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

[stopcrazypp]

Which is, in my opinion, the only item based on which a buyer could really have a claim against Tesla, coz' this was simply not accurate (and not open to technical interpretation) and written black on white in the Design Studio.

Actually, I think they can get away from that too because the 6.2 update also improved 60-100mph (0.083 sec) roughly the same as it did 0-60 (0.09sec).

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/50241-P85D-and-P90D-horsepower-disagreement/page9?p=1081511&viewfull=1#post1081511

 

[thegruf]

and didn't it also extend the top speed to 155mph, therefore delivering on the improved high speed performance?

 

[darthy001]

and didn't it also extend the top speed to 155mph, therefore delivering on the improved high speed performance?

Top speed was specifically mentioned as a _separate_ update in the design studio.

And 0,083 of a second would be in the margin of error territory to me and far from my understanding of the words that was in the design studio. Anyone actually owning these cars havent noticed any improvement whatsoever in high way passing power... Actually described in the very article those numbers are taken from.

But the semantics-police could maybe try selling this of as the promised update so I was obviously wrong there someone will always twist Teslas words so thay they have done northing wrong.

The fact that they now offer(in theory at least) a paid upgrade delivering this exact feature some months later of course has no relevance here, or does it?.... Doh, that upgrade at least promises actual gains that would be possible to actually notice for a human being as opposed to 0,083 of a second for an exercise of this kind...

edit: forgot to mention that the 0,083second "improvement" is subtracted from a 5second+ timeline. I would bet money noone would be able to blindtest that difference...

 

[kseitzberg]

@darthy001: Speak for yourself, I always drive with my eyes closed, and I CAN feel a difference between now and when we got our cars delivered in March (Europe). :biggrin:

Actually we did a test of several P85D's in Denmark 14 days ago.

We had 2 vbox'es to test with, so only 2 cars could test at a time.
One of the other Danish owners were confident that his car did deliver - so I took his car for a short ride - and I could feel that it was as slow as mine. Afterwards the test result showed the same - 3,9 seconds 0-100 km/h - exactly the same as the rest.

I clearly remember how it felt - getting your head smashed into the headrest and sticking your phone to the seat. None of that is there anymore.

Fast - Yes - but not as fast as it should be.

Hoping to test a brand new delivery tomorrow - actually will be there during delivery and then test!

 

[darthy001]

@darthy001: Speak for yourself, I always drive with my eyes closed, and I CAN feel a difference between now and when we got our cars delivered in March (Europe). :biggrin:

Actually we did a test of several P85D's in Denmark 14 days ago.

We had 2 vbox'es to test with, so only 2 cars could test at a time.
One of the other Danish owners were confident that his car did deliver - so I took his car for a short ride - and I could feel that it was as slow as mine. Afterwards the test result showed the same - 3,9 seconds 0-100 km/h - exactly the same as the rest.

I clearly remember how it felt - getting your head smashed into the headrest and sticking your phone to the seat. None of that is there anymore.

Fast - Yes - but not as fast as it should be.

Hoping to test a brand new delivery tomorrow - actually will be there during delivery and then test!

eeeeh not talking about 0-100kph here.... And you are actually talking about _worsening_ of performance and not the opposite..

I was reffering to claims of improved performance 100-160kph of less than 2%... 0.083seconds out of 5seconds can not be compared to 0,4(5?) seconds out of 3-4seconds. That is vastly different and can definately be felt.... You are reffering to a possible change close to 10-20% of an already blindingly fast movement. Two different worlds..

edit: wrong numbers

 

[rns-e]

eeeeh not talking about 0-100kph here.... And you are actually talking about _worsening_ of performance and not the opposite..

I was reffering to claims of improved performance 100-160kph of less than 2%... 0.083seconds out of 5seconds can not be compared to 0,4(5?) seconds out of 3-4seconds. That is vastly different and can definately be felt.... You are reffering to a possible change close to 10-20% of an already blindingly fast movement. Two different worlds..

edit: wrong numbers

You are right, you and Ken are talking about two different things. I agree with you about the high end speed, they have not delivered on that, but the description of the Ludicrous upgrade with 20% faster acceleration to 250 km/t is exactly what I would understand as high end speed improvement - but as you say, now they want extra money for that, so what are they thinking about ???

What Ken is talking about is worse performance from 0-100 km/t (or 0-60 mph also) compared to when the first cars was delivered back in march. There is more than 15 documented Danish P85D's that are noticeable slower than the stated 3,3s 0-100 km/t. As Ken wrote, we are talking times such as 3,9s and 4,1s which is comparable or close to 85D's (which is $20k cheaper). I have a hard time believing that this only affects Danish P85D's and talking 0.6 - 0.8s slower 0-100 km/t is not ok, but it is good to know that they have the fix now in the Ludicrous upgrade.

 

[thegruf]

@darthy001: Speak for yourself, I always drive with my eyes closed, and I CAN feel a difference between now and when we got our cars delivered in March (Europe). :biggrin:

Actually we did a test of several P85D's in Denmark 14 days ago.

