Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[davidc18]

The Dania SC will not update your firmware if you make it clear that they are not authorized to do so. Mine is here now and it was the first and last point that we reviewed. Make sure it is in your service record that they type up.

 

[Tech_Guy]

The Dania SC will not update your firmware if you make it clear that they are not authorized to do so. Mine is here now and it was the first and last point that we reviewed. Make sure it is in your service record that they type up.

id put a sticky note on the screen to remind them of such ....

 

[Tech_Guy]

I wonder why your car keeps getting depleted of power when you are not using LaunchMode.

I was thinking that the LaunchMode and the counter was suggested as the problem with your car by Tesla.

Agreed thats how it was initially described to me, launch mode was directly related to my cars power loss, however looking at there new disclaimers even spirited performance driving could cause my power to be reduced though it was not mentioned in the last email nor any discussion with them. Nor was any of this disclosed at purchase...

 

[Ulmo]

Hey, I'm having range problems with my downgrade decision to get my Model S 60D. If anybody with a P90DL (or P100DL?) decides to dump their counter-expired no longer Ludicrous car for -- say -- $60,000, let me know, I'll buy it (if it has HEPA filter -- especially a fully loaded Model X with tow hitch, although, drag strippers probably don't fully load their P100DL's). I'll even consider it at the reasonable cost of what a regular non-Ludicrous P90D or P100D (respectively) would be, if you carry the difference as a loan to me (more likely if it is fully loaded, especially a model X with tow, especially a 5 seater with fold-down middle row ...).

 

[stopcrazypp]

Agreed thats how it was initially described to me, launch mode was directly related to my cars power loss, however looking at there new disclaimers even spirited performance driving could cause my power to be reduced though it was not mentioned in the last email nor any discussion with them. Nor was any of this disclosed at purchase...

I wouldn't read too much into that. It may be referring to the fact that the car reduces performance temporarily (the yellow limiter) after you drive it continuously at high power. This had been well known in the Tesla community for a long time, but perhaps not explicitly pointed out by Tesla, so they are adding that in.

 

[msnow]

I wouldn't read too much into that. It may be referring to the fact that the car reduces performance temporarily (the yellow limiter) after you drive it continuously at high power. This had been well known in the Tesla community for a long time, but perhaps not explicitly pointed out by Tesla, so they are adding that in.

I believe the yellow limiter is mentioned elsewhere in the manual as a temporary condition. The new language is ambiguous and also doesn't say "temporary". In fact it says it affects "the overall driving and ownership experience". That sounds more than temporary to me. I don't think this new paragraph is a coincidence with what we are hearing.

"To help protect the performance and longevity of the powertrain, Performance versions of the Model S and Model X, continually monitor the condition of various components and may employ limiting controls to optimize the overall driving and ownership experience."

 

[trayloader]

Tesla most certainly is not doing things like other car manufacturers for better or worse.

I like to do simple summaries to aid me in clarity. I chuckled at this one.

Tesla advertises a HP number and, with the P90D, a quarter mile time.
Tesla ships a bunch of cars that have no chance of meeting the HP number or the later quarter mile number.
Tesla writes a technical blog post to explain why the HP number is ok. This post turns out to be total crap because Tesla later meets the HP number without changes in the focus of the post, the motors.
Tesla ships a car that arguably meets HP and quarter mile numbers.
Tesla learns is still did not get it right so it retroactively reduces performance to make up for an engineering ooopsie.

Tesla's recommendations for those customers is to upgrade to their latest performance product saying the "restrictions" are removed on that model all the time stating in writing that all performance models are open for performance modification if Tesla chooses. I believe the term Tesla used the term optimized.

Of course the above is a darker summary of the situation but arguably a fair assessment of the facts.

Great summary.
Maybe the explanation is much simpler.
The P90D system is on the edge and this "tool" was invented as a risk preventer
memba:
Tesla Model S catches on fire during a test drive in France

 

[stopcrazypp]

Technically launch control didn't exist in the original GT-R, the original 0-60 was with VDC on in R mode.

Probably best to hear about the whole controversy from the vehicle designer himself: Fastforward to 3min mark

I look forward to Tesla being transparent and finding a Mizuno equivalent to explain the P90D launch controversy from their perspective

We are getting further off topic, but I wanted to clear things up so people don't have misconceptions. Launch control most definitely existed in the original GT-R (the video you linked even discussed it). You can look at the user manual. It's basically the VDC off mode (it's very obvious when active: it brings revs up to 4500 rpm before launching).
http://www.vadennissanservicecontracts.com/owners-manual/nissan/2009-Nissan-GTR.pdf

Here's a video of how to activate launch control in the 2009 GTR:

The video you linked is a misleading because it is comparing the 0-60 of VDC R-mode after the software update (the video was made after the 2010 GTR was out). That number was 0-60 in 3.5.

If you rewind the clock back to 2008 however at the peak of the controversy, the GTR can only get impressive 0-60 (3.2-3.3) if launch control (AKA VDC off) was used. Without VDC off, the best you can get in a 2009 pre-update GTR is 0-60 in 3.8-4.5, which is still good, but not the game changing times that was widely published. That's why many people that got a GTR used launch control at the time.
Quickest 0-60 time - R35 GT-R

As you can see in your linked video, it wasn't until the 2010 model year until they got the 0-60 back down to the 3.3 mark of the original with launch control.

The controversy very much mirrors what happened here with the P90D playing the part of the 2009 GTR and the P100D playing the part of the 2010 GTR.

 

[P85DEE]

10.999 (Tesludi) on Drag Times is a V3 car,

Well it's good to see this as I always thought that the P90DL had 10.9xxx in it and the splits are very similar to other cars which just missed it.

