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

"Secret Sauce" power upgrade coming - beyond Ludicrous

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
As I said above, the filmed acceleration does not seem to be significantly different than a ludicrous car.
Best to check my arithmetic, but 0 to 60 mph in 2.8 seconds is almost one G, so the filmed portion seems quite a bit less than ludicrous.

Can you post the speeds at exactly 2,3, and 4 seconds into the acceleration ? I don't know how to see individual frames.
 
Last edited:
Until I see and hear a little more, I'm not ready to fully commit one way on the other on this.

There is indication that it could be a hoax and there is indication that it could be on the up and up.

After thinking it over a little more, no matter how "compelling" the indication that it is straight up is, .... so far, for me, well while it's still not getting and "F" just yet, it's not getting more than a "C" to a "C minus" on the smell test right now. And I have a pretty keen sense of smell when it comes to things such as this.

They're going to have to give me a little bit more than "special sauce" here. And that name certainly didn't help with credibility.

I can't make a meal off of "sauce". I need a little more. Show me some numbers. vBox, dash gauges, give me something other than just some guy's moans and grunts of enthusiasm.
 
Last edited:
Best to check my arithmetic, but 0 to 60 mph in 2.8 seconds is almost one G, so the filmed portion seems quite a bit less than ludicrous.

Can you post the speeds at exactly 2,3, and 4 seconds into the acceleration ? I don't know how to see individual frames.

I didn't do timing, just power. Just slow it down to .25 in youtube.

FYI I have a power limited ideal quarter simulator for the Model S. If I plug in max acceleration as 1.67G and keep power the same, then I get slightly under 2.5s to 60. 1.67G's are held for ~.7s up to ~25mph, falling to 1G at ~1.2s and ~39mph. This seems to pass through the BS filter, as that guy would have to at least being doing some fancy integral math to get the two figures to BS about ;)
 
Within the comments on YouTube the owner of the Tesla responded to a question with - if it makes it to production it would be late summer. Also a week or so back on his Twitter feed he had a loaner Tesla for 3 days suggesting this wasn't just a software update - probably a new battery and or other terminal upgrades etc.
 
I downloaded the video and watched it with VLC 0.25x speed. That still leaves room for error but it was the best I could do for now

At 5:42, 13 mph
At 5:43, 35 mph
At 5:44, 51 mph

So over these two seconds,
the first second was 9.83 meters per second per second acceleration, equal to 1 G
the second second was 7.15 meters per second per second acceleration, equal to 0.73 G

Addendum:
I found frame by frame, and the video is encoded at 30 fps
Starting from 3 mph and advancing 15 frames (0.5 second) showed 16 mph, thus 1.2 G

I christen this "sedate roller coaster" speed ;-)
 
Last edited:
Acceleration of ONE G is ~ 9.8 meters per second per second, right ?
I wondered about the claim of 1.67 G

It's possible they contrived this figure as the total acceleration felt by the driver, including the 1.0g downward pull from gravity. To get to 1.67g net, you need 1.0g downward + 1.34g horizontal acceleration. (Thank you Pythagoras.) This still stretches the limits of what ordinary road tires are capable of; I thought the traction limit was around 1.1g, but with super-sticky tires it might be possible. Sustained 1.34g forward acceleration would take you from 0-60mph in just a shade over 2 seconds. Wheee!!!

Then again, 1.67g of horizontal acceleration would take you from 0-60mph in about 1.64 seconds. And for reference, top fuel dragsters can go 0-100mph in 0.8 seconds, and 0-60mph in <0.5 seconds. Somehow I don't think this will be street-legal anytime soon :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: LargeHamCollider
It's possible they contrived this figure as the total acceleration felt by the driver, including the 1.0g downward pull from gravity. To get to 1.67g net, you need 1.0g downward + 1.34g horizontal acceleration. (Thank you Pythagoras.) This still stretches the limits of what ordinary road tires are capable of; I thought the traction limit was around 1.1g, but with super-sticky tires it might be possible. Sustained 1.34g forward acceleration would take you from 0-60mph in just a shade over 2 seconds. Wheee!!!

Then again, 1.67g of horizontal acceleration would take you from 0-60mph in about 1.64 seconds. And for reference, top fuel dragsters can go 0-100mph in 0.8 seconds, and 0-60mph in <0.5 seconds. Somehow I don't think this will be street-legal anytime soon :)

LOL you always have 1G downard. No one would/should be referring to the vector of acceleration and gravity, that would be retarded. And no one said 1.67 continuous. See my post above. As for "street-legal", there's no law that limits torque.
 
