I can add to the validity of this claim. My friend has a P90DL v2 that he launched (not Launch Mode) regularly and Tesla finally admitted that his power was reduced due to too many launches. He knew this happened because he was using Power Tools(?) and noticed a significant drop. My P85DL has not experienced a drop as I go to the drags often and the times have not changed.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits
- Thread starter Ingineer
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Tesla Inc.
Andyw2100
Well-Known Member
Did your friend take any sort of hard-line stance with Tesla, for example, saying that this was totally unacceptable, etc., etc.?
How in the world can Tesla think it is OK to sell a product for upwards of $125,000 and then limit what it can do after the fact?
Trying to pinpoint the cars affected by this launch limit, we've been told Tesla said P100D is excempt... and NSX1992 says his P85D is not affected, but his friends P90DL v2 is... I wonder if the counter is basically a P90DL feature?
We also get a hint that it isn't launch mode, but simply any (full?) launch that seems to trigger the counter.
Who knows, just trying to use the anecdotal data to form some picture.
Anyway, agree that it is no way acceptable to do something like this without informing the customer beforehand (pre-purchase).
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Sort of weird that they would base it on "Launches" ? (Does this mean launch mode, or just colloquial 'launches' from stand still?)
It isn't really even possible to hit the max amps until around 30-40mph -- what if I just launch my car to 25 mph? I won't even hit max amps so why limit it?
Limiting the maximum amps really just limits passing performance more than anything, where you might actually need max amps, say between 45-70 mph.
So the logic is -- Sorry, you've done too many low speed launches, now we will limit your passing performance?
WUT?
It isn't really even possible to hit the max amps until around 30-40mph -- what if I just launch my car to 25 mph? I won't even hit max amps so why limit it?
Limiting the maximum amps really just limits passing performance more than anything, where you might actually need max amps, say between 45-70 mph.
So the logic is -- Sorry, you've done too many low speed launches, now we will limit your passing performance?
WUT?
NSX1992 above says it applies to any launch, not just launch mode.
Whether or not this is correct is unknown, IMO.
Interesting. I would expect limiting top-end amperage to have no effect until around 25 mph, at a minimum.
A P100D/P90D producing max torque at 10mph is probably only using 25% of the max pack amperage. Unless the limit is a function of the current speed?
Very very strange stuff going on here.
I have to say, among all of the "dramatic" threads here on TMC, this is one of the more disconcerting. Published horsepower and kWh are numbers that imply correlation to performance. If true, this is a real-world performance difference. Like @Ingineer, I (also) Love Tesla, but if verified, this is a practice I will not defend.
Hopefully there's an oversight or misunderstanding.
Hopefully there's an oversight or misunderstanding.
There are two potential issues in this thread, 1) the kWh discrepancy (actual total vs. advertised total) and 2) the counter of death for launches.
Personally I find the smaller than advertised actual total kWh the lesser issue, though affecting a larger part of the fleet (most of the high-end cars?) and would be false advertising...
But the idea that some high-end models (P90DL?) actually kill part of their performance after some hidden, arbitrary number of launches is far more disconcerting.
That would truly be the definition of bait and switch.
Just to play devil's advocate for a moment. 
Not sure if this comparison has been made already but aren't launches the equivalent of "red-lining" an ICE. Invariably, continuous red-lining an ICE will cause premature stress and wear / tear on the engine (i.e. cylinders, pistons etc.) which will ultimately lead to less power output. Is the reduction in power an apples-to-apples comparison? Possibly, however I think we need to be more pragmatic about this. It is an unrealistic expectation to believe that continuous launches will have no long-term negative impacts on performance.
Nonetheless, if Mr. Ingineer's datapoints are correct, then yes one can argue that Tesla not disclosing this info is an egregious omission.
Fascinating (and somewhat disturbing) discovery though...
Not sure if this comparison has been made already but aren't launches the equivalent of "red-lining" an ICE. Invariably, continuous red-lining an ICE will cause premature stress and wear / tear on the engine (i.e. cylinders, pistons etc.) which will ultimately lead to less power output. Is the reduction in power an apples-to-apples comparison? Possibly, however I think we need to be more pragmatic about this. It is an unrealistic expectation to believe that continuous launches will have no long-term negative impacts on performance.
