[updated with *] P85D 691HP should have an asterisk * next to it.. "Up to 691HP"

[jerjozwik]

As of right now the car does everything Tesla originally said it would do..... except for everything Tesla originally said it would do.

285 mile range! Oh wait... 253....
Autopilot! Oh wait... maybe this summer...
691 HP! Oh wait... maybe 500.....
0-60 in 3.2s! Oh wait... they changed their metric to include a 1-ft rollout (which it didn't before), so it's really ~8-60 in 3.2s and 0-60 in ~3.6s.
Next generation seats! Oh wait... a bunch of owners had to wait months more for those...

sigh... still felt amazing when i test drove it. every day im on the fence for p85d vs 85d.

 

[gordo]

If you take Kimbal's remarks at face value, it sounds like they're not done with P85D performance enhancements after all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wIK510qaBD4

Sure, I'll gladly take another 0.1 second off 0-60 times, but I think I speak for most P85D owners when i say that what we really want is some improvement in the 50-90mph range.

Is there a reason why Tesla won't just come out and say what they're up to with P85Ds? It would certainly take a lot of the edge off threads like this one.

 

[hdsm]

this thread has been stopped ??? !!

 

[p85dk]

Thread can be flat when someone doesnt accept the reality!

I am a Tesla suporter but they made it completely unclear! they have to explain what is the reality ! i just asked them and by the way they read this thread also...

We are mature we can discuss ! dont you think Tesla has to clarify both their idea (700hk) and perhaps the future (upgrading)

did you get an answer, when you asked them?

 

[p85dk]

Was just upgraded to .239 and tested - now it is drawing approx 385kW at just under 90% charge. Tested on dry road, 17 Celsius, A/C and radio off, 21" tubine

 

[gordo]

That seems quite a bit lower max kW than sorka's results above... In any case, .239 seems to be a very low volume beta release (if you trust the firmware tracker site), so I wouldn't get too bent out of shape over it. We'll likely have a proper GA release that you can re-verify on in a week or two.

 

[p85dk]

Was just upgraded to .239 and tested - now it is drawing approx 385kW at just under 90% charge. Tested on dry road, 17 Celsius, A/C and radio off, 21" tubine

View attachment 82702

Sorry - it is .238

 

[MuppetOwl]

3.6 seconds to 100 km/h is about the best it can do. With 100% SOC, light driver and without the heavier pano roof 3.5 to 100 km/h is maybe possible

Don't look at the times from motortrend, dragtimes and Tesla because they are all with rollout (4-60 mph). Without rollout a time of 0.2-0.3 seconds slower is normal. And also the difference from 0-60 mph to 0-100 km/h is 0.2 seconds.

Edmunds are one of few magazines from the US that does not test with rollout times and they did time the P85D to 3.5 seconds from 0-60 mph before the 0.1 second update. So 3.4 seconds is the time from 0-60 mph.

Edmunds.com

Some info about the rollout test many of the US magazines (And Tesla) use.
How We Test Cars and Trucks

No European car maker or car magazine do test with rollout. Tesla, GM and Ford is the only car makers I know about that use rollout times to lie about the 0-60 mph times.

 

[Andyw2100]

No European car maker or car magazine do test with rollout. Tesla, GM and Ford is the only car makers I know about that use rollout times to lie about the 0-60 mph times.

Which begs the question, then, when Musk said that at 3.2 seconds the P85D would be as fast as the McLaren F1, was that a fair and accurate statement, and both cars were being timed using 1-foot rollout, or was the McLaren F1's time a true 0-60, 3.2 second time, while the P85D's time included the 1-foot rollout, in which case the P85D was not as quick as the F1.

I tried to dig into this a while back, and posted about it, and while I couldn't come up with anything conclusive, the evidence seemed to point to the McLaren's time also including rollout. I'd certainly like to know, though, if anyone has any definitive answer on this.

I'll look for the post I'm talking about, and edit this post to include the link to it.

