Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Raven (non-performance) Maximum Power Output vs 100D

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Is the visual in the video on the left available for everyone? I have a 2016 P90DL and havent been able to find this menu in the settings and wondering if this is only available on new / raven cars?

Not available to everyone, but you should have it. It’s only on Ludicrous cars, and only appears when you go into Ludicrous+ and wait until the battery warms fully.
 
ah. i havent had a chance to test the car yet with battery fully warmed up yet. Does it appear automatically or does it need to be selected once warmed up?

This also looks like a similar menu to the tyre pressure monitoring that i cant seem to find either!
 
ah. i havent had a chance to test the car yet with battery fully warmed up yet. Does it appear automatically or does it need to be selected once warmed up?

This also looks like a similar menu to the tyre pressure monitoring that i cant seem to find either!

It should appear automatically; certainly it did the one time I tried it (after half an hour of battery heating.)

Once you’re warm, it’s an option for the left screen, with a name something like Stats and an odometer rolling icon.

Tire pressure should be on the car status page, which has a car icon in the middle and also shows seat belts and doors.
 
I am going to the SC to try out S LR again (because still debating between about LR and and P100D from test drives).
Is there anything I can test with an iphone/android alone?
I believe there are standalone apps but I've never tried them and I don't know how accurate they would be.

I'll be interested to hear how your test drive of the LR Raven went. Listen for traction control struggling to keep the tires gripping the first 20mph or so.

The following graphs compare my Raven LR with my 2018 100D. The Raven is slower to about 25 mph (despite 69% SOC cold battery for the 100D vs 85% for the Raven with warmed battery fresh off SuperCharger), then it catches up but struggles as you approach 60mph supposedly due to the lower peak power (more efficient drivetrain doesn't do enough to offset this power loss).
IMG_5939.jpg
IMG_5938.jpg
IMG_5937.jpg
 
Initial acceleration in the above graphs indicates approximately a 0.45s 1 ft rollout time. Dragy assumes 0.25s which I believe to be incorrect. PowerTools data illustrates the benefit of using rotational speed to determine acceleration vs GPS which clearly cannot analyze the first foot of movement. In this analysis I'm assuming that the moment Power is seen by the app is the moment Power reaches the wheels.
Conclusion: 100D 69% SOC 0-60 1ft rollout ~3.55s
Raven 85% SOC warmed battery 1ft rollout ~3.65s
 
went out last night and did a quick 0-60 pull figured if I can stopwatch the video I can get a close estimate. Think there was about 285 mile range left on 370 so puts me just under 80%

have a look...

https://photos.app.goo.gl/oEUaMTqSYP8gZd2p9

I popped this in to the video editor and trimmed it from the frame where 0mph and 1mph are morphed and the same for 59mph and 60. So this makes it a true 0-60 and it came in at 3.87 seconds

without any tools or data loggers seems pretty close to 3.7 but still not exactly what they advertise. Mind you, I'm on 21's which have tires about 50% vs the brand new 19's with Michelin's so might be a tiny bit of slip.
 
Last edited:
went out last night and did a quick 0-60 pull figured if I can stopwatch the video I can get a close estimate. Think there was about 285 mile range left on 370 so puts me just under 80%

have a look...

https://photos.app.goo.gl/oEUaMTqSYP8gZd2p9

I popped this in to the video editor and trimmed it from the frame where 0mph and 1mph are morphed and the same for 59mph and 60. So this makes it a true 0-60 and it came in at 3.87 seconds

without any tools or data loggers seems pretty close to 3.7 but still not exactly what they advertise. Mind you, I'm on 21's which have tires about 50% vs the brand new 19's with Michelin's so might be a tiny bit of slip.
0-1 to 0-60 means you are missing that first mile-per-hour. The initial acceleration from my data over the first foot or so is 3 m/s/s. 1 mph is 0.44 m/s, so using an online calculator it takes 0.147 seconds to reach 1 mph at 3 m/s/s acceleration, so your 0-60 time comes in at 4.02s or 3.57s 0-60 taking into account 1ft rollout. Almost identical to my car, within 0.1s at least and also slower than my 100D was. This could be a Raven-wide issue. Certainly not achieving their claim of higher power and torque and faster 0-60 times. They need to get this fixed asap IMHO.
 
Last edited:
0-1 to 0-60 means you are missing that first mile-per-hour. The initial acceleration from my data over the first foot or so is 3 m/s/s. 1 mph is 0.44 m/s, so using an online calculator it takes 0.147 seconds to reach 1 mph at 3 m/s/s acceleration, so your 0-60 time comes in at 4.02s or 3.57s 0-60 taking into account 1ft rollout. Almost identical to my car, within 0.1s at least and also slower than my 100D was. This could be a Raven-wide issue. Certainly not achieving their claim of higher power and torque and fast 0-60 times. They need to get this fixed asap.


So based on your analysis of my very very limited data, taking in to consideration all of the data you've collected and how much you've spent on calculations are you of the opinion that my car is also in line with advertised acceleration?

