Stop the Press! Tesla announces REAL HP numbers for P85D and P90L

[P85DEE]

I agree with much of what you say but it doesn't change the fact now that:

• Future buyers will no longer be misled. There is now a combined REAL motor power at the shaft listed.

If you are willing to dig deep enough to find it, and understand what it means, then that may be of benefit.

But if the viewer's eyes are already lit up from the "motor power" numbers listed just above that, then I doubt it will much matter.

Magazines will no longer be able to say it's a 691 or 762 hp car. Why? Because they were misled the same way as the average consumer and there's no way they're going to list 691 when they've been told it's 463.

Told by whom?????? Magazines thrive off of sensationalism. And therefore will probably use the higher number. It's more bombastic.

I'm predicting that they will no more use the 463 number than they would use the RWHP number of an ICE vehicle making 691hp, ...........unless that vehicle were showing unusually low drive train losses, and the RWHP number were exceptionally close to the crank hp numbers. That way, the magazine could then tout, indeed would be quick to tout, that the car was "underrated" from the factory. That's what sells magazines.

People love to read sensationalism, if not outright BS. Why do you think that "Batboy" sold so many copies of the Weekly World News???
Bat Boy (character) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The car magazines will continue to add front and rear motor power, and then in the fine print, or as a side note, "fess" that the car actually makes a "battery limited maximum motor shaft power of 463. .......And the average reader, will have no earthly idea what that means. And will have even less of a clue as to what "motor power" means.

Low hp numbers don't sell magazines. High horsepower numbers, in bold print, and preferably with the car smoking it's tires on the cover of the magazine,.... that's what sells car magazines.

BTW, I'll bet that 463 hp is now low balling it and that is the power listed at the lowest range of the of the daily driving SOC which is 30%.

As far as I'm concerned, Tesla is now doing the right and honest thing for *future* buyers. It will remain to be seen what they do for past buyers. Will the try and make it right or will they simply state they were telling the truth all along and it was up to the consumer to know that it wasn't *REALLY* 691 hp at any point in the drive train....even all the way upstream at the battery

I'm late to the party

Smoke and mirrors. I don't think they've changed a thing. They have not changed their act at all. Had they, well then you would see absolutely no mention whatsoever of "motor power".

Think about it......what would be the need to even mention "motor power"???????? What would be the need????? What does that mean to anybody????? What does that mean to someone comparing ICE vehicle's SAE certified HP ratings to a P85D????

Instead, they have left "motor power" completely in play. Why leave that in there, unless you're trying to "trick" people just as you were "tricking" them before???? Why not eliminate it since you've already seen it to be a "pitfall". Unless you want it to remain a "pitfall"?

 

[sorka]

I see this as black & white (since I'm a programmer, I see everything as Boolean):

Tesla said (last year): P85D - 691 hp (0-60 in 3.2) for $125k or 85D - 417 hp (0-60 in 5.2) for $105k (of course I went for the P85D)

If they said: P85D - 463 hp (0-60 in 3.1) or 85D - 417 hp (0-60 in 4.2) (I could have decided based on real numbers)

Bingo!

- - - Updated - - -

Awesome News!!! Great, I am looking forward to no more posts about people who didn't get their missing horsepower.

Not so fast. Months ago the debate moved from whether the P85D actually made the claimed hp to finally whether Tesla was deceptive in the way they advertised it. Is suspect that debate won't end any time soon.

- - - Updated - - -

It's looking like Ludicrous only adds 69 horsepower, yet according to Motor Trend, it can run 10.9 at 122.xx mph in the quarter vs the P85Ds 11.6 @ approximately 116.xx mph in the quarter.

How can it do that, with only 69 more horsepower??

They can't. Either the the MT car is a ringer or their vbox was badly busted.

 

[lolachampcar]

Dang Flat, I was with you all the way up to "Many of you here seem to suffer from "pathological honesty" while at the same time secretly wanting Tesla to fail. A toxic brew stemming from jealously and your upbringing." . The thing about whiners and such also put me off your message. Going for people's goat has them focusing on hurt feelings and not the points you are making.

 

[cynix]

There has been talk about this in other threads (where I believe someone linked one video where Elon said "691 horsepower"), but ultimately in colloquial speech, I don't think saying "motor horsepower" is necessary.