Edit: Here's the link, and the post: P85D vs GTR - PerformanceBox data vs drag strip slip data... help? - Page 3

I think this is asking what I asked earlier, and what wk057 said he immediately wondered too, which is, essentially, do the Tesla P85D and McLaren F1 have roughly equivalent 0-60 times, or is there a chance that the P85D time included one-foot rollout while the McLaren F1 time did not, which would make the McLaren F1 .3 seconds, give or take, faster 0-60.

I had hoped someone with more expertise would definitively answer this. But I don't believe anyone has, or if they have I didn't understand it.

I admittedly do not have any expertise in this area, but I did do some searching, and I believe what I found answers the question with a reasonable amount of certainty. The answer is that the cars do have very similar 0-60 times, and that the comparisons were apples to apples. This is what I found.

I started with the Wikipedia article on the McLaren F1, which supports the 3.2 0-60 time: McLaren F1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The reference to support that time is an article in "Autocar:" McLaren F1 1992-1998 performance | Autocar

That article doesn't say explicitly whether or not 1-foot rollout was used.

Digging a little more, I found this article, also in "Autocar:" How much do performance figures on sports cars actually matter? | Autocar

In the article immediately above, the author gives several reasons why American magazines often report slightly better 0-60 times than his magazine does. He talks about things like weight, fuel being carried, etc., but never mentions 1-foot rollout as a factor. He would have had to include that, since it is such a big factor, if, in fact, his publication and the American publications were doing things differently. Here's just one paragraph from the article, so you get a feel for it:

"American magazines have a habit of producing unusually rapid figures on cars, after all; always have done, always will do. Call it the unfair advantage, call it what you will, but for a long time it’s been an unwritten rule of road testing that the US mags tend to record faster times on their cars than everyone else."

This article would have had to have mentioned 1-foot rollout as a difference, if there was a difference.

So I think, based on the above, it is reasonably safe to conclude that the times being thrown around for the McLaren F1, like the times being thrown around for the Tesla P85D, do include 1-foot rollout, meaning the comparisons are valid, and the cars have similar 0-60 times.

Edit Number 2: Dennis--You wrote:

No European car maker or car magazine do test with rollout.

The above, though not conclusive by any means, would seem to indicate that Autocar --DOES-- use rollout when testing. Can you provide some evidence that they do not? If so, that would mean the comparison of the P85D to the McLaren F1 was not a fair comparison.

 

[p85dk]

No European car maker or car magazine do test with rollout. Tesla, GM and Ford is the only car makers I know about that use rollout times to lie about the 0-60 mph times.

I bought a car that was advertised as being able to go 0-100 km/t at 3.4 s, later updated to 3.3 s. The car is going into Tesla tomorrow for testing along with two other P85D's. I expect them to come back with a solution for the car to achieve the advertised numbers.

 

[MuppetOwl]

Yes i agree. It is false advertising to say that the car goes 0-100 km/h inn 3.3 when the correct number is 3.6. 0-100 is from zero and not 6 km/h to 100 like it is when using rollout numbers.

 

[wk057]

I bought a car that was advertised as being able to go 0-100 km/t at 3.4 s, later updated to 3.3 s. The car is going into Tesla tomorrow for testing along with two other P85D's. I expect them to come back with a solution for the car to achieve the advertised numbers.

Definitely interested in the outcome of this. Please keep us updated.

 

[Andyw2100]

Yes i agree. It is false advertising to say that the car goes 0-100 km/h inn 3.3 when the correct number is 3.6. 0-100 is from zero and not 6 km/h to 100 like it is when using rollout numbers.

You haven't addressed my question, which is asking you to support your statement that no European car magazine tests with rollout.

I'm on the same side as you in this. I own a P85D. I just think that the evidence I found, while in no way conclusive, points to the fact that "Autocar" did probably test the McLaren F1 using rollout.

While I agree that Tesla advertising the P85D as doing 0-60 in 3.2, when in actuality is was 3.2, with rollout is less than 100% honest, it bothers me a lot less if the McLaren F1 Musk was comparing it to also did the 0-60 in 3.2 with rollout. If, on the other hand, Musk was equating the P85D to the F1, with the P85D's 3.2 second time including rollout, and the F1's time --NOT-- including rollout, then I would consider that extraordinarily misleading, and a much, MUCH worse transgression.

