I have a buyer lined up for my BMW M5, but I only want to sell it if I can get a Model S Plaid. I don't trust Tesla to deliver though. In 2017 I test drove an S and they salesman promised me they would be full auto pilot by the end of the year. People paid for that on leases that have already been turned in and never got it. They said the cyber truck was coming out sooner, it was delayed, same with the semi, and the roadster. I preordered the Plaid+ before they announced the two different models and already feel like I was lied to about that. They said it would be out this year, that's why I put my car up for sale, now it's not. I know this is the wrong place to say this, but Tesla is AWFUL. That being said, if the performance numbers on the Plaid are legit, and it's going to happen, I want it. Has anyone here received one yet? Seen one? Or heard any news other than what's on the website? I did an acceleration analysis of the lap they showed at Laguna Seca. 60-130mph took > 6 seconds. If 0-60 takes 2.00 seconds, then at 8 seconds it should be going 130mph, but they claim it will run a 9.2 1/4 mile at 155mph. That doesn't add up.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Plaid... is it real?
- Thread starter gpdriver17
- Start date
Tesla has probably done quite a few tweaks to the plaid from when the Laguna seca lap 4+ months earlier. Tesla knows some customers go to tracks and do 1/4 miles races etc. and post videos. There are a few youtube channels strictly racing other cars their Teslas. If the car is advertised with specific performance numbers, my guess is the car customers receive will meet or exceed those numbers. The numbers listed by Tesla are pretty specific; so the car was definitely doing 9.23/155 in tests before they posted the numbers in late Jan 2021. That said, I agree with you that the car going around Laguna seca in Sept 2020 wouldn’t have achieved 155 in the 1/4. I did analysis as well so you are correct.
Watch some videos of the Tesla Roadster test rides in 2017. Same plaid tri motor and tech has been improved since then.
It’s probably extremely expensive and time consuming to do those Laguna seca laps. Since Tesla has the best time, there’s no need to rush back. If the same driver did a lap with the car now, the time would probably be faster by a full second or more. My speculation of course.
Watch some videos of the Tesla Roadster test rides in 2017. Same plaid tri motor and tech has been improved since then.
It’s probably extremely expensive and time consuming to do those Laguna seca laps. Since Tesla has the best time, there’s no need to rush back. If the same driver did a lap with the car now, the time would probably be faster by a full second or more. My speculation of course.
Last edited:
Sounds like you know the answer from your prior dealings with Tesla.
No way it is released on time.
No way it is released on time.
MTL_HABS1909
Active Member
BigNick
Infamous Fat Sweaty Guy
My guess is these numbers are from computer simulations and mathematical equations, with optimal conditions: well-prepared track to launch on, 95% SoC, battery pack at optimal 50C temp, etc.
No way are the numbers from computer simulations and math. The performance numbers are from actual testing. That guy ‘Amil’ who gave the test rides in the roadster is involved even now in real performance testing. I also read online recently that motortrend tested the plaid and got a 1.96 sec with the 1 ft rollout.
Of course the testing was on a well prepared track, warmed up battery at 95-100% soc, etc. That’s all expected and fair.
Thanks for the reply. I'm glad some of you understood my points and weren't overly defensive of Tesla.
I think they're beautiful cars and have a lot going for them, but the company seems to make a ton of huge claims and doesn't have a great track record of delivering on them, that's all I'm saying.Another thing I was considering that there's some mode that's only available for say 30 seconds, then requires a cool down and that's why they couldn't run laps with it. The 60-130mph acceleration required to hit a 9.2 with 0-60 in 2.0 seconds is about 4 seconds (found some data from a modified Audi RS3 that hit a 2.0 0-60 and 9.2 1/4 mile at 154mph). In other words, what they showed is ~50% slower than it needs to be to hit advertised numbers. That's significant. I don't know if 4 months is enough development time to do that.
Hopefully we'll find out soon though. I guess I'll just keep my current car until some of these actually get delivered/tested.
Bill Price
Active Member
Yep............park your hopes right next to mine. Not gonna give the richest man in the world a free $1K for a year or better. I'll wait till I see fruition to their efforts and pull the trigger after I've see pudding proof.
airborne spoon
Active Member
Anyone that doesn't know that "Elon time" isn't "rest of the world time". you have to add at least a like a year to any time he says. 
ssv22
Member
You have known this about Tesla since 2017, yet you put up your car for sale? Tesla has been consistent in being inconsistent lol. It's us who should be making the right judgement calls.
Lol Nice to see I wasn’t the only one who analyzed the acceleration of the Laguna Seca plaid. I actually did it in October out of curiosity. My estimates said that car was capable of high 9s and early 140s trap speed. I was pretty happy with those numbers considering my P100D was barely able to hit 125 best case.Thanks for the reply. I'm glad some of you understood my points and weren't overly defensive of Tesla.
Another thing I was considering that there's some mode that's only available for say 30 seconds, then requires a cool down and that's why they couldn't run laps with it. The 60-130mph acceleration required to hit a 9.2 with 0-60 in 2.0 seconds is about 4 seconds (found some data from a modified Audi RS3 that hit a 2.0 0-60 and 9.2 1/4 mile at 154mph). In other words, what they showed is ~50% slower than it needs to be to hit advertised numbers. That's significant. I don't know if 4 months is enough development time to do that.
Hopefully we'll find out soon though. I guess I'll just keep my current car until some of these actually get delivered/tested.
When Tesla announced 9.23 - 155 for the base plaid
, I was not expecting that but I believe it. A few videos would be nice though... Even Lucid showed a few 1/4 mile videos of the Lucid Air. I’m a little surprised Tesla hasn’t posted any videos showing off the plaid. The only video they’ve shown is a lame 5 sec clip of a plaid driving in the snow.My numbers were similar to yours except the 60-130 time I came up with says it should be about 5 secs, not 4. All good though.. cheers
AMPd
Well-Known Member
Can you post what exactly you read that said motortrend tested the plaid, I can’t seem to find anything on that.
If looks like gpdriver is correct. I think I first heard about it on the episode of Tesla Daily’ from the 12th of February. At 4:10, “the Motortrend spec 0-60 test came in at 1.96 seconds.” If you listen, it sounds like he said, “in the Motortrend test, 0-60 came in at 1.96.” This is an article about it..
Attachments
Similar threads