But the whole argument for Tesla not being deceptive/misleading hinges on the claim that "motor hp" != "hp". I already find it hard to believe that the average Joe would know the difference, and now you're reducing it to "hp" != "hp"?

I have noted that other manufacturers have used similar ratings (like Fisker for example) and they don't append "motor power" to the end (even when written).

And Fisker is certainly a great example of how to run an EV company… (sorry I couldn't resist.)

 

[Super_Popular]

This is not a game. If Telsa fails vehicle manufacturing is done in the USA. Mark my words. China Inc will outbid Google and Apple to buy Tesla if they go bankrupt (pretty easy to do when you know what the other guys are bidding)

I don't think Tesla is going to go bankrupt for that to happen. My guess is that Tesla will sell to either Apple or Google in the next few years.

 

[sorka]

You're proving my point with the Bugatti Veyron people.

Now, let's look at this practically. The Dodge Challenger has a rating of 707HP. The Tesla outperforms it. So, what practical use is HP in discussing performance?

This demonstrates just how badly the P85D is beaten by the Hellcat at any speed except below 30 MPH and even that wouldn't be the case if the Hellcat wasn't traction limited below 30 MPH. Notice how the Hellcat pulls 50% more g's at almost any speed in the 1/4 mile after 3 seconds.

- - - Updated - - -

Is there a difference in performance between the 70D and the P85D? What do you think the difference in performance between a P85D with 463 hp and one with 700 hp would be like?

Come on

If your are really that happy with the performance of the P85D with 463hp, you could have saved you self a lot of money and gotten the 85D and still have a great performing car

The difference is a lot more than 50 hp at 15 MPH which is why the P85D kills the 85D from 0-60. But on the open highway, I agree there isn't that much difference.

And despite what Tesla's claim is, the 85D puts out 376 KW to the P85D's 410 KW (both fully charged). However, at 67% charge, the 85D and P85D are outputting the same 376KW, so unless the P85D is 90% or more, the difference vanishes rapidly on the open highway. From a start, the P85D still kills the 85D because the P85D has more torque i.e. more power at lower RPMPs even if both peak at the same 376KW at 67%.

 

[sillydriver]

Papa Panasonic is still in control of Tesla. Panasonic is controlled by "Japan." "Japan" is controlled by industry. Toyota and Honda one day may wake up from their fuel cell dream and realize Tesla is a real threat

This is not a game. If Telsa fails vehicle manufacturing is done in the USA. Mark my words. China Inc will outbid Google and Apple to buy Tesla if they go bankrupt (pretty easy to do when you know what the other guys are bidding)

I wouldn't worry about Toyota and Honda too much. If you look at the Japanese keiretsu structure, Panasonic (Matsushita) has ties with the Sumitomo group, which is associated with Mazda, their competitor.

But more to the point, I agree with you that Tesla is not in the clear. In 30 years of professional investing in technology companies (before retiring) I've seen promising companies killed off all sorts of ways, and what I've learned is that although there are warning signs, often having to do with cash flow, the underlying cause of death is often unrelated to the issues of most concern before the disaster occurs: they are unknown unknowns, to use that cliche. And having seen all that, my judgment is that the complaints against Tesla hashed out in this thread are not going to metastasize into a serious threat to the company's survival. Nor am as concerned as I think you are that the automotive industry will suddenly gang together to find some way to destroy Tesla, since they haven't yet and the writing has been on the wall for a while in terms of the threat Tesla poses. That industry is not as concentrated as it used to be, and I believe Tucker was killed off at a much earlier and weaker stage of development, having shipped only about 50 cars, I think. It is also difficult for established players in any industry to stop those driving disruptive technologies in the Clayton Christensen sense, which I believe is what Tesla has, although I admit its impact on the auto market is not fully worked out. So I am less worried and more optimistic about the company's prospects than you, although there is always that unknown-unknown irreducible risk.

And Chick Fil A really is delicious.

 

[sorka]

...and many people throughout automotive history have bought vehicles based on rated power claims, only to be disappointed on the dyno. As I said, this isn't a new or Teslacentric issue. It's a fundamental flaw in how the consumer base views various performance metrics... be it for legitimate reasons or perceived ones. I can understand the specific issues of the early adopters you mention above, however that's a very specific outlier, and one that no longer matters for the current iteration of the car.