Wonder if there is any other way to accurately gauge this without buying a draggy
 
  • Funny
Reactions: bhzmark
So based on your analysis of my very very limited data, taking in to consideration all of the data you've collected and how much you've spent on calculations are you of the opinion that my car is also in line with advertised acceleration?

Wonder if there is any other way to accurately gauge this without buying a draggy
I don't think Dragy would be any more accurate and certainly doesn't give an accurate 1ft rollout correction because it uses GPS, with insufficient resolution to see what's going on in the critical first foot of motion. In my opinion it appears that your car, like mine, is NOT in line IF Tesla's spec of 0-60 is from a dead stop. If it's a 1ft rollout figure then both our cars meet their spec but their claim of faster 0-60, higher power and higher torque does not appear to be true, at least so far. Furthermore, both of our cars appear to be slower than my 100D.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: bhzmark
Wonder if there is any other way to accurately gauge this without buying a draggy

No. Get a Dragy. It is cheap and accurate.

Google to see how other people have confirmed with real data comparisons how accurate it is. Ignore people who speculate it isn't accurate solely based on their ignorance of 10Hz GPS resolution.
 
Point I'm making is that while I have no doubt Dragy is accurate from a dead stop to 60, 1/8 mile 1/4 mile etc (GPS resolution has no significant effect in this case), where it does matter is in determining the all-important time to roll that first foot. Does it use L1C or L2C GPS receivers? Alternatively, does it use an accelerometer to determine initial acceleration?
 
Last edited:
From dead stop. I think I’ve got a fluke 100D that is utilizing full uncorked power. I’ve done a powertools run 10x on a straight road, 20celcius, battery 90%. Fluctuated between 3.61 and 3.68.

Also running 21” arachnids w/90% tread so lighter rims.
I weigh 180lbs and I took out the extra power adapters bag. Lol. Also have sunroof option.

Previous to uncork, runs were in the 4.25-4.32 range.
 
Very nice! I think the fastest run I had with my 100D was a 3.625 but I was using "tracking" and doing my own analysis as to when the car first starts moving. Were you using tracking or the "0-60" function? For some reason I've never been able to get that feature to work.
 
I believe there are standalone apps but I've never tried them and I don't know how accurate they would be.

I'll be interested to hear how your test drive of the LR Raven went. Listen for traction control struggling to keep the tires gripping the first 20mph or so.

The following graphs compare my Raven LR with my 2018 100D. The Raven is slower to about 25 mph (despite 69% SOC cold battery for the 100D vs 85% for the Raven with warmed battery fresh off SuperCharger), then it catches up but struggles as you approach 60mph supposedly due to the lower peak power (more efficient drivetrain doesn't do enough to offset this power loss). View attachment 459679 View attachment 459680 View attachment 459681
Drove LR today, did not notice a difference with a Dec'18100D that got totalled 2 weeks ago. Maybe because it was not back to back.
 
I popped this in to the video editor and trimmed it from the frame where 0mph and 1mph are morphed and the same for 59mph and 60. So this makes it a true 0-60 and it came in at 3.87 seconds

without any tools or data loggers seems pretty close to 3.7 but still not exactly what they advertise. Mind you, I'm on 21's which have tires about 50% vs the brand new 19's with Michelin's so might be a tiny bit of slip.

You'd need to measure how many frames from the 0-1 change to the 60-61 change. However, I don't think the CID speedometer is going to be accurate enough for 0-60 times. There is significant filtering on the data before it is displayed. Granted, if the delay caused is the same at 0 as it is at 60, then it could be used, but I don't know what filter algorithm is used, so maybe not.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DavidO
Point I'm making is that while I have no doubt Dragy is accurate from a dead stop to 60, 1/8 mile 1/4 mile etc (GPS resolution has no significant effect in this case), where it does matter is in determining the all-important time to roll that first foot. Does it use L1C or L2C GPS receivers? Alternatively, does it use an accelerometer to determine initial acceleration?

The dragy uses a technique called integrated doppler(carrier phase) to essentially count the number of gps carrier wavelengths between the start and finish. Carrier phase can be measured to about 1% accuracy of the 20 cm wavelength.This is also what the vbox uses, and this is the description that they gives for their distance accuracy.



Distance
GPS satellites are equipped with an atomic clock, which ensures timing stability to less than one-millionth of a second. By integrating Doppler-derived speed with this level of time signal reliability, an extraordinarily accurate distance measurement is achieved.



There are a number of tests which we have carried out over the years to verify and improve our measurement algorithms for applications in vehicle testing.

2_(1).jpg

One such test is to place two reflective strips on the road at a known distance apart. Using a laser sensor connected to the trigger input of a VBOX, the vehicle is then driven between these two points a number of times, and the distances compared. In such tests, the VBOX 3i will always be within 3cm in 1000m, which is about the same as the measurement uncertainty due to the slight deviation of the vehicle during the driving.

Accelerometers are used but in a kalman filter to basically interpolate between the 0.1 second spacing of the gps data. The kalman filter uses the gps data to calibrate the accelerometers.
 
Last edited: