TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Tesla blog post: AWD Motor Power and Torque Specifications

Discussion in 'Model S: Driving Dynamics' started by dsm363, Sep 22, 2015.

  1. dsm363

    dsm363 Roadster + Sig Model S

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    18,235
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
  2. sandpiper

    sandpiper Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,463
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    That is a very very well written response. And it probably reflects something close to reality. I'm betting that, internally, Tesla was more concerned about performance, and that in coming up with their marketing specs they fairly simply added up the motor HPs without a lot of consideration for the battery.

    Personally, I hope this is start of the end for this issue.
     
  3. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    3,938
    Location:
    NoVA
    Hmm.

    The crux of the article is that Tesla publishes the combined shaft HP numbers the motors are capable of, even though there are factors (pack SOC, temp, traction, front/rear torque-split, etc...) that may at times prevent that combined total from being reached.

    However, most HP figures for vehicles are the peak ratings for what the system as a whole is capable of under ideal conditions. Even if an ICE engine itself is capable of 400HP, you can't publish that if the fuel pump is only capable of delivering 350HP worth of fuel rate.

    IOW: You need to be able to demonstrate full HP under ideal manufacturer-specified conditions.

    Does the P85D ever deliver a measurable 691HP? My understanding was no...
     
  4. sandpiper

    sandpiper Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,463
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    As I understand it, there are specific SAE standards for reporting HP in ICEVs but there none for EVs yet. It's more than just the engine peak HP. I believe it also includes specific accessories, and assumes some drive train losses. Because EVs are so different, those conditions simply aren't defined at this point. And if the goal is to make EV and ICEV numbers comparable for comparison purposes, then that gets even muddier. I suspect that, once standards are set, that Tesla will have to revise their numbers. But that's a debate for another day.

    Anyway... that's as far as I'm going to wade into this debate because it's become somewhat of a religious war. My car does what I expected to and I'm happy!
     
  5. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    No horse in this race, but that came across as side-stepping the real issues owners are bringing up (some of which are mentioned in the comments)
     
  6. sandpiper

    sandpiper Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,463
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    Tesla more or less confirmed, in their blog, that the battery won't deliver enough power to provide the full combined motor HP. The big question is... is it relevant? Tesla is saying no, it's not in any practical way. There will doubtless be a lot of opinions!
     
  7. scottf200

    scottf200 Active Member

    Joined:
    Feb 3, 2013
    Messages:
    1,271
    Location:
    Chicagoland ModelX S603
    "The true measures for any performance EV driver are acceleration times and driving performance of the vehicle." -- JB Straubel
     
  8. Cosmacelf

    Cosmacelf Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2013
    Messages:
    3,399
    Location:
    San Diego
    Bottom line, there are no standards yet for dual motor EV horsepower measurements, Tesla used one way of measuring that doesn't reflect real world power output.

    Coming from the computer world where hard drive manufacturers publish really high IOPS specs, and real world testing under various methodologies gives five different numbers depending on how it is tested, this isn't surprising.

    But I do agree that it would have been nice if Tesla had used a HP number that was closer to what you could get in the real world.
     
  9. dsm363

    dsm363 Roadster + Sig Model S

    Joined:
    May 17, 2009
    Messages:
    18,235
    Location:
    Las Vegas, NV
    Totally agree with this. Using a more real world number would have been better but as you noted, using an idealized set of testing isn't new to Tesla. They addressed how they got this number and this will have to do. No free hardware upgrades coming it looks like.
     
  10. jaguar36

    jaguar36 Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2014
    Messages:
    859
    Location:
    NJ
    Agree, It very rarely even mentioned the P85D going so far as to list HP measurements of the other models but then skipping the P85D. I also got a rather condescending tone from the post. The whole HP isn't relevant for power thing. Its the same unit in a different system.
     
  11. Todd Burch

    Todd Burch Electron Pilot

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2009
    Messages:
    4,734
    Location:
    Smithfield, VA
    ICE vehicles may be able to achieve their peak number, but that's not all that useful either--peak horsepower occurs at such a narrow RPM range.

    I'd rather have a lower peak HP number but a much wider torque band (as EVs provide) than a higher HP number only valid within a narrow band
     
  12. AnOutsider

    AnOutsider S532 # XS27

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2009
    Messages:
    11,923
    Wouldn't the cleanest solution be to dyno the car and then you can report the peak HP?
     