LOL you always have 1G downard. No one would/should be referring to the vector of acceleration and gravity, that would be retarded. And no one said 1.67 continuous. See my post above. As for "street-legal", there's no law that limits torque.

Hence my use of the word "contrived". Even 1.67g instantaneous is not possible with normal road tires; the traction limit is 1.1-1.2g for any commercially available road tires. You'd need your tires to physically melt on the road to provide higher traction that this, and I don't think _that_ would be street-legal :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: LargeHamCollider
Hence my use of the word "contrived". Even 1.67g instantaneous is not possible with normal road tires; the traction limit is 1.1-1.2g for any commercially available road tires. You'd need your tires to physically melt on the road to provide higher traction that this, and I don't think _that_ would be street-legal :)

How are you so sure? Because no ICE car has achieved this feat? Or because someone has done the appropriate coefficient of friction calculation? I do have one datapoint, and that is 1.1G's is NOT maxing out traction even with the MXM4's. Of course for rubber, the highest mu is achieved with some amount of longitudinal slip. If Model S's were achieving this small amount of slip through 60, we would all know.. Right now, the torque limits are pre-programmed. It's not like an ICE where the engine does what it can.
 
How are you so sure? Because no ICE car has achieved this feat? Or because someone has done the appropriate coefficient of friction calculation? I do have one datapoint, and that is 1.1G's is NOT maxing out traction even with the MXM4's. Of course for rubber, the highest mu is achieved with some amount of longitudinal slip. If Model S's were achieving this small amount of slip through 60, we would all know.. Right now, the torque limits are pre-programmed. It's not like an ICE where the engine does what it can.

Disable traction control in the Model S and you can spin the wheels all you want from 0-20mph. The electric motors have more than enough torque; the limiting factor is friction. If 1.67G's were physically possible with the S's tires, someone would have already done it and smashed the traction-controlled 0-60 times. Since no one has done it, the implication is that the wheels aren't capable of it, because the motors surely are.

Or you could google "tire road friction" and find countless empirical measurements around 1.0 for the maximum tire-road coefficient of friction, which directly corresponds to the maximum horizontal acceleration. (Coefficient of friction 1.0 -> 1.0g max acceleration.) Using very sticky tires, the P90DL has managed ~1.1g for fractions of a second, which is highly impressive. 1.67g is simply not in the realm of possibility for currently used road tire materials.
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: donauker
Disable traction control in the Model S and you can spin the wheels all you want from 0-20mph. The electric motors have more than enough torque; the limiting factor is friction. If 1.67G's were physically possible with the S's tires, someone would have already done it and smashed the traction-controlled 0-60 times. Since no one has done it, the implication is that the wheels aren't capable of it, because the motors surely are.
The challenge is to hold torque at exactly the right slip ratio, not to light up the tires. This is much more complicated than turning off traction control.
Or you could google "tire road friction" and find countless empirical measurements around 1.0 for the maximum tire-road coefficient of friction, which directly corresponds to the maximum horizontal acceleration. (Coefficient of friction 1.0 -> 1.0g max acceleration.) Using very sticky tires, the P90DL has managed ~1.1g for fractions of a second, which is highly impressive. 1.67g is simply not in the realm of possibility for currently used road tire materials.

But my tires are crap all seasons and I'm getting over 1G. A nice set of sticky summer rubber should significantly higher. By how much is the question.
 
For what it's worth, I've heard from many individuals that Tesla is very firm about their NDA's. They control the release of information and it's definitely not done through bloggers and VC's, because they are concerned with the messaging that accompanies such a release. Based on my knowledge of how they approach information release, this wasn't a purposeful leak.

If that's true, then either a) this guy is indeed some kind of tester and just completely blasted his NDA, knowing that his friend was going to post a video blog entry about this, or b) he's just got simple ludicrous mode and oversold his rather excitable friend the easter egg in hopes of boosting his followers and ego.

My money's on b).
 
For what it's worth, I've heard from many individuals that Tesla is very firm about their NDA's. They control the release of information and it's definitely not done through bloggers and VC's, because they are concerned with the messaging that accompanies such a release. Based on my knowledge of how they approach information release, this wasn't a purposeful leak.

If that's true, then either a) this guy is indeed some kind of tester and just completely blasted his NDA, knowing that his friend was going to post a video blog entry about this, or b) he's just got simple ludicrous mode and oversold his rather excitable friend the easter egg in hopes of boosting his followers and ego.

My money's on b).
Single best explanation yet!

Also, based on Kevin Bacon's 6 degrees of separation theorem, couldn't someone who knows someone just call him? Or is this multi-page thread simply more fun?