Pack Performance and Launch Mode Limits

[n2mb_racing]

*sigh*

This is not correct. It isn't appropriate to round when timing something.

Yes, but when we talk about someone "breaking into the 10s" that means the first digit is 10. The rest doesn't matter. So if Tesla just said it was a 10 second car, 10.99 would count.

 

[SDRick]

*sigh*

This is not correct. It isn't appropriate to round when timing something.

Correct or not, I have been told all measurements are "rounded"!

 

[AnxietyRanger]

And in that same vein, and I guess more importantly, that 10.99 car is considered - in the racing world - a "10 second car". (Even though mathematically and realistically a 10.99 car is an 11 second car.)

*sigh*

This is not correct. It isn't appropriate to round when timing something.

First, I agree 10.99 is 10.9 is 10 in racing. I agree.

As for mathematics and realistically:

I guess my main point was that realistically a 10.99 second car is more a 11 second car then 10 second car. If just talking in laymen terms. 10.99 is practically 11 seconds and a long time removed from 10 seconds.

As for the mathematical rounding rules. I am not sure if they vary from region to region, but I have certainly learned to round time measurements as well as others. Anyone have a mathematical source to verify what is right?

 

[GMDC]

This power reduction is similar. I take my background in combination with others work on this form and conclude that battery concerns have Tesla dialing back 1600ish amps to 1500ish amps based on integrated use. The number of launches, mode, traction, etc makes for interesting conversation but only discovery or de compiling the BMS code is going to give answers. I'm not filing suit and I have yet to get a copy of the suspect firmware so I'm not concerned about these details.

Anyone who can actually work on the idea above?

 

[Skipdd]

I totally agree!
I have no problems with the thread being the length that it is. I also have no problems being a punching bag to keep the discussion going in order to get something happening. Its my fiduciary responsibility. LOL

Anyway. I believe that some are venting...especially at me, however that's absolutely no problem because everything in my life is exactly the same as before it all started. In other words....no effect.
I hope it has been therapeutic for some.

Another option to explore is to see if Tesla can provide an extremely in-expensive upgrade for P90D owners to the P100D car. The P90D wasn't on sale for that long a period of time. How many P90D's were actually sold? It can't be that many.

I'm too lazy to dig up all the plots and graphs but I do want to reinforce the idea of launch mode, max battery mode and the like is not intimately tied to this limit.


IF I were coding this, it would be current only as a trigger and I would start counting after a short period as the inertia of the part(s) in question give you a small freebee. Launch mode (as another poster has pointed out) only pre-loads the suspension with 40ish KWs of power. You use that much power driving down the road at 60-70 so the only affect is heating the drive unit. Max battery increases the battery's temperature in an effort to lower internal resistance. This does not change the current supplied but, instead, increases power by reducing voltage sag under load. IF the battery interconnects are the issue (which was one of the major changes to the newest battery), a change in voltage sag is not "seen" by the interconnect. The interconnects only see current across them.

Now that P85DEE has joined this thread I'd like to make an observation. I've been increasingly more interested in how intelligent rational discussions across the political spectrum can be derailed by one or two entities zinging off in an unsupported or ill conceived position or set of positions. We have lost the ability to filter conversations for the benefit of all having a voice. I do not want to change the source of this noise but I suggest we have to be smarter about hearing and responding to it as it really does distract from any meaningful progress. By that token, please feel free to ignore me if you think I am spouting crap.

A couple of comments on your last point. I saw a reference to an "ignore" button - is there one, or was that commentary perhaps on the dislike button? I'm reminded of the spam issue that occurs within an organization when someone mistakenly replies to an org wide distribution list and multiple people start replying each saying "stop." The solution was to create an "ignore" button that then wipes out the thread. In this case, you'd want to wipe out the poster just for this thread, for essentially spamming the thread. It would be up to each individual to use the button, so it's not as much of a scold as having one's comments plucked out by a Mod and moved to the snippiness thread.. As an aside I'm reminded of how easy it was during the recent election for hyperbolic comments to create a wave in the media that became self-propelling and damaging to informative discourse. I was wishing for an "ignore" button there too

 

[St Charles]

First, I agree 10.99 is 10.9 is 10 in racing. I agree.