That's just because those consumers don't realize that rated hp is at the motor shaft and not the wheels. That said, many cars make more power than claimed. The Hellcat makes between 745 and 760 hp at the crank shaft even though Dodge only claims 707. It's typical manufacturers to underrate vehicle hp due for insurance rate purposes. Speaking of which, anyone going to call up their auto insurance and let them know that their P85D is now 228 hp less than what they thought it was when their policy was written????

 

[stopcrazypp]

lol... so now it's OK to use the 691 HP term without a qualifier even though it's never produced and "motor power" is by far NOT the default usage of "horsepower"/HP? What next?

Is it OK for Tesla to say that because the car has ~275 more horsepower, highway passing performance will improve accordingly?

Is it OK for Tesla to say that motor power is "similar to an ICE at the flywheel" when 691 HP could never be measured anywhere in the car? (I could measure and confirm ICE HP at the flywheel and get the spec, but not with the P85D.)

Is it OK for Tesla to say that this is "power at the motor shafts"?

I think some of these defenses are getting pretty thin. Might be time to come up with better material.

(Answer key: No. No. No.)

Really? Did you really just post that with a straight face?

Yes, really. When I talk about the P85D, I don't say "it has 691 hp motor power" or "it has 691 motor horsepower", I just say "it has 691hp" or "691 horsepower". The details of the rating system is not important in the conversation. I think your attitude is different because you ultimately see 691hp as an invalid rating in the first place. I don't.

In the same vein, you can probably find videos of Elon saying the Model S has 300 miles of range without qualifying that is at 55mph (and back before the dual motors and 90kWh), but that will not be taken as false advertising even with EPA being 265 miles. I see the issue no different here.

 

[sorka]

Cheap shot - no car maker have overclaimed hp with 57%

Nice!

- - - Updated - - -

That is a low blow. It is true that demo cars are electronically limited. Your "It didn't feel like" is very subjective. So it is fair for him/her to respond in that way to your subjective feeling about the performance.

The low blow is being told the reason the car isn't making the expected power on the test drive is because it's electronically limited to 80 MPH and progressively pulling power back so as not to result in a sudden deceleration. I guess I'm an idiot for believing it.

 

[bonnie]

Actual HP value is lower, sure lets go with that. You can't actually do anything with it other than use it in equations to get to something tangible. So how does that diminish its value exactly? What are you not getting? Is it the 'assumption' of speed, acceleration and performance? Does HP have intrinsic value to those qualitative and quantitative measurements? When I see a Camry with 340HP I have to laugh because I know that the transmission will most likely die in less than a year if you were to use the HP everyday, not to mention the suspension or rest of the drivetrain...anyway

People see CPU speed and think "This one is faster!" and as humans do, try to equate that to real world performance but have nothing to actually do that. Thus we have benchmarks. Several actually, that test various attributes of the CPU and system against real world tests. See arstechnica or tomshardware which are both excellent sites on how to see how deep this rabbit hole goes

People see HP and think "This one is faster!" and as humans do, try to equate that real world performance. Thus we have a dyno, but really? This leaves out a lot of the 'faster' equation like weight of the car, CoD and other variables which are minimal but add up. See this and several other threads to see how deep the rabbit hole goes

People see 0-60mph times they think "This one is faster!" and then they apply that during driving (as long as that scientific method is well understood and easily repeatable which is debatable...I get that) in the real world and should actually be able to reach that figure. And quite a few people have done this to varying success but it has been done.

NOTE: I'm quite amazed at Motor Trend getting 2.6s and wonder how that is going to play out.

Also wk057: When I get an X, I promise that I will be upset if the car cannot achieve stated 0 to 60 times under the stated scientific conditions

"You must spread reputation around before giving it to Discoducky again."

Stupid rep system.

 

[sorka]

That's the way I see it too. It's not that the number is a lie, it's that it was measured it in a way different from what some people assumed. The only real way to solve it is for the industry to come together and have a uniform power measuring method (as with ICE vehicles using an SAE standard, which doesn't exist yet for EVs). Even the "real HP" numbers this thread is talking about is using some sort of measure Tesla made up. Ironically, it appears the "motor power" numbers were the ones that followed an actual standard (ECE R85).

