Sport vs. Non-Sport the same motor?

[vfx]

I hope they offer it ... Maybe a few years from now ....

Time heals all wounds. With enough years and people off to new things they could announce a Sport upgrade for $2K. It may just be a firmware change but I'm sure there would be theater involved with opening up the PEM (for cleaning) and a new ($5) widget installed. Maybe even a new VDS screen or button to go with it. 5 years from now no one will care. Maybe even sooner. Tesla did not seem to have a problem doing a bait and switch on pricing and angering customers in the past.

 

[user497]

I also believe we landed a man on the moon... Smorgasbord, I thought the 2.0 and 2.5 non-sport motors where the same and the 2.0 and 2.5 Sport motors were also the same. Are we now saying that in addition to sport vs. non-sport differences there may be differences between 2.0 and 2.5? My understanding was that the 2.5 changes were mostly cosmetic.

 

[Lloyd]

Why not locate the differences between the sport and non-sport firmware? Perhaps an aftermarket reprogramming could be accomplished much like Dinan does with BMW, or Hypertech does with other domestic models!!

 

[smorgasbord]

Are we now saying that in addition to sport vs. non-sport differences there may be differences between 2.0 and 2.5?

That's the great thing about conspiracies - you don't have to be right. Any corrections/expansions to what you say are just more fodder for the conspiracy. ;^)

The first paragraph of the 2.5 Addendum is:

This addendum describes features that are specific to the Roadster 2.5. It also provides updates and/or corrections that improve the accuracy or quality of the information published in your owner package. All documents included in your owner’s package apply to the Roadster 2.5. However, in cases where information is duplicated, the contents of this addendum supersedes the contents of the other documents in your owners package.

So, the question may remain for some: are the Addendum changes "updates" or "corrections?" Are the 2.5 motor specs corrections to what was published for 2.0, or was the motor actually updated? Inquiring minds want to know!

The second paragraph is:
All specifications and descriptions are accurate at the time of printing. Because improvement is an ongoing goal at Tesla Motors, we reserve the right to make changes at any time, without notice and without obligation.

Here's more for conspiracy buffs: The Part Number for the Addendum is "??????? Rev AA".

Where's the Long Form Addendum with a correct part number? ;^)

 

[Doug_G]

RAt one point I considered all the 2.x motors are made the same and there is some binning after testing, but that would imply more variation in the manufacturing process than would likely be considered acceptable.

Have you ever tried to wind a coil? It's only stable for two layers. After the second layer it starts jumbling up no matter how hard you try. Human-wound coils definitely do achieve greater packing density. Machine winders just go back and forth and let it jumble up as it will. If a human feeds the wire he/she can linger on low areas and skip through high areas.

 

[TEG]

This thread seems like deja-vu recently.
I think we dug up all sorts of quotes about "hand-wound stator" in the past already, and debated all this before.

11-09-2009
Racer.com: Charged Up

I asked the sales rep about {the sport motor} at the Seattle store and he assured me that the motor was hand wound with additional coils.

Magazine reviews!

I was told by Dan Myggen that the key difference is that the Sport motor is hand-wound to get a higher winding density. The firmware difference adjusts the control electronics to take best advantage of the better motor characteristics.

Tesla Roadster Sport: Charged up - Racer.com

The Roadster Sport's AC induction motor is hand-woven with more copper than the standard car's powerplant, and it produces 40hp more and an extra 19lbft of torque as a result. If you prefer to measure such things in sheer current, the regular motor can draw 800 amps from the car's lithium ion battery at any one time; the Roadster Sport peaks at 1000 amps.

Tesla Motors introduces Roadster Sport | Press Releases | Tesla Motors

It comes with a hand-wound stator and increased winding density for lower resistance and higher peak torque. In addition to Yokohama’s Ultra High Performance tires, the Roadster Sport has improved suspension with adjustable dampers and anti-roll bars that will be tuned to the driver’s preference.

So, the Sport upgrade price wasn't just for the motor torque improvement.
They also had the upgraded adjustable suspension & the upgraded wheels, etc.
( If a firmware update helped with performance it still wouldn't turn a base model into a full 'sport'. )

 

[S-2000 Roadster]

Yes, Tesla originally talked about the "hand wound" motor prior to the actual release of the 2.0 Sport. I'm sure some beancounter ran the numbers and conferred with a tech and decided it would just be cheaper to give everyone the same motor and tweak the output in software. In the technology industry this is common practice even for hardware devices. For example you can purchase a digital photo copier or phone system that has all of the hardware built-in to do many advanced functions but you need to "purchase" an upgrade to unlock those features.

Again, you're comparing apples to oranges.

When the PCB for that photo copier or phone system is assembled, a robot called a "pick and place" glues individual electronic components to the board with solder paste, and then the whole thing is baked to melt the solder and make everything permanent. It's certainly cheaper sometimes to run all the boards with the same parts list, because it takes the robot a fraction of a second to add the unused parts, but it would take a human much longer to set up two separate runs of boards with and without the extra parts. In other words, setup time is human time, but parts placement is robot time, so you can cut the human time in half by simply making all boards identical. Under these conditions, you end up with hardware that is only limited in software for marketing reasons.

