NHRA measures the time from the first blue arrow to the second one. The car's speed at the first blue arrow is not zero due to the rollout.
Correct. Because TopGear didn't use rollout. Meaning their speed was 0 at the first blue arrow.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Porsche Taycan Vs Tesla Model S: Review, Road Test, Race, Charging
- Thread starter TMC Staff
- Start date
NHRA measures the time from the first blue arrow to the second one. The car's speed at the first blue arrow is not zero due to the rollout.
Correct. Because TopGear didn't use rollout. Meaning their speed was 0 at the first blue arrow.
That's not "NHRA" -- that's just simply every drag strip. good grief.
And when cars stage deep they are essentially at that line with no rollout. Or if they stage neither deep nor shallow but just in the middle, the little bit of rollout they have, a few inches, doesn't even matter. It certainly doesn't explain TopGear failing to get the times from others on Dragy and Vbox and even adjusted for worst case shallow staging on Dragtimes.
They are members of NHRA: Member Track Locator
Your comment shows that I was unable to explain my table above. Few inches make a big difference on the 1/4 mile time. However they barely make any change on the max speed.
At 0 inch 'deep staged', car is right at the start line, 1/4 time: 10.738s. Speed at end: 129.42mph
At 2 inches behind the start line, 1/4 time: 10.579s. Speed at end: 129.42mph
At 6 inches behind the start line, 1/4 time: 10.501s. Speed at end: 129.43mph
At 13 inches behind the start line, 1/4 time: 10.424s. Speed at end: 129.44mph
Note: the difference between let's say 5" and 7" isn't that great, 10.501s vs 10.481s
but there is a night and day difference between starting the race at the start line with no rollout vs 5" behind. 10.738s vs 10.501s
Or you can just ask people who go to the drag strip and they will tell you that deep or shallow staging makes about one tenth difference. And there is plenty of documentation, including from me on this forum, that Dragy and Vbox are within a tenth of time slips times. With the variation likely explained by deep or shallow staging.
Dragy and Vbox times, and even timeslips adjusted for assumed worst case shallow staging all show that TopGear testing protocol was defective. No amount of spreadsheet columns will disprove that. QED
PS Lots of dragstrips that use typical dragstrip eqiupment are NOT NHRA affiliated, so people generally intending to refer to dragstrips should not use the more limiting term, NHRA. International Hot Rod Association - Tracks
Last edited:
I think most everybody on the Forum understands the concept of roll out. What your Avalanche of Statistics has failed to explain how ever is is the 0.7-0.6 second gap between a truly representative time for the Raven in the quarter mile - redundantly documented at 10.5 or 10.6 seconds at a decent state-of-charge - and what Top Gear has offered. It takes a lot of 'fact juggling' to explain (err...obfuscate?) that. Can you acknowledge that that Gap is simply more than you can explain with measurement variation, surface variation, air temperature, Etc. And according to the previous post Top Gear has admitted that they cooked the data and did not actually measure the car. They took numbers from a previous test of a different car without the current horsepower. So Top Gear has no integrity at all. They are an advertising outfit pure and simple. They have no journalistic integrity. If they're willing to cook data or publish fake data related to something else that's a line in the sand that if you cross over it means no one can trust a single thing that you're saying going forward.
Last edited:
If everybody understands it why is everyone confused about it including you? If you understood, you wouldn't mention 0.7s gap or compare 10.5 s to TopGear's time.
@Racerx22b didn't know that the Dragy (at least with the way it is set up on that car) measures 1/8 and 1/4 times by excluding the rollout distance similar to the dragstrip times. So that's not a clean 1/4 mile.
Additionally he failed to tell the DragTimes guys that TopGear doesn't play with rollout and uses a clean 1/4 mile run starting with the speed of 0mph. So DragTimes guy came up with a completely irrelevant comparison at the end with the NSX.
TopGear measured the P100D's clean 1/4 mile run accurately: 11.08s, 124mph top speed.
TopGear failed to make a faster run with the Raven and I have said this, see below. Maybe they didn't use launch mode. Tesla Bjorn tried range mode and couldn't tell if it made any difference because the numbers were so close.