This is why I'm really interested in having you, Dennis87, provide support for your claim that no European magazine, and in particular "Autocar" tests using 1-foot rollout.

Thanks.

Edit: I may have to soften my statement above, at least a little. I just went back and watched the part of the D announcement where Musk mentions the McLaren F1. I don't know if he or Tesla ever equated the P85D to the McLaren F1 anywhere else, or at any other time, but at least at the D announcement, Musk actually did not equate them. He said, "The target hat we had for performance was to try to meet...uh...one of the greatest...the...the acceleration of one of the greatest super cars of all time which is the McLaren F1. And so we're able to actually achieve a 3.2 second 0-60. Yeah. Yeah, it's mad." Musk never actually said that Tesla --DID-- achieve matching the McLaren's acceleration, and also never gave the McLaren's 0-60 time.

 

[MuppetOwl]

I know that example Porsche and Audi dont do this. And that is the reason when motortrend, caranddriver and other us car magazines test the car they get about 0.3 faster than the factory specs are. In Europe I have never seen a car tests using rollout and im pretty sure that is only magazines from usa and drag strips that use rollout. But I cant 100% prove that every test or car manufactor from europe dont do it.

 

[ERP]

If cars were tested in Europe with a rollout, they would not use 12 inches as the rolling distance. 30 cm would be very close, but if a different distance was used then that is another factor to skew the numbers, albeit a small one.

 

[sorka]

+1

Where did you get the 550 hp from, when I had mine on the dyno it was approx 430 metric hp and from what I understand the dyno test dragtimes did showed the power in the same range. Instant torque on the other hand is out of this world

There's some discussion in the other forum saying that your dyno result doesn't count because it broke the dyno. But it didn't the second time right? They replaced the belt and then you dynoed it. Did you have to was into the throttle and if so, at what MPH did you hit full WOT? 5 mph? 10 mph? .... or something much higher?

 

[p85dk]

There's some discussion in the other forum saying that your dyno result doesn't count because it broke the dyno. But it didn't the second time right? They replaced the belt and then you dynoed it. Did you have to was into the throttle and if so, at what MPH did you hit full WOT? 5 mph? 10 mph? .... or something much higher?

The belt broke after 45 min testing. We had done all the tests and verified them several times. Then I asked him do a test were he floored it from zero. He was not sure that it would stay on the dyno, so he did a soft roll out at about 5 km/h and then it broke the belt.

We had to run it at max speed (250 km/h) at the first run to calibrate. Normally they calibrate at 3000 rpm, but since it does not have a rev counter we took it to max which should be around 18000 rpm. But all this is only to calculate the torque. The HP is easy since this is based on the known factors such as drum weight, speed etc. So the one thing they were completely sure of was the HP. They were unsure about the torque as you use the calibrated number for that, but he estimated it to be +1,300nm from 0 km/h

Here we are doing the 250 km/h run:

 

[legislator]

Do you have the graphs posted somewhere?

 

[p85dk]

Do you have the graphs posted somewhere?

http://teslaforum.dk/ow_userfiles/plugins/base/981-Tesla_Dyno.png

 

[brianman]

Random REST data point.

My P85 high water mark for May power was 341 kW.

car_version=2.4.188

1432143647268,50,45575.1,81,41,326,47.584599,-122.177106,341,D,208,137
1432143647518,53,45575.1,81,41,324,47.584642,-122.177154,341,D,208,137

My P85D high water mark for May power was 398 kW.

car_version=2.4.188

timestamp,speed,odometer,soc,elevation,est_heading,est_lat,est_lng,power,shift_state,range,est_range
1431220842172,90,4567.5,83,17,325,47.601985,-122.182755,398,D,210,147
1431220842423,92,4567.5,83,16,325,47.602042,-122.182812,398,D,210,147

For reference:

So far, these are the peaks KWs for each SOC:
...
89% = 411 KW
81% = 396 KW
...