph from 50 to 80 mph (me included)...The Ludicrous upgrade is a good start imo.

I understand your point but in Europe, people coming out of a higher performance Audi, Mercedes, BMW or Porsche, will not be happy with the current characteristics of a Performance Model S at higher speed. This is not the largest segment but it is the segment that can afford buying a P Model S. I'm sure this is only a question of time.

- - - Updated - - -

In many ways, I think Tesla needs to figure out how they're going to approach these customer bases. And the techies are tough - very tough.

I agree. Tesla is facing the typical problem of moving its marketing strategy from the very technical early adopter segment to the early majority segment. Not easy to keep both segments happy at the same time but it is the only way up.
 
just adding a drop of knowledge to this issue, i asked my motortrend informant whats the deal with real world performance not matching what they got in their test. his response was "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions, and we are better drivers."

but hey, maybe they all signed a firmware update NDA! :D
 
just adding a drop of knowledge to this issue, i asked my motortrend informant whats the deal with real world performance not matching what they got in their test. his response was "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions, and we are better drivers."

but hey, maybe they all signed a firmware update NDA! :D

Did he honestly think that was a reasonable explanation? Does he not get this is an EV and air density for drag will almost no difference. Even P90DLs at 1 mile high altitudes aren't doing any better than ones a few hundred feet above sea level.

And even if he believed driver skill was a factor, which it isn't, it still wouldn't explain the exit speed difference.
 
just adding a drop of knowledge to this issue, i asked my motortrend informant whats the deal with real world performance not matching what they got in their test. his response was "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions, and we are better drivers."

but hey, maybe they all signed a firmware update NDA! :D
This sounds like a BS story. Most people don't realize how much additional power, or traction it takes to drop tenths of a second in the low 11 to high 10 second range. It's not like we are going from a 13.4 to a 12.9. There is absolutely no way to gain that much with a better driver in a non-stick shift AWD car.
 
Did he honestly think that was a reasonable explanation? Does he not get this is an EV and air density for drag will almost no difference. Even P90DLs at 1 mile high altitudes aren't doing any better than ones a few hundred feet above sea level.

And even if he believed driver skill was a factor, which it isn't, it still wouldn't explain the exit speed difference.

They already cut the atmospheric corrections for turbo cars in half. I would assume they should use 0 correction for a Tesla.
 
just adding a drop of knowledge to this issue, i asked my motortrend informant whats the deal with real world performance not matching what they got in their test. his response was "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions, and we are better drivers."

but hey, maybe they all signed a firmware update NDA! :D

His answer may say something significant. When I look at the pix with the MT article, the one with the vbox antenna out the window looks like it might be at a high desert testing location. The 10.9 might not have been the actual measured number. They could have measured 11+ and then "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions", stupidly adjusting the wrong way since an ICE car would produce a slower quarter at high altitude, while an MS would run faster at high altitude due to less air drag. The very fact he said "calculated and adjusted" makes me think we are not dealing with a real number.
 
His answer may say something significant. When I look at the pix with the MT article, the one with the vbox antenna out the window looks like it might be at a high desert testing location. The 10.9 might not have been the actual measured number. They could have measured 11+ and then "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions", stupidly adjusting the wrong way since an ICE car would produce a slower quarter at high altitude, while an MS would run faster at high altitude due to less air drag. The very fact he said "calculated and adjusted" makes me think we are not dealing with a real number.

You are making a very good point here. Hope it is not true because it would burst our bubble!
 
His answer may say something significant. When I look at the pix with the MT article, the one with the vbox antenna out the window looks like it might be at a high desert testing location. The 10.9 might not have been the actual measured number. They could have measured 11+ and then "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions", stupidly adjusting the wrong way since an ICE car would produce a slower quarter at high altitude, while an MS would run faster at high altitude due to less air drag. The very fact he said "calculated and adjusted" makes me think we are not dealing with a real number.

At seal level, the drag at 110 MPH would be 77.95 hp assuming a frontal area of 27 square feet, cd of .24, weight of 5000 lbs.

At one mile high, that would be about 13.5 hp less. Not enough to make any real difference.
 
At seal level, the drag at 110 MPH would be 77.95 hp assuming a frontal area of 27 square feet, cd of .24, weight of 5000 lbs.

At one mile high, that would be about 13.5 hp less. Not enough to make any real difference.
The drag change would come close to washing out between the MS and ICE car. The bigger change is the ICE engine breathing less at high altitude. At a mile or 83% atm, I think a 500 hp normally aspirated engine becomes 413, an 87 hp difference.

The point being that if those clowns adjusted the MS as if it were an ICE car, they would have added significant performance.
 
Last edited:
OMG
If Tesla followed the 691 combined motor hp (that only occurs on a dyno someplace with a near zero source impedance infinite current source) with allowing MotorTrend to test at a mile high track then use ICE fudge factors to turn an 11.4 into a 10.9, I'm going to scream. Really, I'll go down to the Service Center and scream.

:0


His answer may say something significant. When I look at the pix with the MT article, the one with the vbox antenna out the window looks like it might be at a high desert testing location. The 10.9 might not have been the actual measured number. They could have measured 11+ and then "calculated and adjusted for atmospheric conditions", stupidly adjusting the wrong way since an ICE car would produce a slower quarter at high altitude, while an MS would run faster at high altitude due to less air drag. The very fact he said "calculated and adjusted" makes me think we are not dealing with a real number.