  13. stopcrazypp

    stopcrazypp Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 8, 2007
    Messages:
    7,047
    #13 stopcrazypp, Sep 22, 2015
    Last edited: Sep 22, 2015
    Under most current convention that is true because almost all automakers have switched to SAE net. However, this was not true back when automakers were using SAE gross. Under SAE gross the only thing that had to be stock was the engine. All the rest does not have to be stock, so the numbers do not consider the system as a whole.
    http://ateupwithmotor.com/terms-technology-definitions/gross-versus-net-horsepower/

    I should note that Fisker also used a similar rating as Tesla (only considered the motors in its 402 hp rating, when in reality it was making under 300 hp considering the whole system). Ford also lists separate motor power numbers for their Energi cars (although they also list battery power now). There is no published SAE power standard yet for EVs.

    Also, what JB Straubel said was exactly what I suspected Tesla's rating to be (that it didn't factor in battery power). It was what this article back in October 2014 said it was when the new motor power numbers came out:
    http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1095000_puzzling-new-power-numbers-for-tesla-model-s-whats-the-deal

    - - - Updated - - -

    I should once again remind everyone of the history of the "motor power" numbers. Starting in October 2014 (with the launch of the dual motor numbers), Tesla published only motor power numbers for all models. It was not until April 2015 (a month after that "691 hp" complaint thread) did they started adding back system power numbers for the other models (although they left it blank for the P85D, but I think the reason why they did was obvious given the thread).
     
  14. scaesare

    scaesare Active Member

    Joined:
    Mar 14, 2013
    Messages:
    3,938
    Location:
    NoVA
    Sure, but it's a measurable and achievable number. And it's similar to other specs (like MPG, battery pack range, etc...) that are "optimistic" under many real-world conditions...

    And many ICE performance enthusiasts make the same point: "It's the swept area under the curve that matters.", which is not without merit, but also has some drawbacks.

    Whatever the spec, however, I argue the car should be able to achieve it.
     
  15. jcoverton

    jcoverton Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2015
    Messages:
    41
    Location:
    Virginia Beach, VA
    This debate reminds me of the issues companies had measuring the output of amplifiers. Most amps are measured in watts. Manufactures competed by publishing increased watt ratings in response to demand for bigger amps. Stereo amp manufactures added the output of there two channels together to get total watts in many cases ignoring the fact their power supplies could not drive both channels at the specified wattage. It got worse with home theater systems 5 or more channels. Even as power supplies got bigger, many did not respond well to changes in power demands typical with music reproduction. In the end it was the ability of the system to reproduce music that counted not an amps specifications that could be manipulated.

    I think the same is true with the MS. It is how it drives and how quickly it accelerates that counts not the HP ratings or the motors. I have followed this forum for quite awhile and from what I read most people who drive or ride in a Tesla love their cars. I have a P90D being delivered next week and can't wait even though I may never know how many HP it really has or what the total power the electrical system can supply.
     
  16. sandpiper

    sandpiper Active Member

    Joined:
    Sep 25, 2014
    Messages:
    1,463
    Location:
    Ontario, Canada
    100% agree!
     
  17. andrewket

    andrewket 2014 S P85DL, 2016 X P90DL (soon 100)

    Joined:
    Dec 20, 2012
    Messages:
    5,046
    I've stayed quiet throughout this entire situation. (Well, I think I might have replied once to a post.) I'm still going to stay out of this, but ..

    I would have appreciated JB stating when the L upgrades for the older P85Ds would be available. It's been awhile now and the SCs still don't have any information.
     
  18. Johan

    Johan Took a TSLA bear test. Came back negative.

    Joined:
    Feb 9, 2012
    Messages:
    6,890
    Location:
    Drammen, Norway
    This is a great analogy, and one that I think Tesla could really help explain how the horsepower number is similar to the wattage of a given speaker while the torque, acceleration and driving feel is the equivalent of what actually has real mening which in your example would be different aspects of the music being outputted: for example volume/power, dynamic range, responsiveness, corectness in amplifying the original signal (CD, Tape whatever) and in the end the total subjective feel of the totality of the music.
     
  19. brianman

    brianman Burrito Founder

    Joined:
    Nov 10, 2011
    Messages:
    15,487
    Good that they've come out publicly (blog) on the topic. I find the post a bit lacking though, unfortunately.

    As an example, the number 691 never appears in the post. That's pretty telling all by itself.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Another quick note:
    Tesla All Wheel Drive (Dual Motor) Power and Torque Specifications | Tesla Motors
    To me this begs a follow-up question:
    Aside from what this means to current customers, I'm quite curious from a technical perspective.
     
  20. TexasEV

    TexasEV Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2013
    Messages:
    3,782
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Could someone explain why anyone cares what the number is? How does it affect your enjoyment or use of the car?
     

Share This Page