We had 2 vbox'es to test with, so only 2 cars could test at a time.
One of the other Danish owners were confident that his car did deliver - so I took his car for a short ride - and I could feel that it was as slow as mine. Afterwards the test result showed the same - 3,9 seconds 0-100 km/h - exactly the same as the rest.

I clearly remember how it felt - getting your head smashed into the headrest and sticking your phone to the seat. None of that is there anymore.

Fast - Yes - but not as fast as it should be.

Hoping to test a brand new delivery tomorrow - actually will be there during delivery and then test!

0-62mph (100km/h) = 3.3 seconds (0-60 is 3.1s)
not specified but the norm in the USA is to include 1 foot roll out, that's been shown to be iro 0.4s so you are at 3.7 secs.

3.7 secs =>3.9 secs is easily within environmental/SoC variables so honestly I think you overdoing it a bit describing the car as slow

 

[rns-e]

0-62mph (100km/h) = 3.3 seconds (0-60 is 3.1s)
not specified but the norm in the USA is to include 1 foot roll out, that's been shown to be iro 0.4s so you are at 3.7 secs.

3.7 secs =>3.9 secs is easily within environmental/SoC variables so honestly I think you overdoing it a bit describing the car as slow

Lets agree that 1 foot rollout is NOT zero. I know some people in here are saying that is the way it should be measured, but no one has shown any documentation for 1 foot rollout is the industry standard. That is just after rationalisation when the numbers do not add up. IF Tesla is saying that their claim of 3.1s 0-60 mph is with 1 foot rollout then it should be stated with an *, which it is not and nobody from Tesla has ever stated that it is with 1 foot rollout. They have only said that it is 3.1s to 60 mph from zero mph so that is the only facts that we have to compare with.

0.4s in a Tesla P85D, then the car will do approx 5 mph or so and that is not 0 mph which ever way you look at it

EDIT: That would be like going in to McD and ask for a 6oz Cola, pay for a 6oz Cola and then they only put 5oz in the cup and when you ask why there is only 5oz and not the 6oz you paid for, they tell you that that is the industry standard, and when you ask to see the documentation, they just say everybody knows that, but can not document it.

EDIT take 2: sorry - The 3.9s 0-100 km/t is the best numbers tested. And when asking Tesla under which conditions should we be able to do 0-100 km/t in 3.3s or even 3.5s with the industry standard 1 foot rollout - Tesla excels with their great communication skills and ignore the question as if they haven't heard it

 

[3mp_kwh]

As Ken wrote, we are talking times such as 3,9s and 4,1s which is comparable or close to 85D's (which is $20k cheaper).

Honestly, have you had 85D's show up hitting 4.2-4.4, with P85D's hitting 4.1? I think no matter whether one-foot roll-outs are discussed, or implied, it is the ~150HP deficit that matters.

IMO, if you don't know the 1-foot roll-out is standard practice, you don't follow cars or read about them. The error is an OEM writing "0-60".

 

[rns-e]

Honestly, have you had 85D's show up hitting 4.2-4.4, with P85D's hitting 4.1? I think no matter whether one-foot roll-outs are discussed, or implied, it is the ~150HP deficit that matters.

IMO, if you don't know the 1-foot roll-out is standard practice, you don't follow cars or read about them. The error is an OEM writing "0-60".

I do read about cars and I know the US magazines use 1 foot rollout, but car manufactures do not and european car magazines do not. I may be wrong, but Car and Driver typically gets better 0-60 times that the manufactor is saying, because they use 1 foot rollout. Car and Driver have not been able to verify Teslas claim of 3.1s 0-60, best they got was 3.3s.

But I do agree that the HP is as serious and the Ludicrous fuse is part of the solution to both problems

 

[darthy001]

Honestly, have you had 85D's show up hitting 4.2-4.4, with P85D's hitting 4.1? I think no matter whether one-foot roll-outs are discussed, or implied, it is the ~150HP deficit that matters.

IMO, if you don't know the 1-foot roll-out is standard practice, you don't follow cars or read about them. The error is an OEM writing "0-60".

1-foot roll-out is _not_ the standard in europe. I had never heard of it before Tesla, and I am interested in cars to put it mildly...

 

[rns-e]

Honestly, have you had 85D's show up hitting 4.2-4.4, with P85D's hitting 4.1? I think no matter whether one-foot roll-outs are discussed, or implied, it is the ~150HP deficit that matters.

IMO, if you don't know the 1-foot roll-out is standard practice, you don't follow cars or read about them. The error is an OEM writing "0-60".

I can not help but notice that there is a lot of 'you should have known' when it becomes clear that we can not trust the performance numbers Tesla claims for the P85D - is there anything else I should have known besides the missing hp and the missing acceleration when it comes to performance?

 

[SDRick]

I am surprised at the 1 foot rollout standard as well. When did this become the norm and who decided? What part of the "zero" in 0 to 60 is not defined or understood?

 

[Stoneymonster]

I am surprised at the 1 foot rollout standard as well. When did this become the norm and who decided? What part of the "zero" in 0 to 60 is not defined or understood?