In contrast, the Sport motor is not machine made, so I don't see how it could ever be cheaper to hand-wind all of the motors and then software limit them. Human time is still more expensive than robot time. They can probably machine-wind several non-Sport motors in the time it takes to make a single Sport motor.

 

[TEG]

And I recall seeing labels on the side of motors with a "B" (base) or "S" (sport) written on them to identify.
That would be a complete waste of time if they were all the same.

 

[qwk]

And I recall seeing labels on the side of motors with a "B" (base) or "S" (sport) written on them to identify.
That would be a complete waste of time if they were all the same.

This is a good point.

 

[doug]

Have you ever tried to wind a coil? It's only stable for two layers. After the second layer it starts jumbling up no matter how hard you try. Human-wound coils definitely do achieve greater packing density. Machine winders just go back and forth and let it jumble up as it will. If a human feeds the wire he/she can linger on low areas and skip through high areas.

Yeah, I've wound some coils for long pulse magnets. I don't doubt that you can do better with hand wound or at least human guided machine assisted windings. I don't really think that's the point of confusion here.

The question is if the 2.x non-sport motor is the same as the Sport motor. I don't know that Tesla has ever definitively said so. In January 2009 when Tesla first announced the Sport they said the Sport motor had a "hand-wound stator and increased winding density." The "increased" was in reference to the 2008MY Roadsters (drivetrain 1.5), the majority of which had yet to be built or delivered by Jan '09. The marketing language has continued to mention "hand-wound" when promoting the Sport, but I haven't seen them say anywhere that the 2.x non-sport motor is not also hand-wound.

 

[mpt]

Given the production volume of the roadster, would it be feasible to build a machine to wind the motors, or is this a common piece of equipment?

 

[TEG]

...The marketing language has continued to mention "hand-wound" when promoting the Sport, but I haven't seen them say anywhere that the 2.x non-sport motor is not also hand-wound.

Not saying that the non-sport motor is not "hand wound" doesn't mean it is. (Negative soup... I think it is a stretch to suggest they imply it could be by not talking about it.)
But do they ever mention that the non-sport IS hand-wound? I would think if it was, they would have said so somewhere by now. If it is, and they never mentioned it, it would seem disingenuous given how many times and places they brought it up about the sport motor.
My impression is that the times when they mentioned the Sport being hand-wound were in situations where comparisons were being made to the base 2.x models, not to the old 2008 1.5s.
Also, when asked about the differences of the Sport, and "hand-wound stator" was mentioned, it wasn't just coming from a PR / marketing people. We have heard it from all over the place.

Accidental omission, vagueness or intentional misinformation?

I guess the thing to do is ask a more specific question next time:
"Do the 2.0 and 2.5 base model Roadster motors have hand-wound stators like the Sport motor is said to have?"

 

[TEG]

Given the production volume of the roadster, would it be feasible to build a machine to wind the motors, or is this a common piece of equipment?

(Watch the Nissan factory make Leaf motors at 1:00+):
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPKRTQbLs0w&t=1m0s

If you search "Stator Winding Machine" on Youtube you will find bunches.

I think the various statements about "hand-wound stator" were in comparison to a machine-wound stator, so I assume some motors did have a machine-wound stator.
I think the debate boils down to this:
2008 1.5 : Probably machine-wound
2010 2.0 Base: ???
2010 2.0 Sport: Probably hand-wound

This:
http://webarchive.teslamotors.com/display_data/Spec_Roadster_US.pdf
On page 3, only associates hand-wound with the Sport.

On the other hand, Wikipedia seems vague. First they talk about hand-wound stator as a general 2010 change:
Tesla Roadster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Changes for the 2010 model-year cars include:

• An upgraded interior and push-button gear selector, including "executive interior" of exposed carbon fiber and premium leather, and clear-coat carbon fiber body accents.
• Locking, push-button glove box wrapped in leather.
• A centrally mounted video display screen to monitor real-time data, including estimated range, power regenerated, and the number of barrels of oil saved. This convenient screen is visible to the driver and passenger.
• Adjustable, custom-tuned suspension with the option of sport and comfort settings.
• More powerful and immediate heating, ventilation and air-conditioning.
• More efficient motor and hand-wound stator. The new motor generates more kilowatts per amp—more mechanical power—than the predecessor.
• A suite of sound-deadening measures to dramatically reduce noise, vibration and harshness. For instance, engineers added pellets to a member of the chassis side rail. These pellets expand by 5,000 percent during the adhesive heating cycle to eliminate rattles.