It was sold as a 691 hp car that only really makes 463 hp. The 691 hp number was arrived at by providing more power, a lot more power, than can be delivered by the battery that is sold with the car. This was never disclosed ANYWHERE. Geez. I think I am going to post my bullet list again.

- - - Updated - - -

It delivers exactly the performance of a 463hp car WITH exceptional low speed torque, AWD, and exceptional traction control. All of which is GREAT ... and superior to any other 463hp car I can think of below 30mph. That is NOT however, how they represented it. Their representation (comparisons to supercars and claiming 691/762 hp) suggested MUCH better performance above 30mph than delivered.

If the driveline losses are a few percent lower, that's fine too, but its almost immaterial vis a vis the >200 hp gap we have at hand.

Bingo!

- - - Updated - - -

The Tesla seems to lose 18% between the battery and driveshaft - 415kW (564hp) from the battery result in 463hp motor power at the drive shaft.

I suspect the 463 hp number is at 30% SOC(357 KW = 480 hp) which would make it about 3.5% loss from battery to motor shaft.

- - - Updated - - -

If I'm reading your dynograph right, then it looks like you got peak horsepower at 4,095 RPM, and Peak Torque at 2,499 RPM?

Why did it take so long for it to reach peak torque?

I thought that electric motors made peak torque at 0 RPM.

Torque = HP * 5252 / RPM.

You'd have infinite torque at 0 RPMs and would smoke the tires. Power is software limited to keep traction which means peak torque doesn't occur until 10 to 12 MPH.

This is about 460 hp at the wheels at around 65%.

- - - Updated - - -

691 hp is not imaginary. It is what was measured with the motors attached to a motor dyno with an independent power supply. It's simply a different way of measuring things.

Where can I buy a car that was measured that way cause it's not the one that was delivered?

- - - Updated - - -

I bet the class action lawyers are sharpening their pencils but it is really an extremely small class. Unlike VW and other cases, there have been far fewer P85D vehicle sold in comparison, and I bet the vast majority of those owners won't want anything to do with it. Most are very pleased with their cars, and it's not like they are not getting the car they test drove (unlike VW or cases with defects). I bet this forum has probably heard from most of the people that would be part of a class action.

I seriously doubt most P85D owners have ever visited TMC even once. There are are 11 Model S owners where I work and I've asked every one of them if they've visited TMC and not one has.

It's pretty good bet that most P85D owners will now be made aware of this.

No class action lawsuit against a vehicle manufacturer has ever resulted in the class roster being banned from buying that brand of car again.

 

[flathillll]

I don't think Tesla is going to go bankrupt for that to happen. My guess is that Tesla will sell to either Apple or Google in the next few years.

You are assuming Apple and Google will be in good health in the next few years, which is what almost everyone assumes. I assume they both will be laying off people in the near future and they will have to get back to their core focus. China wants Tesla. The whole point of the TPP is so China can enter the automotive market thru the backdoor. China is never going to sell a gas car in the USA. They are leap frogging ahead. Ford/GM/Fiat will all be bankrupt unless we save them again (and yes Ford was saved by given early warning so they loaded up)

 

[sorka]

i'm sure you realize that the dyno measures the drum speed along with the run time to calculate the acceleration, then knowing the drum weight and inertia it calculates the torque into the drum(s) since it is AWD both front and rear are measured and summed together. Then you must assume some gear ratio for the rear and the front, and nobody really knows the front ratio. From there i've outlined previously how the motor torque is calculated.

There can be uncertainty in this measurement and especially backing out the front gear ratio, so to get an answer within +/- 3% based upon derived calculations is quite an accomplishment (even 23 ft-lbs out of 684 or 713 is really in the noise). The fellow put his car up on the dyno rack to be tested--he took a risk of damage if it jumped the drums, time to cut him some slack on his test results. At least he tried to get some data, and you don't seem to even know the correct units for torque.

Only in the case of independent drums (load only or dual eddie current). If the drums are physically tied together as with the Mustang AWD 500 SE(which Tesla owns two of btw to dyno D cars), or the Dynojet 424xLC2 with the optional Linx system tying the two drums together. The 424xLC2 without the Linx attached measures front and rear wheels independently and is only suitable for 4WD vehicles or AWD vehicles that can lock the transfer case.