A long long time ago. It's to eliminate errors in timing off the mark. Why does it matter? As long as cars are tested the same way, relative performance is what you care about.

 

[dsm363]

A long long time ago. It's to eliminate errors in timing off the mark.

I thought it was to make the 0-60 times look better for magazines and the manufacturers.

 

[Stoneymonster]

I thought it was to make the 0-60 times look better for magazines and the manufacturers.

But if they all do it uniformly, that makes little sense.

 

[MuppetOwl]

Rollout is for the dragstrip not to measure real 0-60 times. No magazines or car manufacturers in example Japan or Europe use rollout for 0-60 mph (0-100kph)

- - - Updated - - -
Edmunds and caranddriver also think its cheating.

How We Test Cars and Trucks

The term "rollout" might not be familiar, but it comes from the drag strip. The arrangement of the timing beams for drag racing can be confusing, primarily because the 7-inch separation between the "pre-stage" and "stage" beams is not the source of rollout. The pre-stage beam, which has no effect on timing, is only there to help drivers creep up to the starting position. Rollout comes from the 1-foot separation (11.5 inches, actually) between the point where the leading edge of a front tire "rolls in" to the final staging beam — triggering the countdown to the green light that starts the race — and the point where the trailing edge of that tire "rolls out" of that same beam, the triggering event that starts the clock. A driver skilled at "shallow staging" can therefore get almost a free foot of untimed acceleration before the clock officially starts, effectively achieving a rolling-start velocity of 3-5 mph and shaving the 0.3 second it typically takes to cover that distance off his elapsed time (ET) in the process.We believe the use of rollout for quarter-mile timed runs is appropriate, as this test is designed to represent an optimum drag strip run that a car owner can replicate at a drag strip. In the spirit of consistency, we also follow NHRA practice when calculating quarter-mile trap speed at the end of the run. So we publish the average speed over the final 66 feet of the quarter-mile run, even though our VBOX can tell us the instantaneous speed at the end of the 1,320-foot course, which is usually faster.
On the other hand, the use of rollout with 0-60 times is inappropriate in our view. For one, 0-60-mph acceleration is not a drag-racing convention. More important, it's called ZERO to 60 mph, not 3 or 4 mph to 60 mph, which is what you get when you apply rollout. While it is tempting to use rollout in order to make 0-60 acceleration look more impressive by 0.3 second, thereby hyping both the car's performance and the apparent skill of the test driver, we think it's cheating.

 

[rns-e]

A long long time ago. It's to eliminate errors in timing off the mark. Why does it matter? As long as cars are tested the same way, relative performance is what you care about.

Please provide some documentation showing that it is in fact a standard that manufacturs use when stating their 0-60 mph times. And more specific please provide some documentation showing that Tesla is using 1 foot rollout as a standard. I can not find it anywhere.

- - - Updated - - -

Rollout is for the dragstrip not to measure real 0-60 times. No magazines or car manufacturers in example Japan or Europe use rollout for 0-60

- - - Updated - - -

How We Test Cars and Trucks

'On the other hand, the use of rollout with 0-60 times is inappropriate in our view. For one, 0-60-mph acceleration is not a drag-racing convention. More important, it's called ZERO to 60 mph, not 3 or 4 mph to 60 mph, which is what you get when you apply rollout. While it is tempting to use rollout in order to make 0-60 acceleration look more impressive by 0.3 second, thereby hyping both the car's performance and the apparent skill of the test driver, we think it's cheating.'

But if it is the standard for measuring 0-60 mph, why would Edmunds write this? Did they not get the memo that it is the standard?

 

[Stoneymonster]

Please provide some documentation showing that it is in fact a standard that manufacturs use when stating their 0-60 mph times. And more specific please provide some documentation showing that Tesla is using 1 foot rollout as a standard. I can not find it anywhere.

I don't have to, I'm not on trial, I'm having a conversation. I'm giving a reason that some DO use it, have for decades, and speculating on it's importance.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Top speed was specifically mentioned as a _separate_ update in the design studio.

And 0,083 of a second would be in the margin of error territory to me and far from my understanding of the words that was in the design studio. Anyone actually owning these cars havent noticed any improvement whatsoever in high way passing power... Actually described in the very article those numbers are taken from.

But the semantics-police could maybe try selling this of as the promised update so I was obviously wrong there someone will always twist Teslas words so thay they have done northing wrong.

The fact that they now offer(in theory at least) a paid upgrade delivering this exact feature some months later of course has no relevance here, or does it?.... Doh, that upgrade at least promises actual gains that would be possible to actually notice for a human being as opposed to 0,083 of a second for an exercise of this kind...

edit: forgot to mention that the 0,083second "improvement" is subtracted from a 5second+ timeline. I would bet money noone would be able to blindtest that difference...

Well, the context is in the world of lawyers and suing Tesla. Tesla made a big deal about delivering an update that gave a 0.1 second improvement to the 0-60mph. And apparently the update gave a similar improvement to 60-100mph also. Legally, that may be sufficient to satisfy their claim, given they never specified how much improvement in high speed. In practical terms, neither of these improvements may matter that much.