lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
That will likely be overall available system power (albeit with a better name than that) when we make a complete transition to BeV.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Stop the Press! Tesla announces REAL HP numbers for P85D and P90L
- Thread starter Matias
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Driving Dynamics Model S
I'm not sure I have caught everything in this thread but here are my thoughts.
1) Tesla didn't lie but it was deceptive. It reminds me of the 60's when horsepower was measured with no air filter and no exhaust.
2) A lot of people on this thread think HP is almost everything. I suggest they compare two cars with everything the same except one has a narrow peaky HP curve and the other a broad one. Performance and drivability is about a lot more than HP.
3) The performance numbers are the meaningful ones and what people should look to in deciding if they are upset. If it makes them on 1HP then more power to Tesla.
4) People seem surprised about the lower performance at higher speeds and blame it on the HP difference. An electric motor is different from an ICE and a car could easily meet the HP number at lower RPM and be no faster at high RPM if paired to a single speed gearbox.
5) Finally, the Hellcat will beat a P90DL if properly driven with proper tires. However, why not compare apples to apples. Pick a gear. I'm generous; pick any single gear you like on the Hellcat. Now race a P90DL. One reason a P90DL isn't quicker at higher speeds is gearing.
In summary I think the HP numbers originally published were misleading but HP is a small part of the equation. I am surprised that people expected a bigger high speed acceleration difference considering the present single speed gearbox. Just my thoughts.
- - - Updated - - -
Some additional thoughts:
I suspect the engineer who designed the motor was very proud that it was an X HP motor. That's how motors are sold when they are sold stand alone. He probably figured it allowed for a lot more low end torque so the high HP rating was nice even if the battery couldn't supply full current. Publishing the stand alone motor HP rating is deceptive even if technically correct since it wasn't pointed out that it was motor max HP and not system HP. However, the larger motor isn't useless because performance is about more than HP. The low end torque increase over a smaller motor means quicker acceleration off the line.
1) Tesla didn't lie but it was deceptive. It reminds me of the 60's when horsepower was measured with no air filter and no exhaust.
2) A lot of people on this thread think HP is almost everything. I suggest they compare two cars with everything the same except one has a narrow peaky HP curve and the other a broad one. Performance and drivability is about a lot more than HP.
3) The performance numbers are the meaningful ones and what people should look to in deciding if they are upset. If it makes them on 1HP then more power to Tesla.
4) People seem surprised about the lower performance at higher speeds and blame it on the HP difference. An electric motor is different from an ICE and a car could easily meet the HP number at lower RPM and be no faster at high RPM if paired to a single speed gearbox.
5) Finally, the Hellcat will beat a P90DL if properly driven with proper tires. However, why not compare apples to apples. Pick a gear. I'm generous; pick any single gear you like on the Hellcat. Now race a P90DL. One reason a P90DL isn't quicker at higher speeds is gearing.
In summary I think the HP numbers originally published were misleading but HP is a small part of the equation. I am surprised that people expected a bigger high speed acceleration difference considering the present single speed gearbox. Just my thoughts.
- - - Updated - - -
Some additional thoughts:
I suspect the engineer who designed the motor was very proud that it was an X HP motor. That's how motors are sold when they are sold stand alone. He probably figured it allowed for a lot more low end torque so the high HP rating was nice even if the battery couldn't supply full current. Publishing the stand alone motor HP rating is deceptive even if technically correct since it wasn't pointed out that it was motor max HP and not system HP. However, the larger motor isn't useless because performance is about more than HP. The low end torque increase over a smaller motor means quicker acceleration off the line.
sillydriver
Member
That's true -- and maybe I would get 10% more milage at constant 65 than over my historical pattern -- but 85Kwh is a number repeated over and over by Tesla -- even printed in chromium on the back of my car -- and it is literally, measurably false for all owners. Or at least it is if 0% and 100% are interpreted to mean 'empty' and 'full' respectively. Not good.
Ok. Just curious, when did you buy? I bought well before these threads/discussion had started of any detectable volume. The narrative then was the car has 691hp.
Norway's largest news site have this on the first page now.
Forsiden - VG
http://www.vg.no/forbruker/bil-baat...d-700-hk-men-bilen-har-kun-469-hk/a/23553701/
Google translate:
Google Oversetter
Forsiden - VG
http://www.vg.no/forbruker/bil-baat...d-700-hk-men-bilen-har-kun-469-hk/a/23553701/
Google translate:
Google Oversetter
I suspect you're very close to reality Lola. The shape of the power & torque curves and lack of multi-speed transmission will mean that an EV will, for a certain range of speeds, significantly outperform an ICE with the same peak HP. And an EV of a certain shaft HP will deliver more power to the wheels than an ICE with the same HP.
