Yeah, I put in the weights and all. Best I've seen on the PBox is about 530HP. I loathe Apple products, but that's a discussion for another time... and I don't see a droid version of that app. I'm also not keen on inputting my Tesla login credentials into a 3rd party closed source app since that's basically like handing over the keys to my car. I've tried some of the phone dyno apps in the past and they tend to just not be accurate. The PBox is pretty consistent when done in the same spot, however. I'll try to figure out why the SD card keeps getting corrupted so I can actually log the data soon.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
[updated with *] P85D 691HP should have an asterisk * next to it.. "Up to 691HP"
- Thread starter krisg81
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Driving Dynamics Model S
Yeah, I put in the weights and all. Best I've seen on the PBox is about 530HP. I loathe Apple products, but that's a discussion for another time... and I don't see a droid version of that app. I'm also not keen on inputting my Tesla login credentials into a 3rd party closed source app since that's basically like handing over the keys to my car. I've tried some of the phone dyno apps in the past and they tend to just not be accurate. The PBox is pretty consistent when done in the same spot, however. I'll try to figure out why the SD card keeps getting corrupted so I can actually log the data soon.
Just double checking. I've never seen one that estimated power anywhere but the wheels.
I did the dyno last week that showed just over 430 metric hp, max torque never measured as it broke the timingbelt on the dyno.
Since then I have done some 0-100 km/h and looked at the data from the REST API and at 100% Battery the max draw is 415kW and at 90% it is 405kW. That is energy INTO the motors. Best 0-100 km/h with 21" turbine, A/C off, 16 degrees c, try and flat road, sun etc etc. was 3.5 s which is .2 slower than specs.
I think the measured 430 metric hp at the wheel is just about right. It is the massive torque and AWD that brings it down from P85s 4s to P85Ds low 3s - there is not that much more power. The lower time of the P85D is the launch, after 20/25 mph it is not pulling more than P85 or 85D - I find that extremely disappointing, and even more so when I can not get the full insane effect. An issue several Danish owners have reported.
- - - Updated - - -
Since then I have done some 0-100 km/h and looked at the data from the REST API and at 100% Battery the max draw is 415kW and at 90% it is 405kW. That is energy INTO the motors. Best 0-100 km/h with 21" turbine, A/C off, 16 degrees c, try and flat road, sun etc etc. was 3.5 s which is .2 slower than specs.
I think the measured 430 metric hp at the wheel is just about right. It is the massive torque and AWD that brings it down from P85s 4s to P85Ds low 3s - there is not that much more power. The lower time of the P85D is the launch, after 20/25 mph it is not pulling more than P85 or 85D - I find that extremely disappointing, and even more so when I can not get the full insane effect. An issue several Danish owners have reported.
- - - Updated - - -
| Time 0-100 km/t | kWh | Max kW |
|---|
| 3.595 | 0.355 | 403 |
| 3.486 | 0.628 | 402 |
| 3.636 | 0.385 | 403 |
Also, the P85D still outputs more than an 85D but it's nowhere near the difference advertised...or what used to be advertised before Tesla pulled the hp rating off the design studio.
The 85D puts out 371 KW at 80% so that's still quite a bit less the P85D at 80%. However, it's likely that the P85D falls to the point of convergence with the 85D at some lower SOC since they both have the same battery. At some point neither car will be able to pull more than X KW and at that point both will pull the same.
The 85D puts out 371 KW at 80% so that's still quite a bit less the P85D at 80%. However, it's likely that the P85D falls to the point of convergence with the 85D at some lower SOC since they both have the same battery. At some point neither car will be able to pull more than X KW and at that point both will pull the same.
My previous post is pending approval - let see if this go through
I'm on version .188, and it has just become slower with the updates it had. It was diffidently quick when I got it with version .124 on it, but since then, nope. The notes says quicker, the numbers says no.
