Wow.
Look, I know you're trying to help, but I think you're waaaay off base here.
Elon himself promoted the Ludicrous mode option, a $10k stand-alone option on top of the extra $30k to $40k just to get into a "P" model in the first place.
Last time I checked, I can select "Ludicrous" via the central display--I paid for it, and there were no limits posted on it's use. It's safe to assume that if there were stated limits, the take rate for this option would have fallen substantially. (And I'm not talking about occasional performance degradation caused by extreme ambient conditions--a lot of brands do that when they under-engineer something. What we're talking about is a permanent reduction in performance, a surprise that no one outside of Tesla knew of until this thread.)
For you to call it "abuse" and make references to cars being "beaten on, flogged or tracked" is remarkable. I can only assume that you're not writing a $2k+ check every month for a P90D because if you were it's likely your perspective would be a bit different.
I'm going to make this one short.
Tesla has no dedicated racing program.
Many other auto manufacturers do.
Chevy will deny warranty coverage on a Z06 if they find out you're tracking it or anything otherwise that they would consider beating on it.
Ask me how I know. And there's a car built for the track if ever there were one.
Indeed we've had a peripheral discussion about this in another thread.
To some degree, Tesla relies on the exploits of private owners word of mouth and YouTube videos to bolster the car's performance rep.
Most performance car manufacturers will not cover damage, be it immediate or what they consider to be cumulative, as a result of "off road" use, or even on road "abuse", "racing" and the like.
They do this to protect themselves from warranty claims arising from such use. They have no intent of sponsoring anyone's private racing program, nor covering anyone's issues which they deem to be the immediate or cumulative effect of what the consider to be abuse.
At least two persons in here made an inquiry with regard to their (Tesla's) position regrading on track mechanical damage or failures and warranty coverage.
I was one of them.
Different answers were given. My answer was that they "would know" when, where and what the car was doing when a failure should occur.
They were non commit all as to if I would be covered in event of an on track mechanical incident and I understand that.
The other guy said that they actually encouraged his track efforts in part for some of the reasons I stated earlier.
My point then as now, auto manufacturers can be expected to take steps to insulate themselves from covering warranty claims related to what "they" consider to be abuse.
The important word here is "they".
Most of the methods are "reactive", the manufacturer denying the claim after it is presented, on the grounds of abuse.
However on the surface, this move by Tesla, if it is what it appears to be, then it seems to be proactive.
In other words, if you have a pattern of driving which could, or would, leave them prone to exposure for a later warranty repair either as a result of an immediate circumstance, or as a result of cumulative effects from driving in such a manner, , they seem to be taking steps which would lessen their exposure to that by making less power available.
You don't use launch mode to take off from your driveway or in rush hour traffic from a stop light.
So it doesn't take much to know that anyone using it a certain number of times, whatever that is, is most certainly flogging the car.
There is no "nice" or "gentle" way to extract the quickest ET from a car.
When I say flogging, I know what I'm talking about. As a former frequent drag racer, primarily in Vettes, every car I owned and put on the track I was trying to beat/ the best time out of it that I could when running time trials and attempting to set new bests, which is what most people in here using launch mode are running and where they are using launch mode.
Otherwise I saw little point in going to the track unless I was going to drive it like I stole it.
I bust something doing that, even if the car is "supposedly" marketed in such a manner, then it's liable to be on my own dime.
If this is what's going on here, Tesla permanently cutting power in cars already sold, in order to protect themselves from warranty claims, well then it's an ethically questionable approach indeed.