So how does Tesla convey this? The 463 number really undersells what the vehicle can do. Yet, explaining complex concepts to large groups simply doesn't work.
No, it is a 469 hp car. Horesepower (hp) is a unit of measurement of power - it is not a unit of measurement of "experience".
What you experience is acceleration. The experienced acceleration is the result of many factors.
- - - Updated - - -
I do not see the problem. Tesla is also giving the 0-60 mph figure, so everybody sees, that it can accelerate quick.
I actually see it as a pro for electric vehicles in general. People will realize that you do not need 700 hp for awesome 0-60 mph performance because it is an electric vehicle. It will help people to realize that electric vehicles are the more awesome cars.
Last edited:
The point is they dropped the 463 number. Not mentioned. Not in the small print. Nowhere. Funny how that number was eliminated but the 691 was included, amplified, marketed. One would not see that as poor luck, or weak communications due to the logical outcome of comparing the car against other 600-700hp cars (which is exactly what happened.)
Last edited:
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
I think WCP's comment is most telling.
Tesla did sing the hp number from the highest hill.
People did think the car was super special because of that number.
It comes down to risk/reward for me. How does Tesla deal with the fall out and does that fall out eventually outweigh the positive press and exposure garnered by that high hp number?
Tesla did sing the hp number from the highest hill.
People did think the car was super special because of that number.
It comes down to risk/reward for me. How does Tesla deal with the fall out and does that fall out eventually outweigh the positive press and exposure garnered by that high hp number?
Tesla Motors uses Motor Trend as a authority at the bottom of the order page:
and the reason for selecting Motor Trend as the authority Tesla uses on the order page is the first review of the P85D
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/alternative/1411_2015_tesla_model_s_p85d_first_test/
As Tesla have chosen to use Motor Trend as a authority it is interesting to study the 'data card' for the P85D from Motor Trend
and the reason for selecting Motor Trend as the authority Tesla uses on the order page is the first review of the P85D
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/alternative/1411_2015_tesla_model_s_p85d_first_test/
As Tesla have chosen to use Motor Trend as a authority it is interesting to study the 'data card' for the P85D from Motor Trend
Spent a little bit of time going back down memory lane browsing through history of posts, emails, notes, etc from around the D launch last year.
I'll give @WarpedOne some credit for one thing. Definitely got lucky with this one:
Guessed the correct no-rollout 0-60 time a week before the launch event when a few photos of a P85D logo emerged and we weren't even 100% sure what the details were.
And at the time it also appeared @WarpedOne was one of the only two, maybe three people that were talking about battery power limitations at that time. However, everyone, including him (not intentionally singling out, just saying), appears to have conceded (around that time) that they didn't know what, if anything, Tesla may have done to the P85D pack to make it output so much more power. You'll be hard pressed to find much info that goes with people understanding that the car didn't produce 691 HP.
Even in the thread I started on the subject ( P85D Power draw numbers do not add up... ) a couple of days after the launch event I had guessed that Tesla upgraded some components in the P85D packs to allow the higher discharge rates, as I was mainly focused on the main pack fuse. Unfortunately this was prior to me testing cells extensively and better understanding their specs. At the time I had guessed that the internal resistance must be lower than the NCR18650B type cells. No dice there (it's nearly identical).
Looking back through some of my emails with Tesla at the time it's quite obvious that Tesla was selling this as a 691 HP car. No qualifiers. Surprisingly, and I completely forgot about it until recently, I specifically asked the question of how they were able to get so much more power out of the battery pack to handle the 691 HP power output (shortly after starting my thread). The person who responded answered with, "The P85D doesn't use the same exact battery pack as the P85. [...] [It has one] specifically for dual motor vehicles." OK then, that settled it. They must have upgraded the battery pack components as originally guessed.
I actually have some of my handwritten notes in a notebook from when I had some phone conversations with people at Tesla. I usually just keep going down the page with little notes during calls, and on more than one occasion the "691 HP" note appears, sometimes circled a few times indicated I spent a bit of time on the topic during the call.