In the case when the drums are physically tied together, it's the same as simulating the ground and the dyno doesn't measure front vs rear.

There is an exception and that is the Superflow 880 AWD. Even though the drums are tied together, in this case with a drive shaft rather than a belt, there is a torque/strain gauge on the shaft between the two drums which can detect the difference in torque applied to the front and rear despite the fact that the drums are physically tied together. With this dyno, you can measure horsepower front and rear on an AWD drive car that CAN'T lock it's transfer case or a vehicle that has two independently driven axles.

 

[Canuck]

Originally Posted by Canuck
I bet the class action lawyers are sharpening their pencils but it is really an extremely small class. Unlike VW and other cases, there have been far fewer P85D vehicle sold in comparison, and I bet the vast majority of those owners won't want anything to do with it. Most are very pleased with their cars, and it's not like they are not getting the car they test drove (unlike VW or cases with defects). I bet this forum has probably heard from most of the people that would be part of a class action.

I seriously doubt most P85D owners have ever visited TMC even once. There are are 11 Model S owners where I work and I've asked every one of them if they've visited TMC and not one has.

It's pretty good bet that most P85D owners will now be made aware of this.

No class action lawsuit against a vehicle manufacturer has ever resulted in the class roster being banned from buying that brand of car again.

I never said most P85D owners visited this forum. How can you possibly take that out of what I said above? I said that this forum has probably heard from most of the people that would be part of the class action since most P85D owners won't want anything to do with it. Instead of asking your 11 colleagues if they have visited here, you should have asked them if they will be suing Tesla over the hp numbers. That was my point. Time will tell who is right.

This motor vehicle class action (if commenced) will be very different than most and Tesla is also very different than all auto manufacturers. Consider this: P85D owners who say they were mislead by Tesla can't just get their money back and then buy another without calling into serious question the legitimacy of the claim that they wouldn't have bought in the first place if they knew the true number. I predict for this reason Tesla will add the names to their list. Again, only time will tell who is right. No use arguing about it but it's interesting to put our positions down here so later we can see who is right. If I am proved to be wrong, it certainly won't be the first time.

 

[Andyw2100]

Consider this: P85D owners who say they were mislead by Tesla can't just get their money back and then buy another without calling into serious question the legitimacy of the claim that they wouldn't have bought in the first place if they knew the true number. I predict for this reason Tesla will add the names to their list.

I consider myself mislead by Tesla, but I don't want my money back. I'm generally happy with the car. I do, however, want to get what I paid for.

There are ways for Tesla to right this wrong that don't involve taking the cars back and refunding the purchase price. It's not all or nothing.

 

[sorka]

Not if they actually test higher, i.e. ECE R85.

Where can I buy a car that tests higher rather than the one that was delivered to me?

- - - Updated - - -

I think some things on this issue need some clarification, because people keep wanting to take this in a thousand different directions that have little to nothing to do with the actual problem.

I think we all agree that Tesla makes some pretty awesome cars. I really like both of mine. I don't think that is in question.

The horsepower related concerns and the 0-60 time concerns (rollout vs non-rollout) are independent issues, even if they did start at the same time.

The horsepower related concerns and the range increase concerns (285 miles at 65 MPH is pretty much impossible, sorry, and the P85D does not have more range than the P85) are indepentent issues, even if they did start at the same time.

Now for this particular on-topic point...

The issue I personally have is that Tesla allowed customers to believe that the P85D produced substantially more horsepower than it actually does. The introduction of the "motor power" term was clarified by folks at Tesla at the time to be "similar to an ICE at the flywheel" to myself and others I've spoken with. Many enthusiasts also figured that this number was an "at the shaft" type number. I'm reasonably certain no one, myself included, expected 691 HP at the wheels.

Additionally, Tesla only used the "motor power" term on the website, and no where else (that I'm aware). Everywhere else, and in every conversation/interview/etc that I've had or seen with Tesla had no such qualifier. It was a 691 HP car as far as everyone was concerned. Tesla even confirmed speculation that the car would have "substantially improved high speed performance" over the P85 due to the added horsepower.

The majority of early P85D buyers, myself included, had no opportunity to test drive the vehicle prior to delivery and had few options except to trust Tesla's sales and marketing folks on the matter. Personally, I'd already purchased two Model S that met or exceeded their advertised specs, why would Tesla fudge the numbers for the P85D?