• But then they call it out as special for the Sport:
  

  The Sport Model introduced during the 2009 Detroit Auto Show includes a motor with a higher density, hand-wound stator that produces a maximum of 288 hp (215 kW). Both motors are designed for rotational speeds of up to 14,000 rpm, and the regular motor delivers a typical efficiency of 88% or 90%; 80% at peak power.

Some old versions of Wikipedia seemed to talk of firmware change, but it appears that those references are gone from the latest.
Archive: Tesla Motors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

...
Tesla Roadster Sport

Main article: Tesla Roadster
Tesla began taking orders in January 2009 for the Roadster Sport, a higher performance sports car based on the Roadster.
Tesla says the Roadster Sport accelerates from 0–60 mph (97 km/h) in 3.7 seconds, compared with 3.9 seconds for the standard Roadster. MotorTrend was the first third-party independent outlet to verify that time, reporting 0-60 mph in 3.70 seconds. The Roadster Sport price starts at US$128,500 in the United States and €112,000 (excluding VAT) in Europe. Deliveries began in July 2009. The Roadster Sport is the first derivative of Tesla’s proprietary, patented powertrain.
The Sport has been critically acclaimed by some of the leading US car critics including Engineering Editor Kim Reynolds of MotorTrend, whose magazine was the first to independently confirm the Roadster Sport's reported 0-60 mph time of 3.70 seconds. (MotorTrend recorded 0-60 mph of 3.70 seconds; it recorded a quarter-mile test at 12.6 sec @ 102.6 mph.) Reynolds called the acceleration "breathtaking" and said the car confirms "Tesla as an actual car company. ...Tesla is the first maker to crack the EV legitimacy barrier in a century."
According to Tesla's in-store marketing materials and third-party media reports, the Sport has:
• Special firmware that wrings more torque out of the motor, particularly from 20-50 mph
• Adjustable suspension that can be tuned to the driver’s preference, including a sport or a comfort setting.
• Distinct Sport badging on the interior and exterior of the car, including special “S” insignia on the leather seats.
• Lightweight, forged black wheels.
• Yokohama’s Ultra High Performance tires.

An example of hand winding:

(Braiding hair might be good previous experience!)

 

[doug]

I think it is a stretch to suggest they imply it could be by not talking about it.

No, I'm saying the opposite. They imply that it (the 2.x non-sport motor) is not hand-wound by not talking about it. Don't be confused by the negative soup since it's key to meaning.
[not saying something isn't] != [saying something is]

As much as I love Tesla, this kind of ambiguity isn't new. It was implied that the 2008MY cars had a 0-to-60 of 3.9 seconds. This was only discovered not to be the case when a diligent owner did tests and then asked about it. There are other examples.

Anyhow my interest in this is just mild curiosity as to what are the facts. Would be nice to get a definitive answer. For example, what percentage more windings the Sport motor has over the 2.x non-sport motor.

 

[mpt]

I'm liking the outcome of this discussion; next up, is the Sport PEM any different?

 

[TEG]

As much as I love Tesla, this kind of ambiguity isn't new. ... There are other examples.

One big example that pops in my mind were the mixing of base price AND optional features in the same sentence.
We had a flurry of "300 miles for $50K" articles written after people tried to interpret the original S press releases.

Tesla Model S: 300 Mile Range Seven Seat EV Sedan for under $50k | PriusChat

...With a 300-mile range and 45-minute QuickCharge, the $49,900 Model S...

 

[dwegmull]

One big example that pops in my mind were the mixing of base price AND optional features in the same sentence.
We had a flurry of "300 miles for $50K" articles written after people tried to interpret the original S press releases.

Tesla Model S: 300 Mile Range Seven Seat EV Sedan for under $50k | PriusChat

I'm surprised this classic trick still works: look at most advertisement for product that comes in multiple trim (anything from a mobile phone with several possible memory configuration to a new housing development), the add shows a picture of the higher trim model and shows the price of the base model... In some cases, you have to do some serious digging to find a price list detailing the various trims and options.

 

[vfx]

Would think "hand wound" could be duplicated with the proper machine and machine vision.

 

[smorgasbord]

I'm surprised this classic trick still works...

Tesla isn't the only one playing the tax rebate included, optional equipment not included game. Here's the Chevy Volt home page: http://www.chevrolet.com/volt/availability-local-dealership/

And it has this content right now:

But, we're pretty far afield from the real "conspiracy": is the 2.5 non-sport Roadster's motor also hand wound, and if not why is its HP rating exactly the same as the hand wound Sport model's motor?

And while we're at it, is the 2.5's non-Sport motor really 40 HP more powerful than the 2.0 and earlier motor?

 

[bolosky]

And while we're at it, is the 2.5's non-Sport motor really 40 HP more powerful than the 2.0 and earlier motor?

My understanding was that the power limit was never the motor, it was the ESS (battery). My 2.0 non-sport regularly shows > 200 kW when I push it, so I never really believed the 185kW number that was floating around. It does seem to be able to sustain > 200kW for only a few seconds though, then it backs off for some reason.