I believe numbers more than youtube vids - i.e. Tesla Model S P85D vs Porsche Panamera Turbo S drag race - YouTube - the Tesla should smoke the Panamera of the line. But maybe it has the same sw version as mine?
I'm on version .188, and it has just become slower with the updates it had. It was diffidently quick when I got it with version .124 on it, but since then, nope. The notes says quicker, the numbers says no.
I believe numbers more than youtube vids - i.e. Tesla Model S P85D vs Porsche Panamera Turbo S drag race - YouTube - the Tesla should smoke the Panamera of the line. But maybe it has the same sw version as mine?
Kalud
Active Member
I've found out that I can see significantly higher power output from a warmer battery, like after Supercharging, or even just driving. Getting in the car after its been off for many hours never gave the best result, all my highest kW values were after some driving and charging. Try tour test again in those conditions and report back.
I'm currently on 188 also. My REST KW numbers are higher starting with 167 and are higher than what you reported. Perhaps there is an issue with your P85D? I see 414K at 90% and 396K at 80%.
Test is performed under those exact conditions
I think there may be, and I have been telling Tesla that for a month now. They have pulled the data and said that everything looks ok. Next thing is that they will come and collect the car on a day where conditions are optimal for testing and do their own testing.
However, there are multiple Danish owners reporting same issues
Unfortunately for Tesla this is something that isn't just going to go away. For a $20,000 price difference vs the 85D the performance should reflect that, and in my opinion it is not a $20,000 performance gap especially after ~25-30 MPH. So far the dynos are showing HP closer to the 85D advertised numbers than the P85D. My PBox has hit ~530 HP, but that's not really a dyno. In any case, not a single person has any evidence of the car putting out anything close to 691 HP under any conditions. Even if 530 whp were 691 shaft HP that'd suggest ~25% mechanical losses, which is pretty impossible considering the other data available.
Anyway, I think Tesla is going to be in for a bumpy legal road if they don't do something to make this right on their own, and soon. For people who placed orders after they removed the 691 HP claim from the website, I'm not sure how that would work... but thousands of P85Ds were ordered and delivered while it claimed 691 HP. At this point all available evidence suggests that claim is false, which is a problem.
Anyway, I think Tesla is going to be in for a bumpy legal road if they don't do something to make this right on their own, and soon. For people who placed orders after they removed the 691 HP claim from the website, I'm not sure how that would work... but thousands of P85Ds were ordered and delivered while it claimed 691 HP. At this point all available evidence suggests that claim is false, which is a problem.
Even after the phrase was removed from the design studio, thousands of customers will still order the P85D believing it has 691 hp given that all of the research sites are still listing such and Tesla has done nothing to correct this, so from a legal standpoint, I don't think their claim will be any less until Tesla explicitly comes out and makes a formal and public correction and lists the actual SAE equivalent hp. I wonder what they're currently listing on the Certificate of Origin. It requires an SAE hp rating so if they're not listing 691 or 738, what are they listing now?
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
They listed 738 previously.
http://my.teslamotors.com/it_CH/forum/forums/horsepower-listed-title-p85d
The certificate of origin number has no bearing on an advertised number anyways, so whatever they list there probably doesn't matter in regards to their advertised number. For example a 2015 Z06 is listed as 52.8 hp (I looked it up, I believe the formula is bore^2 * # cylinders * 40%, not sure what it is for EVs).
http://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.cor..._189c9779bafa334f949eec61c1c4959eb6010979.jpg
There is no legal requirement that a manufacturer must use SAE equivalent hp to rate their cars, so I don't see how Tesla violated any laws. As for what other publications say, that is their responsibility, not Tesla's. Tesla even when talking about 691hp was very clear it was referring to motor hp (which appears to be a correct number).
Last edited:
At no point in time do both motors produce 691 hp. Yet the P85 on the tesla design studio also said motor power at one point but in actuality they consistently dynoed more than the claimed power.