Only after more people started publicly questioning the 691 HP number did they simply remove it. No explanation, no answers to inquiries, nothing. Just remove the number and hope no one notices? I mean, if it were in fact a legitimate measure of the car's performance, why remove it?

Some time previously the website clearly advertised a coming "free over the air software update" to increase high speed performance. For completeness, this advertising was there AFTER the 3.2 to 3.1 "0"-60 improvement update (yes I put quotes around the 0 in "0"-60 when referring to the fake with-rollout times that are more like 5-60). Many, myself included, figured that this might be the update the unlocked some or all of our missing horsepower. We now know that free OTA update turned into a costly hardware update that still doesn't unlock the full 691 HP (and as of this writing still does not exist as a retrofit, paid or otherwise, in a customer's hands yet).

Then comes a cryptic blog post nearly a year later that basically admits the original power number was not a true power production number, and was more of a slap in the face, IMO, to those who know what we're talking about. Sorry, Mr. Straubel, but 1 HP is still 1 HP, and I don't care about performance at various altitudes vs ICE engines which had nothing to do with the concerns.

Now Tesla finally posts the real horsepower output of the car, 463 HP... a number that myself and others had already figured out within a reasonable margin with real world testing.

"But Tesla is great!" "Tesla is saving the world!" "OMG we need Tesla!" <-- While statements like these may (or may not) be true, it doesn't affect this particular situation.

The fact is that Tesla fudged the facts to fit the situation. At that time it appears the goal was getting as many Q4'2015 deliveries as possible, no matter what, which meant selling P85Ds like crazy. Had Tesla actually put the real specs on the specs page last year as they stand today, I would not have bought a P85D. It's still the same car. The actual specs haven't actually changed. But the *advertised* specs have changed significantly since I placed my order. Given what I know today, I would have been much happier with an 85D, or simply keeping my P85.

For completeness, let's take a look at the few major bullet points along those lines:

• Advertised in October 2014 when I placed my order
  • 691 HP (274 HP more than the P85)
  • 285 miles of range (20 miles more than the P85)
  • 0-60 in 3.2 seconds (full second faster than P85)
  • Autopilot in a few months
• Reality:
  • 463 HP (-228 HP)
  • 253 miles of range (-32 miles / -12 from the P85)
  • 0-60 in 3.5 seconds (true 0-60)
  • Autopilot released 10/15/2015 (so, +6 months best case, +8 months or more really)

People who traded up from a P85 paid a significant amount of depreciation to do so with the promise of better high speed performance thanks to 274 more horsepower, better range due to the efficiency improvements of the dual motor setup, shave a full second from 0-60, and autopilot features only to have paid that same premium for 46 horsepower, a significant range penalty, 0-60 times that actually differ by closer to a half-second due to the switch to using 1-ft rollout without telling anyone, and a year wait for autopilot.

Yes, the non-horsepower related bullet points are problems. But this thread is about the horsepower issue, so lets get back to that.

So, actual +46 HP vs advertised +274 HP (or +211 HP depending on which P85 number you feel like using). I don't know about you, but if I take a 400 HP car and add 200+ HP to it by adding minimal weight, I'm going to get some pretty dramatic improvements, and not just in 0-60 times. These are the improvements that were touted by Tesla when I was buying my P85D. Faster highway passing. Much faster top speed runs. Etc etc etc.

In reality, we received less than 20% of the increased performance we paid for, yet according to many here I'm in the wrong because I feel like Tesla cheated me and used me to boost Q4'14 sales.

I keep holding on to a little hope that Tesla is going to surprise us with something that will make us early P85D buyers have at least a little faith restored in the company... but that's probably just wishful thinking at this point. I'm honestly not 100% sure what their next move is. I'm half expecting an announcement this week of the P100D with the tag line of having "twice the power of the P85D" with Tesla comparing the newly advertised actual horsepower of the P85D with a car having two large motor's combined "motor power." Add to that a new 0-60 metric that uses some random magazine's method of testing that subtracts the first 42-ft of rollout from the time to better show the meaning of life the universe and everything in the 0-60 time to get a mind blowing 1.9 second 0-60 to plaster all over the place while they're at it. Might as well say it has a 500 mile range too. Later they'll include the note that to get that range requires the double battery capacity feature that will be available free via OTA updates in several months.