Nonetheless, if Mr. Ingineer's datapoints are correct, then yes one can argue that Tesla not disclosing this info is an egregious omission.
Fascinating (and somewhat disturbing) discovery though...
Just to play devil's advocate for a moment.
Not sure if this comparison has been made already but aren't launches the equivalent of "red-lining" an ICE. Invariably, continuous red-lining an ICE will cause premature stress and wear / tear on the engine (i.e. cylinders, pistons etc.) which will ultimately lead to less power output. Is the reduction in power an apples-to-apples comparison? Possibly, however I think we need to be more pragmatic about this. It is an unrealistic expectation to believe that continuous launches will have no long-term negative impacts on performance.
Nonetheless, if Mr. Ingineer's datapoints are correct, then yes one can argue that Tesla not disclosing this info is an egregious omission.
Fascinating (and somewhat disturbing) discovery though...
Gradual wear and tear is one thing. That is understandable and to be expected.
A counter to artifical reduction is another, that could be more akin to a defeat device because it acts in secrecy and separate of the organic process. Especially if there is no pre-publicized maintenance regime to reset that counter through, say, cost of part replacement.
Just to play devil's advocate for a moment.
Not sure if this comparison has been made already but aren't launches the equivalent of "red-lining" an ICE. Invariably, continuous red-lining an ICE will cause premature stress and wear / tear on the engine (i.e. cylinders, pistons etc.) which will ultimately lead to less power output. Is the reduction in power an apples-to-apples comparison? Possibly, however I think we need to be more pragmatic about this. It is an unrealistic expectation to believe that continuous launches will have no long-term negative impacts on performance.
Nonetheless, if Mr. Ingineer's datapoints are correct, then yes one can argue that Tesla not disclosing this info is an egregious omission.
Fascinating (and somewhat disturbing) discovery though...
The other thing to consider here is what type of 'red-lining' you are talking about.
Launches certainly red-line torque, but they don't necessarily red-line power, and therefore amperage.
If the goal is to control red-lining power, then limiting amperage would certainly do that, but I'm not sure why launches would be the criteria. (Launches don't necessarily red-line power)
If limiting red-line torque was the goal, then launches would certainly be good criteria, but limiting amperage won't prohibit people from red-lining torque, so limiting amperage is a poor way to control that.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
https://teslamotorsclub.com/tmc/att...parison-graph-zoomed-to-tps-eq100-png.112464/
power versus speed versus battery current limit
power versus speed versus battery current limit
This also puts buying an untitled demo/ loaner car into a whole new light, especially if it has racked a good few thousand miles on the clock. Demos in particular are surely subject to many dings on the hypothetical counter.
He was concerned that Tesla would take further action if he complained too much or make it public. I found out about this when I encouraged him to take the car to the drags and get the magic 10.9 since he had the version2 90 battery. It took him one month before Tesla finally admitted they cut the power down to a version 1 (450 to 400). Since Tesla never admitted that there was a version 2 and 3 90KW battery he could not prove that Tesla had misled him as the increased power was never stated.
Wow! Does seem to explain the massive variance that people were seeing with their P90D's.
Seems like the counter lasts just long enough to get a 10.9 video up on Youtube :/
Seems like the counter lasts just long enough to get a 10.9 video up on Youtube :/
Holy shi... this thread is going to eventually reveal who shot Kennedy.
This is basically the same behavior that has manifested in other changes/downgrades.
If they are seeing unfortunate warranty repair costs from heavy users, some pinhead says, "lets just limit horsepower and torque for the users that correlate with failure"...all heads in the room nod and aren't we smart!
There doesn't seem to be any acknowledgement that when you have sold a product as X, you are stuck with that agreement. If the liability or warranty repair costs, or anything else make it inconvenient to Tesla, they suddenly would like to change the deal.
Any chance you guys would enjoy this downgrade more if we bundled it with a new media player?
If they are seeing unfortunate warranty repair costs from heavy users, some pinhead says, "lets just limit horsepower and torque for the users that correlate with failure"...all heads in the room nod and aren't we smart!
There doesn't seem to be any acknowledgement that when you have sold a product as X, you are stuck with that agreement. If the liability or warranty repair costs, or anything else make it inconvenient to Tesla, they suddenly would like to change the deal.
Any chance you guys would enjoy this downgrade more if we bundled it with a new media player?
Similar threads