Based on my calculations the fastest Raven does a clean 1/4 mile in about 10.8s with the top speed of 126mph.
Racerx22b
@unplggdd on Instagram
Honest question, how do you know that? I am not challenging you cause I don't know myself. Their reported times are both from a Vbox which does calculate roll out depending on how set up. Maybe they did roll out for Porsche but not for Tesla?
I don't know?
It doesn't matter Top Gear failed to test the Model S properly and they lied.
/thread
/thread
Based on this calculation here:
Porsche Taycan Vs Tesla Model S: Review, Road Test, Race, Charging
Equations can be found here for example Acceleration and Velocity Equations
Uncle Paul
Well-Known Member
Racerx22b
@unplggdd on Instagram
So to be clear, TG hasn't stated this. You're just coming to this conclusion based on your calculation.
Once again an enormous amount of verbiage that obfuscates simple facts. See multiple posted times and videos including in the prior post from dragtimes. I guess you must figure people are simply going to be overwhelmed by your statistical mumbo-jumbo and give up.
Top Gear also run the Model 3 Performance at 57% on the drag racing part of their testing :
And on the track testing the model 3 performance seems to be even at a lower state of charge WTF:
God I hope things aren't that bad! There is some Integrity in journalism but it seems to me that Top Gear wanted to amplify the drama so they created a cooked video where no doubt the drivers were told to stay close to each other, and then they posted what were out of date and inaccurate times to support God only knows what agenda they must have had.
It's pretty obvious that the best times for the Model S performance version Raven with full launch control and ludicrous plus plus plus slightly beat the published times for the taycan. But it's also obvious at this point someone will have to do a real test with No Agenda other than just seeing how the two cars do if they're both run optimally.
I suspect with the new 50 horsepower boost coming in the firmware that the Tesla S will have a slight Advantage even though it probably won't get near 130 as a trap speed. But my guess is it will stay ahead significantly through much of the race with the Porsche closing but not catching it.
Anyway that's my prediction. I would bet that they are no more than one to two tenths apart at the Finish.
Last edited:
Good catch on that. It seems pretty obvious that the more you look at Top Gear the more they look like an advertising firm. Whatever journalistic Integrity they might have had in the old days has been sold to clicks, ratings, and cash
Correct. Physics don't lie.
Additionally this calculation Porsche Taycan Vs Tesla Model S: Review, Road Test, Race, Charging shows very well that dragstrip 1/4 mile times vary a lot based on rollout while the speed at the end is almost constant. If TopGear did one thing right - measuring the speed at the end - 131.6mph (which may be equal to 130.6mph measured on the dragstrip with the averaging method), I can use this max speed, put it in my model and come up with a time around 10.7s for a clean 1/4 mile run. So the data for the Taycan makes sense when it comes to physics. I don't know if this data is made up or real.
Last edited:
Racerx22b
@unplggdd on Instagram
I'm no mathematician but you seem to be missing many variables that affect acceleration. And even if your calculations are accurate it still does not explain how in the world they were getting 11.2sec 1/4 miles times with the Raven Tesla. Even taking away the rollout doesn't explain the full .6sec gap (.7 in some cases) they have from nearly everyone else performing this test with their Tesla. You're still missing the explanation for about .2-.3sec drop in the time.
Agreed although it seems to me you're doing an awful lot of whining about other people's whining. In any case, that's why the real reference point for you should be the Nurburgring. The Taycan came out with all kinds of hype about running a 7:40 and then the prototype for the next generation Tesla S romperstomped it by 20 seconds. And by the way the taycan costs only $10,000 less than the new Roadster. Do you think that's going to be much of a contest? I'd say a safe over under time for the new Roadster on Nurburgring is something like 6 minutes 40 seconds. That's a full minute faster than the Porsche Taycan. That's enough time to watch the Tesla finish, go get your email, a cup of coffee and then see the Porsche finish.
Last edited:
Will you stop your nonsense when we show you proof of quicker times?
Similar threads