Really nice post!

- - - Updated - - -

WK's thinking is accurate and logical as always. That was a very good summary of what has happened from his vantage point.

There are two extremes-
Musk is a lier or he was not smart enough to know the battery limited available power. I simply can not accept either of these so why then did this all happen?

....

Typical with past performance, Tesla also had the whole ludicrous thing in the works. I still think it was supposed to be a free OTA upgrade but the need for press possibly increased by the beginnings of the HP backlash caused a premature tweet about the update. The reality of Ludicrous was that it required hardware to pull off and thus the P85DL upgrade was born. It is also likely that the full reality of Ludicrous in the P90DL required some number of miles in the field with a lesser variant before it could be rolled out to production cars. This would be the production P90DL versus the MotorTrend P90DL disparity.

I think it was that. I think they delivered a car they knew didn't make the advertised power but thought they'd be able to fix it with an update before the issue blew up in the faces. But then they realized it would require a hardware fix as well so they might as well take advantage of that and call it Ludicrous mode. Ludicrous is what they thought they'd be able to update the P85D to before they realized pushing the fuse and contractors at more power for even just short bursts would not be reliable enough.

- - - Updated - - -

I did get 10% cheaper insurance now after the new correct hp information

Seriously????

- - - Updated - - -

This *everyone* does not include me.

So what did you think it was? Did you think the 85D's 417 advertised number wasn't 417? What insight did you have that led you to believe it was something other than the advertised horsepower?

- - - Updated - - -

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.

OK, but that's 0-60. What about on the open highway?

At 24 seconds into this video, the P85D kills this 435 hp Mustang 5.0 off the line. But at 60 MPH, 2:24 into the video, watch the mustang walk away from the P85D.

They both have about the same power to weight ratio. Why isn't the P85D killing it if it's that much more efficient. At low speeds where the P85D is producing more torque i.e more power at low RPMs, but once both cars are at their peak power, the P85D can't keep up with the lowly 435 hp Mustang.

 

[Alipapa]

The problem here is how the number affect buying decision. Would you buy a 691HP P85D or a 463HP P85D for the same amount of money?
Also note the 85d is now rated at 417hp and 1 sec faster to 60mph all the sudden.
The difference between a S and P is shrink from 311HP to 46HP and 2 sec to 0.8 sec.
How many people would pay the premium for a 311HP upgrade vs a 46HP upgrade?

Scam.

 

[mkspeedr]

After reading through the dozen threads and hundreds of posts….

I don’t understand with all these graphs, formulas, dyno pulls and battery data why anyone bought a P85D in the first place.

If it really had 691 horsepower and accelerated to 60 mph in 3.2 seconds 0-60 that should have been a huge red flag, right?

The people arguing the horsepower point seem to be smart affluent analytical people.

It seems weird all the analyzing was done after the purchase for something so emotionally important to certain people.

 

[Jian Yang]

Hi rns-e, my knowledge on electric motor is actually very limited since my doctorate degrees are not in physics or mechanical engineering. But to answer this question, from my understanding, you get nothing different but all the perks and characteristics of the 691hp max output motors, before the motors hits the battery limit. These characters come definitely from the 691hp max motor which the 463/417 max output motors can never produce. This is the key difference between the ICE engine and electric motor, and if you have to use 1 figure to describe the performance of the car to the consumers, 691hp is more appropriate than 463, IMO (but nobody forces tesla to only use 1 number, and they actually used two sets of numbers for 85D on their website). Some of the augments in this thread about never getting the promised 691hp is not quite true, since they did get the full wrath of the 691hp motors as soon as they put the foot down, and at least officially on their website tesla never promised 691hp (but judgeing from the posts, there are defiantly sales staff or service staff in tesla who did not know a lot about eclectic motors and BSed when confronted with the questions they didn't know; Or some of them knew all the drills yet intensionally misled the customers). The difference is that, with the battery limited at 463hp and all the other limitations of the battery/electric motor, the 691hp performance can not last very long.

I think tesla did play tricks so that when they are busted no one can accuse tesla of lying. So they are still sticking to their story as we speak.

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?