Tesla blog post: AWD Motor Power and Torque Specifications

[cynix]

Thank you for the alert. To clarify, they shipped cars. Each of them included a drive train with two motors and two inverters, tested as an overall assembly according to ECE R85. Tesla's specifications reflected the above.

Did you buy a car or a drive train?

It's like Coca-Cola saying "the water in our product is 100% sugar-free". But as a consumer, are you actually able to drink just the water part of a Coke, or do you have to drink the whole lot with all that sugar in it?

A specification for a part of a product that is not achieveable in the final product is not useful to consumers because we're not buying the product to take it apart and only use the parts that have been rated. We're buying the product to use it as a whole, so we're interested in the specs of the product as a whole.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Google Ford horsepower lawsuit. If you Google horsepower lawsuit, you will get many results of companies getting into trouble for lying about their hp rating including lots of lawn care companies. If companies making lawnmowers get punished for misstating their hp, its hard to imagine Tesla coming away from this unscathed.

I actually posted about why none of the ICE car examples apply to Tesla's case. In those cases they involve engines that actually lost power compared to when it was advertised (whether it be from production equipment like with Cobra, or because of different emission equipment for different markets as with Mazda). However, for Tesla the issue was never about losing power versus a pre-production example or losing power due to emissions equipment in different markets (which is not applicable to EVs).
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...hread/page51?p=1175559&viewfull=1#post1175559

As for the lawnmower examples, actually the judges have chosen to throw out a lot of the suits, but so many were going on that the lawnmower manufacturers decided settling actually cost less money. Even then the examples don't apply. The main claim was that the advertised HP numbers did not match that reported to the EPA (for example a model advertised at 6.75 hp is reported as 3.8 hp to the EPA).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/15/AR2008021501732_2.html

However, the numbers Tesla advertise clearly does match that reported to the EPA:
https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=36008

They also match that on the US certificate of origin and on the EU certificate of conformity.

In general, I think it would be helpful for you to read up on what is a literally false statement vs a misleading statement. It should give you some perspective on why those examples don't apply to Tesla here.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...hread/page53?p=1176759&viewfull=1#post1176759

 

[darthy001]

Crosspost from other thread:

I will try to end my "contribution" to these threads by stating one fact:

There is only one slightly comparable car on the market today. The Mercedes SLS Electric. A european car from a european company adhering to the european standards. It has 4/four motors and more power than the P85D. And it goes like a bat out of hell at high speeds.

Mercedes lists it with BOTH combined motor power AND battery power. <- it can be done!

Tesla has never listed the battery power for the P85D or the P90DL.

Does anyone not see why Tesla has deliberatly chosen _not_ to list battery power?

For me this says it all. Tesla could easily have cleared this up in the same manner as other manufacturers list power in multimotor EVs. But they _chose_ not to.....

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I know it is a fact that does not apparently fit your version of reality, but P85D was advertised as having 691 motor hp, rated by Tesla according to ECE R85, the only Regulation applicable to EV. This regulation directs manufacturers rate EV drive train without taking into account potential limitation of the propulsion battery. So if you put P85D drivetrain on a dyno and test in accordance to the protocol established in international Regulation ECE R85 it will produce exactly the hp it was advertised to produce.

You are playing loose with facts and *should apologize*.

As others have mentioned, ECE R85 is not a US specification and there is no regulation requiring Tesla to use ECE R85 in the USA as far as has been mentioned.

 

[dsm363]

As others have mentioned, ECE R85 is not a US specification and there is no regulation requiring Tesla to use ECE R85 in the USA as far as has been mentioned.

The problem is there is no US regulation at all. It seems Tesla took the only one there was and applied it across the world.