However OTOH, it's disturbing that this may have been one of the last times that car ever runs as quick if what we are concerned about in this thread turns out to be the case.

 

[msnow]

Well it's good to see this as I always thought that the P90DL had 10.9xxx in it and the splits are very similar to other cars which just missed it.

However OTOH, it's disturbing that this may have been one of the last times that car ever runs as quick if what we are concerned about in this thread turns out to be the case.

Wait, you said the original v1 had a 10.9xx in it which it never did other than MT. The v3 from TMC (light driver no pano) was the first we heard about to get the spec but we knew about that last summer. @St Charles said he saw a video of the first v2 to get the spec but we didn't know about that a couple of months ago.

 

[davidc18]

Actually had 3 notes taped inside the car.

 

[St Charles]

Wait, you said the original v1 had a 10.9xx in it which it never did other than MT. The v3 from TMC (light driver no pano) was the first we heard about to get the spec but we knew about that last summer. @St Charles said he saw a video of the first v2 to get the spec but we didn't know about that a couple of months ago.

Not really. I was thinking that the 10.999 run on dragtimes was a v2 car. I have not seen a video of a v2 car hitting 10.9.

 

[msnow]

Not really. I was thinking that the 10.999 run on dragtimes was a v2 car. I have not seen a video of a v2 car hitting 10.9.

If you mean the TRC jockey I'm pretty sure it was a newer July/August build v3 but I could be wrong.

 

[Tech_Guy]

If you mean the TRC jockey I'm pretty sure it was a newer July/August build v3 but I could be wrong.

TRC has a 1088 V3 battery just like my car.....

 

[msnow]

TRC has a 1088 V3 battery just like my car.....

Ok that's what I thought. So it's still just v3's P90DL's that made the 10.9 spec.

 

[P85DEE]

Wait, you said the original v1 had a 10.9xx in it which it never did other than MT. The v3 from TMC (light driver no pano) was the first we heard about to get the spec but we knew about that last summer. @St Charles said he saw a video of the first v2 to get the spec but we didn't know about that a couple of months ago.

"V1", "V2", "V3" doesn't matter. That's nomenclature which traces its origins to here and doesn't exist much further than here and Tesla has never acknowledged it. And they certainly won't now.

At the end of the day they're all P90Ds with Ludicrous and a couple of cars with that P90D designation on their rear deck hatches are now known to have reached a the 10.9 spec.

Furthermore now that we've seen what we've been calling a "V3", with all the right numbers on the battery pack, cut down to somewhere between the power level of a P85D with insane and a P85D with Ludicrous, right under the owner's nose, this method of differentiation is liable to mean less.

In light of recent developments, do we know just exactly how much power that "V3" which ran the 10.99x was making at the time that it ran it?

 

[Andyw2100]

Ok that's what I thought. So it's still just v3's P90DL's that made the 10.9 spec.

At the end of the day they're all P90Ds with Ludicrous and a couple of cars with that P90D designation on their rear deck hatches are now known to have reached a the 10.9 spec.

In light of recent developments, do we know just exactly how much power that "V3" which ran the 10.99x was making at the time that it ran it?

Not trying to parse words, or start an argument here. I'm just confused.

I thought there was just one P90DL of any flavor--the one that ran the 10.999--that has met the spec.

But the posts above make it sound like there are more than one if when referring to the car that ran the 10.99x P85DEE is talking about a different car than the one that ran the 10.999.

So, put simply: do we know of more than one car that ran 10.999 or better, or is it just a single car and a single pass?

 

[Tech_Guy]

from what I've seen the TRC car has made multiple 10.8 passes and his cars power level was 500kw so theoretically any car producing 500KW and up should be there or very close.... id suspect my car would have done it had I ever made it to the track as before the reduction as it was making 511 KW power, though my car was a heavier spec with pano roof premium package and premium sound.... obviously it won't be doing that any more after the power reduction...

 

[P85DEE]

1. From the drag times site 2 P90D cars have run 10.9 or better. One a 10.9x the other a 10.8x.

The designations of V1, V2, V3, started in here after some found that batteries with certain part numbers produced higher max KW numbers using the Power tools app.

What I'm wondering now is how many of those cars found in that thread to have been making 501-510 KW the so named "V3" cars, are still making that.

Unfortunately, we know that at least one isn't. And this would not have been detected had the owner not been 16 sharp and on his "Ps and Qs".

Does that mean that others aren't or may not be?

We don't know.

So that was the reason why I indicated that this distinction that we've made in here, i.e. "V1,V2,V3" is possibly more superfluous now more than ever.

We now have at least one example of a car with a "V3" batter pack in it according to its part number and once observed power, now making less power than the battery pack that we were started referring to as a "V1", or the battery pack which came in the first P90Ds

 

[msnow]

"V1", "V2", "V3" doesn't matter. That's nomenclature which traces its origins to here and doesn't exist much further than here and Tesla has never acknowledged it. And they certainly won't now.

At the end of the day they're all P90Ds with Ludicrous and a couple of cars with that P90D designation on their rear deck hatches are now known to have reached a the 10.9 spec.

Furthermore now that we've seen what we've been calling a "V3", with all the right numbers on the battery pack, cut down to somewhere between the power level of a P85D with insane and a P85D with Ludicrous, right under the owner's nose, this method of differentiation is liable to mean less.

In light of recent developments, do we know just exactly how much power that "V3" which ran the 10.99x was making at the time that it ran it?

It matters if you bought one based on specs. @St Charles probably knows the power of the v3 but my memory was 525 kWh.