Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits
- Thread starter Ingineer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
jerjozwik
Active Member
does anyone know where the 397 kW battery limit came from on wikipidia?
Attachments
-
Screenshot_20170420-003555.png
The 532 hp is what Tesla claimed was the battery limited motor shaft hp for v1 batteries. The 397 kw is just the hp times the conversion from hp to kw (1 / 1.341). There is also an efficiency factor of about 82 to 83 percent for battery kw to motor shaft kw, so the battery power is about 480 kw to produce 532 motor shaft hp. The v3 batteries produce about 570 motor shaft hp, before counter-gate that is.
By the way if you go into settings on tm-spy and select "plot product", it will plot volts on top and power below instead of current.
Last edited:
jerjozwik
Active Member
That's surprising. What kW are you getting? At 89% SOC I can get 465 kW without launch mode. At 93% SOC I can get 483 kW using launch mode.
St Charles
Tesla, not TSLA!
jerjozwik
Active Member
Either that firmware has even greater limits, or the E battery version is severely limited
Looking at the Design Studio for the first time in a while, I was surprised to see the difference between a P100D, which looks like the only way to get ludicrous/insane performance, and an identically equipped (except for the red brake calipers) 100D is $39,500. This is much higher than in the P85D/P85DL days. It appears the company is either trying to really discourage people from buying high-performance cars, or has discovered that people are willing to pay a huge premium for performance and is milking that fact. Given all the discussion of problems and restrictions in this thread, I assume that it's the first: that Tesla originally overestimated the lifecycle profits on these cars given their warranty costs, and is trying to reduce demand. If so, then I suppose our P85DLs and P90DLs were actually relative bargains.
I think it's the second. There is a much bigger profit for Tesla in "P" car's and some people are willing to pay it.
Definitely #2. There is almost no cost difference between a 100D and a P100D. They're doing what any well managed company will do... sell for what the market will bear. The other thing that Tesla must do is to visibly differentiate the P cars. They need to look different than the non-Ps, so that that people will notice them on the road.
Well, if you guys are right that the answer is two, I guess that 85/90 buyers still got a bargain of a sort due to the smaller price differential, but it depends on what the market values of the different levels of performance provided by all these models actually is.
I don't know if it is worth that much of a premium anymore, knowing that the peak power is ONLY available with launch mode, and NOT during 99% of normal driving. I'm frustrated with that!
Mach Schnell!
P100D Pilot & future Tri-Motor CyberTruck Driver
I don't like the req't of launch mode and waiting for max battery power mode to reach temperature either (so I don't do it), but in basic Ludicrous mode getting 549kW at 88% SOC seems to be only down ~26kW from the best reported battery power numbers with max batt power and launch mode at >90% SOC. My VBOX-measured 0-60 time of 2.6 sec is off a couple tenths from best times.
As far as the $39K cost delta between P100D and 100D, it's worth every penny to me. For reference of high performance ICE sedan that I would buy over the pedestrian version, RS7 Vs A7, price delta ~$40K or more depending on spec.
Walta
Member
With this recent change - where max performance is only available via LM? I would love to see the performance numbers for the quarter mile and 0-60 for all the P cars when only in ludicrous mode. I also have stopped waiting for MAX battery, and don't use launch mode, so what did my $10K ludicrous upgrade really get me ? And is this going to be the norm going forward as more car manufacturers step into the over the air firmware update feature? Promise amazing performance - then remove it? Seems to me there needs to be consumer protections in place to prevent this from happening. There should be a law that only allows over the air "improvements" to the purchased car. Something that degrades the performance of a $10K performance option must be illegal.
You should just be able to look at the owners manual and purchase order, at the time of the purchase - and know that is what you purchased. The action of Tesla updating the owners manual with each software release - to re-write history is totally ( fill in your favorite phrase here ) . My original owners manual had zero mention of LM. Now LM is required for max perfromance.
Can you see clicking on this option:
$10K Ludicrous upgrade for 10.9 quarter mile and 2.8 0-60 performance
NOTE: Max Battery must be Ready - usually takes 35 minutes
NOTE: Launch mode must be used - can/will cause battery damage
NOTE: Without using Max Battery and LM - performance degrades to ~11.2 quarter mile, and ~3.0 0-60 .
Ummmmmmmm NO thanks.
jerjozwik
Active Member
@Walta, replying here to keep the data thread about data. my car came with a 1071394-00-a. i brought up the part number change with tesla. they responded saying
"The part number is not indicative of the age or design, so you did not get an older designed battery."
so... might just be the software version?
also... that part quoted was the 3rd battery replacement attempt. they could not source fresh p90d batteries so they attempted 3 times to convert a 90kwh pack to ludicrous mode.
Similar threads