As for mathematics and realistically:

I guess my main point was that realistically a 10.99 second car is more a 11 second car then 10 second car. If just talking in laymen terms. 10.99 is practically 11 seconds and a long time removed from 10 seconds.

As for the mathematical rounding rules. I am not sure if they vary from region to region, but I have certainly learned to round time measurements as well as others. Anyone have a mathematical source to verify what is right?

This is racing, not math.

I'm not going to keep arguing with you on this. a 10.99 IS a 10 second time. It IS NOT an 11 second time. In a racing environment it is not appropriate to round in any direction. Bringing up mathematical justifications for rounding is not relevant and is only adding confusion to the discussion.

 

[Andyw2100]

I saw a reference to an "ignore" button - is there one, or was that commentary perhaps on the dislike button?

This is a bit off-topic, but yes, you can add posters to an ignore list, and then you won't see posts from that poster unless you take them off your ignore list, or use TMC without logging in. To add someone to your own, personal ignore list, hover over your icon (the left-most icon) at the top right of the page, and then select "People You Ignore." You will then be able to add users to your ignore list.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

This is racing, not math.

I'm not going to keep arguing with you on this. a 10.99 IS a 10 second time. It IS NOT an 11 second time. In a racing environment it is not appropriate to round in any direction. Bringing up mathematical justifications for rounding is not relevant and is only adding confusion to the discussion.

I have a hard time understanding your apparent hostility on this. In both of my messages I said this first, bolded:

"And in that same vein, and I guess more importantly, that 10.99 car is considered - in the racing world - a "10 second car". (Even though mathematically and realistically a 10.99 car is an 11 second car.)"

"First, I agree 10.99 is 10.9 is 10 in racing. I agree. As for mathematics and realistically: ..."

The commentary on mathematics and realistical representation of time was just acknowledging the multi-facetedness of the issue.

As for racing and math. Well. It may be racing for you, but I assure not all road-going Tesla buyers are coming from a racing lingo background. They are not buying a racing car, they are buying a car. Considering those multi-faceted viewpoints may be useful, if for nothing else than putting things into perspective for various audiences.

Saying 10.99 is 10, not 11, is not automatically believable to all audiences - nor their obvious reasonable expectation. That is good to understand, at least, I think.

 

[Andyw2100]

As for racing and math. Well. It may be racing for you, but I assure not all road-going Tesla buyers are coming from a racing lingo background. They are not buying a racing car, they are buying a car. Considering those multi-faceted viewpoints may be useful, if for nothing else than putting things into perspective for various audiences.

Exactly!

And that's also why it would have been better and more transparent if Tesla had made it more clear when initially publishing the P85D 0-60 time of 3.2 seconds if they had indicated the time was using 1-foot roll out, especially since they had never used 1-foot roll out in the past.

Many people, including people who knew a lot about cars, and had purchased performance cars in the past were not familiar with the term, or with the convention that allowed for using it in 0-60 times. As an example, I recall a thread where wk057 was trying to reconcile time slips he had received at the track, and even he had not been aware of the meaning of 1-foot roll out, and he had owned a P85+ before buying his P85D.

In other words, what is obvious to some is not obvious to others, so Tesla should strive to make their communications crystal clear to everyone.

 

[lolachampcar]

Is it safe to say drag racers will accept a 10.99 as a 10.9 car while non-racers would tend to think the car should run 10.900 or better in the 1/4 mile for the 10.9 number to be promoted?

 

[St Charles]

As for racing and math. Well. It may be racing for you, but I assure not all road-going Tesla buyers are coming from a racing lingo background. They are not buying a racing car, they are buying a car. Considering those multi-faceted viewpoints may be useful, if for nothing else than putting things into perspective for various audiences.

Saying 10.99 is 10, not 11, is not automatically believable to all audiences - nor their obvious reasonable expectation. That is good to understand, at least, I think.

Because at the end of the day it is justifying ignorance. There is a lot of ignorance floating around this thread already, we don't need to add to it.