This argument has been beaten to death the in the RIP 691 thread and I'm pretty sure the vast majority believe that if the advertised 691 hp, that it should in fact make that or better.
In addition, all other MS variants that have advertised hp have either been accurate or understated. The P85D is overstated by as much as 200 hp and you can't make the motor hp clause as previous correctly and accurately or understated MS models have used that term and not been overstated.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I didn't see this point, but this is not true. At the same time they released the P85D, they changed all their power ratings to motor power. The linked article goes into detail:
http://www.greencarreports.com/news...ower-numbers-for-tesla-model-s-whats-the-deal
The 60kWh when floored goes slightly over the 240kW mark, not above the 283kW "motor power" advertised.
I looked a bit more into this and there is actually no SAE power certification for EVs right now. They are reviving the SAE J2907/J2908 working groups (which previously applied only to hybrids) to come up with something for EVs, but from what I can find it's not finished yet.
http://energy.gov/sites/prod/files/2014/07/f17/vss123_marlino_2014_o.pdf
The J1349 or J1995 standards in use for ICE cars do not apply to EVs. If such a standard was out, GM would have SAE-certified the Spark EV's power, but they didn't (GM seems to SAE-certified every single car in their lineup). So actually there is no SAE power certification standard that Tesla can be held to at this point.
Last edited:
There is no current or future standard by which the P85D could ever be rated anywhere near the advertised power. The standards are developed to ensure that apples to apples comparisons are accurate. The different standards do produce different results on different engines but they're not that far apart in reality. At the very least, in order for the P85D to make anywhere near the claimed hp, it both motors would need to receive a combined input of 515 KW which we all know it doesn't even come close to.
When Tesla upped the P85's rating, they upped it to what the P85 repeatedly dynos. The P85, on a full charge, dynos 430 to 435 at the wheels which after taking into account a mild drivetrain loss puts it right around 480 hp at the motor shaft assuming 10% drive train loss. My point is that they raised the ratings to be inline with what ICE counterparts measure on the dyno. Same with the other model variants....except the P85D which is not just out in left field but out of the parking lot.
When a new EV measurements standard is reached and applied, manufacturer claims will be equivalent so that EVs can be compared with ICE counterparts. They are already there and accurate enough with the P85. Whatever standard is agreed on won't vary much from a measurement standpoint than SAE J1349 with imperial hp which is probably the most stringent standard.
Saying that there is no *exact* standard for measuring EV output doesn't mean a manufacturer can just claim anything they want since there's no standard by which they have to abide by. The claimed 691 hp and it has to at least be within the ballpark, not off by 200.
Basically, using no other data whatsoever, Tesla has a readout of kW output during driving. This is their own display. Scaling aside, there is a tick at 480 kW... so it doesn't matter if it's logarithmic, exponential, linear, or some other scaling. The line never gets to their own tick at 480kW. 1 HP = ~0.746kW. Since at 100% efficiency 691 HP is 515kW we know already based on their own instrumentation that the claim is false. Anything verifying this is just icing on the proverbial cake in the case against the 691 HP claim.
No, this is NOT how SAE correction works. In fact, the SAE numbers you get from ICE motors do not really indicate how much daily power you will see. There are many areas were this went wrong. For example, SAE has atmospheric pressure corrections. If you have a turbcharged engine, of course this not longer applies if engine software increases relative boost pressure while allowing equal absolute pressure until the limits of the turbocharger are reached. blah blah blah, SAE numbers are NOT the numbers you dyno. All the _smart_ aftermarket engine tuners already know, the dyno is just a tool to help optimize power delivery, in absolute terms the number of HP is garbage, and usually highly dependent on the load characteristics the dyno hardware can provide. The same dyno's that Model S's keep either breaking or coming off the rollers.
There's absolutely NO telling what an SAE standard for electric might look like. They may try to do a comparison to ICE vehicles, as has been done with MPGe.
Similar threads