*shrugs*
Looking at things like @lolachampcar above, I've tried to figure this out myself... and honestly, I can't come up with any reason that excuses the omission of the actual 463 HP number. If it were an asterisked footnote at launch time I think they probably would have sold a few less cars, but this issue wouldn't exist at all because the real number would have been there in the specs. The only conceivable reason to withhold that info and mask it with a less realistic number that is not achievable by the car would be to boost sales at the expense and gamble of customers figuring out the truth on their own later and whatever consequences go with that. I have to believe that Tesla as a company was smart enough to realize that this marketing tactic would not be without consequence down the road. Even if it never goes to court and/or Tesla never loses any money on the issue directly (seems unlikely...) they've definitely lost the loyalty of some of their best customers (and, at the same the word-of-mouth promotion that goes with it) as a result of this issues and closely related issues. The monetary cost of that is unknown, but I know of at least a few sales that didn't happen as a direct result of how Tesla has handled this issue and others over the past year... and that's just ones that I know of personally.
In the end, hindsight tells me that Tesla would have been much better off in the long term if they had simply included a few footnotes: The 463 HP battery power limitation; with 1-ft rollout; actual EPA rated range may be lower; s/several months/next year/g (re: autopilot).
I'll give @WarpedOne some credit for one thing. Definitely got lucky with this one:
Guessed the correct no-rollout 0-60 time a week before the launch event when a few photos of a P85D logo emerged and we weren't even 100% sure what the details were.
And at the time it also appeared @WarpedOne was one of the only two, maybe three people that were talking about battery power limitations at that time. However, everyone, including him (not intentionally singling out, just saying), appears to have conceded (around that time) that they didn't know what, if anything, Tesla may have done to the P85D pack to make it output so much more power. You'll be hard pressed to find much info that goes with people understanding that the car didn't produce 691 HP.
Even in the thread I started on the subject ( P85D Power draw numbers do not add up... ) a couple of days after the launch event I had guessed that Tesla upgraded some components in the P85D packs to allow the higher discharge rates, as I was mainly focused on the main pack fuse. Unfortunately this was prior to me testing cells extensively and better understanding their specs. At the time I had guessed that the internal resistance must be lower than the NCR18650B type cells. No dice there (it's nearly identical).
Looking back through some of my emails with Tesla at the time it's quite obvious that Tesla was selling this as a 691 HP car. No qualifiers. Surprisingly, and I completely forgot about it until recently, I specifically asked the question of how they were able to get so much more power out of the battery pack to handle the 691 HP power output (shortly after starting my thread). The person who responded answered with, "The P85D doesn't use the same exact battery pack as the P85. [...] [It has one] specifically for dual motor vehicles." OK then, that settled it. They must have upgraded the battery pack components as originally guessed.
I actually have some of my handwritten notes in a notebook from when I had some phone conversations with people at Tesla. I usually just keep going down the page with little notes during calls, and on more than one occasion the "691 HP" note appears, sometimes circled a few times indicated I spent a bit of time on the topic during the call.
*shrugs*
Looking at things like @lolachampcar above, I've tried to figure this out myself... and honestly, I can't come up with any reason that excuses the omission of the actual 463 HP number. If it were an asterisked footnote at launch time I think they probably would have sold a few less cars, but this issue wouldn't exist at all because the real number would have been there in the specs. The only conceivable reason to withhold that info and mask it with a less realistic number that is not achievable by the car would be to boost sales at the expense and gamble of customers figuring out the truth on their own later and whatever consequences go with that. I have to believe that Tesla as a company was smart enough to realize that this marketing tactic would not be without consequence down the road. Even if it never goes to court and/or Tesla never loses any money on the issue directly (seems unlikely...) they've definitely lost the loyalty of some of their best customers (and, at the same the word-of-mouth promotion that goes with it) as a result of this issues and closely related issues. The monetary cost of that is unknown, but I know of at least a few sales that didn't happen as a direct result of how Tesla has handled this issue and others over the past year... and that's just ones that I know of personally.
In the end, hindsight tells me that Tesla would have been much better off in the long term if they had simply included a few footnotes: The 463 HP battery power limitation; with 1-ft rollout; actual EPA rated range may be lower; s/several months/next year/g (re: autopilot).
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Speaking personally, not being forthright from the start has always cost me more longer term than any short term gains. It's hard to do but usually pays off in the long run.
My two cents
1. 691hp is the combination of the max output of the front motor and rear motor. It was always showed as so on the website, and was strictly speaking not a lie but, for general public, misleading. For people who know about electric motor, it is quite obvious that the P85/90D can not deliver that amount of hp, and they also know it is irrelevant to the performance that, at legal speed, the model S can deliver. For general public, the model S certainly meets their concept and perception of power of a 691hp car. That being said, Tesla motor is guilty of intentionality playing with these concepts to promot the product. But hey, no one losses nothing in terms of performance or awesomeness of the car, it is just now more people know about how electric motor works.
2. Rated range. It is just as the listed MPG on every other car, you will never achieve it unless you drive the car under controlled conditions. This does not make the listed figure a lie. So there is that.