 

[Andyw2100]

Is it safe to say drag racers will accept a 10.99 as a 10.9 car while non-racers would tend to think the car should run 10.900 or better in the 1/4 mile for the 10.9 number to be promoted?

As a non-drag racer, that was exactly what I thought before reading stuff here on TMC, in those oldert threads, that set me straight. I just assumed, apparently incorrectly, that for Tesla to meet the 10.9 spec, the car would have to run 10.900 or better. Again, I understand now that that is not the convention. But your description above is exactly what I thought before learning on TMC what the convention was.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Is it safe to say drag racers will accept a 10.99 as a 10.9 car while non-racers would tend to think the car should run 10.900 or better in the 1/4 mile for the 10.9 number to be promoted?

I think it probably is.

In the middle there may be an audience that would accept 10.9499 as 10.9.

 

[Mickie]

In my experiences with the track and knowing quite a few habitual track-goers, a x.999999999999 time =x. If a car ran 11s for years, then suddenly broke into the 10s, and even if it could not run another 10 quarter, that car is a 10 second car.

Splitting a lot of off-topic hairs regarding the 10.9 issue. I think there was another thread addressing it that spanned a couple 'two-tree' pages

Edit: added first paragraph because I'm shameful of post count bumping lol.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

Because at the end of the day it is justifying ignorance. There is a lot of ignorance floating around this thread already, we don't need to add to it.

I guess that is our cue to just agree to disagree.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

And that's also why it would have been better and more transparent if Tesla had made it more clear when initially publishing the P85D 0-60 time of 3.2 seconds if they had indicated the time was using 1-foot roll out, especially since they had never used 1-foot roll out in the past.

Many people, including people who knew a lot about cars, and had purchased performance cars in the past were not familiar with the term, or with the convention that allowed for using it in 0-60 times. As an example, I recall a thread where wk057 was trying to reconcile time slips he had received at the track, and even he had not been aware of the meaning of 1-foot roll out, and he had owned a P85+ before buying his P85D.

The P85D 3.2 seconds was in its own league of bad because it was presented the same way as all the other Tesla models, including previous Performance models, none of which had used the 1-foot roll out. That is just changing the metric without telling anyone and presenting these different metrics side by side no less...

It would be similar to using different rounding/cropping rules in different car model's acceleration times. I wonder if Tesla has been more consistent in rounding/cropping their acceleration times?

 

[St Charles]

Is it safe to say drag racers will accept a 10.99 as a 10.9 car while non-racers would tend to think the car should run 10.900 or better in the 1/4 mile for the 10.9 number to be promoted?

I don't think so because Tesla never stated that number of significant figures. Tesla stated 10.9, not a 10.99999999...

for those who got a timeslip of 10.999 then they have the correct numbers in the correct places.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

I don't think so because Tesla never stated that number of significant figures. Tesla stated 10.9, not a 10.99999999...

for those who got a timeslip of 10.999 then they have the correct numbers in the correct places.

I assume @lolachampcar was not talking of what is right, but what is the expectation of non-racers when they see a number 10.9. I agree, I would assume many to expect 10.9000 or at least 10.9499 or less.

Not going back to the right or wrong disagreement, just offering a view what the average car buyer might assume...

 

[P85DEE]

This is racing, not math.

I'm not going to keep arguing with you on this. a 10.99 IS a 10 second time. It IS NOT an 11 second time. In a racing environment it is not appropriate to round in any direction. Bringing up mathematical justifications for rounding is not relevant and is only adding confusion to the discussion.

To your part in bold, good move. Otherwise it's down the rabbit hole.

You're learning what I learned months back.

In here, trying to explain that some, is about as useless as would be attempting to shovel smoke with a pitchfork.

 

[AnxietyRanger]

To your part in bold, good move. Otherwise it's down the rabbit hole.

You're learning what I learned months back.

In here, trying to explain that some, is about as useless as would be attempting to shovel smoke with a pitchfork.

Then you and Tesla may be getting a small taste of what the expectation of the average Joe may be. If the racing lingo is cause for conversation on an enthusiast forum, quite a technical forum too, the thoughts of the regular car-buying folk are even more far removed from the world of racing.

It might be wise to have a sensibility about this.