3. The same goes to KWh. The battery has 85KWh, which is a fact under certain conditions. But you can never have all of the 85KWh. In fact being able to use 76 out of the 85 under various conditions in real life is already quite good. So just treat it like you are buying a 128G iPhone, and you can never use all of the 128G.
I can see why these issues would be deal breakers to some people; I also think tesla is not as perfect as what they are trying to make people think; plus in Hong Kong the after sale service is not nearly as good as that in US, and for now not quite acceptable. But despite all these, I still am very happy that I chose model S, and I'll never go back to ICE no matter what.
1. 691hp is the combination of the max output of the front motor and rear motor. It was always showed as so on the website, and was strictly speaking not a lie but, for general public, misleading. For people who know about electric motor, it is quite obvious that the P85/90D can not deliver that amount of hp, and they also know it is irrelevant to the performance that, at legal speed, the model S can deliver. For general public, the model S certainly meets their concept and perception of power of a 691hp car. That being said, Tesla motor is guilty of intentionality playing with these concepts to promot the product. But hey, no one losses nothing in terms of performance or awesomeness of the car, it is just now more people know about how electric motor works.
2. Rated range. It is just as the listed MPG on every other car, you will never achieve it unless you drive the car under controlled conditions. This does not make the listed figure a lie. So there is that.
3. The same goes to KWh. The battery has 85KWh, which is a fact under certain conditions. But you can never have all of the 85KWh. In fact being able to use 76 out of the 85 under various conditions in real life is already quite good. So just treat it like you are buying a 128G iPhone, and you can never use all of the 128G.
I can see why these issues would be deal breakers to some people; I also think tesla is not as perfect as what they are trying to make people think; plus in Hong Kong the after sale service is not nearly as good as that in US, and for now not quite acceptable. But despite all these, I still am very happy that I chose model S, and I'll never go back to ICE no matter what.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Jian,
Your rated range comment is 100% on target for every electric powered thing I had purchased right up until I got my first MS. Shortly after picking up my first P85 I grabbed a buddy and headed down to the Miami store. The trip was several hundred miles of mostly interstate at 70-75 mph in traffic with the AC running mixed in with a little South Beach stop and go. I got back home later that night and was almost amazed to see that my average power consumption was around 290 KW-Hr/mile and I made rated range. I was just driving the car like a car without regard to consumption yet it did exactly what Tesla said it would do. I was amazed. An electric vehicle manufacturer that actually delivered exactly what they said they would. That was my first experience with Tesla. My P+ and my wife's S85 all did the same thing; they made rated range. It has only been with the advent of the P85D that I am no longer capable of making rated range yet my driving has not changed. I've gone from a lifetime average of high 28x WHr/mile to 320 yet my driving stile has remained the same.
My experience did not start out like your #2 but has migrated there.
Your rated range comment is 100% on target for every electric powered thing I had purchased right up until I got my first MS. Shortly after picking up my first P85 I grabbed a buddy and headed down to the Miami store. The trip was several hundred miles of mostly interstate at 70-75 mph in traffic with the AC running mixed in with a little South Beach stop and go. I got back home later that night and was almost amazed to see that my average power consumption was around 290 KW-Hr/mile and I made rated range. I was just driving the car like a car without regard to consumption yet it did exactly what Tesla said it would do. I was amazed. An electric vehicle manufacturer that actually delivered exactly what they said they would. That was my first experience with Tesla. My P+ and my wife's S85 all did the same thing; they made rated range. It has only been with the advent of the P85D that I am no longer capable of making rated range yet my driving has not changed. I've gone from a lifetime average of high 28x WHr/mile to 320 yet my driving stile has remained the same.
My experience did not start out like your #2 but has migrated there.
From my experience driving around or below 60mph is needed to make the US rated range numbers. Anyhting above that and its not remotely possible. 285miles@65mph is utopia in my car.
- - - Updated - - -
And according to the consumer council in norway more than 80 owners have now officially complained about this both to Tesla and to the council. Tesla has promised a response to the council by the 1st of december after meeting with them this week.
I assume more owners will follow suit here if the media keeps up the attention level here. They are smelling blood now.......
Jian, interesting post. With the apparent knowledge you have for how a electric car works, how would you expect a non-battery limited 691 hp electric car to behave? Would it be identical to a 463 hp battery limited electric car or where would it differ in characteristics?
A lie by omission is still a lie. After searching my notes, my rep actually went over the top to highlight the 691 number, and it did matter to our purchase. Not a little bit. We may have bought the Tesla, but we would have not gone for the P. And hypothetically, we may not have purchased one at all....
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing