Maybe people who paid $130K for the vehicle based on those specs?
Is there a reason you think a bait and switch is okay? Or are you in the Tesla-can-do-no-wrong camp?
-
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
Is there a reason you think a bait and switch is okay? Or are you in the Tesla-can-do-no-wrong camp?
What do you want the horsepower for? To go fast? I’m going fast — and just as fast as advertised.
And the speed has maintained through the life of the car. (My recent 11.5 1/4 mile time wasn’t at full SOC, and is similar to what I got at lower SOCs after I ran my onetime full SOC 11.3 1/4 mile time when the car was new.
What is the true cause of your suffering? what is the real damage? Where are you hurt? How much money did you lose? What speed do you imagine you are missing?
Sad to think that some people paid and are driving the same car that I have, and they are going through life miserable telling themselves a story of how they are missing horsepower, and posting angry rants on this site, while I am having fun driving the same car. smh
And anyway according to HP calculators, guess how much horsepower they predict I have for a 5000lb car (plus a driver and random small cargo) to go 11.3 in quarter mile?
Answer: 772.17 horsepower at ~96% SOC at ~ 12k miles
at 11.5?
675 horsepower at 89% SOC and after 80k miles
Angry rants ... you a funny man 
'You wanted it in Yellow, but look at all the other cool things it can do, who cares that it is red?'
It was not us, but Tesla that said the car had 691 hp, so just keep ranting angrily at everybody for pointing that out and pointing out that Tesla actually knew it did not have 691 hp, but still displayed 691 (700) on large banners and websites.
Massive torque let you have the 0-60 acceleration, which is great. The 691 hp would have given you acceleration beyond 50 mph, beyond 50 mph it is a 450 hp car.
My point with the post was not to start the discussion again because, as you clearly demonstrates, no facts can make some people change their mind.
It was just to show that Tesla knew all along they were in the wrong and just continued like they were not. To this day I bet you will not get Tesla to admit to the fact that the P85D only has 449hp.
'You wanted it in Yellow, but look at all the other cool things it can do, who cares that it is red?'It was not us, but Tesla that said the car had 691 hp, so just keep ranting angrily at everybody for pointing that out and pointing out that Tesla actually knew it did not have 691 hp, but still displayed 691 (700) on large banners and websites.
Massive torque let you have the 0-60 acceleration, which is great. The 691 hp would have given you acceleration beyond 50 mph, beyond 50 mph it is a 450 hp car.
My point with the post was not to start the discussion again because, as you clearly demonstrates, no facts can make some people change their mind.
It was just to show that Tesla knew all along they were in the wrong and just continued like they were not. To this day I bet you will not get Tesla to admit to the fact that the P85D only has 449hp.
beatle
Active Member
Those HP calculators are based on ICE power plants, especially the one you linked to that looks like it's from the late 90s. The power curve is different for an EV. ETs can be lower with less hp than an equivalent ICE vehicle because the the power is available immediately and the car has such explosive acceleration below 60 mph. Then power falls off, whereas in an ICE vehicle the hp would remain high during the second half of the run. You mention 11.5 seconds. What was your trap speed?
Also take a look at the CAN bus hp reading. It'll be nowhere near 691. With preheated Ludicrous+ mode and SoC over 90%, I think my car read around 525hp via the CAN bus. The power actually getting to the wheel would be less. I am fortunate that my battery voltage has not been capped.
Mazda once quoted 155hp for the 2001 Miata when the actual horsepower was only 142. When this fact was exposed, Mazda offered to buy back any vehicles from people who were disappointed with the new power rating. Tesla just grabbed a broom and a rug. There's nothing wrong with people wanting the specs quoted in the brochure. Similarly, imagine how upset people would be if they didn't actually have an 85kwh battery pack...
Also take a look at the CAN bus hp reading. It'll be nowhere near 691. With preheated Ludicrous+ mode and SoC over 90%, I think my car read around 525hp via the CAN bus. The power actually getting to the wheel would be less. I am fortunate that my battery voltage has not been capped.
Mazda once quoted 155hp for the 2001 Miata when the actual horsepower was only 142. When this fact was exposed, Mazda offered to buy back any vehicles from people who were disappointed with the new power rating. Tesla just grabbed a broom and a rug. There's nothing wrong with people wanting the specs quoted in the brochure. Similarly, imagine how upset people would be if they didn't actually have an 85kwh battery pack...
What is it exactly that you think you are missing? How slow is your 1/4 mile time when you take your car to the drag strip? How do you know that your car is missing any horsepower if you don’t actually use it ?
Oh,but you just care what a CAN bus reading says? ! Really?
Don’t tell the folks on taycanforum.com but the EPA CSI submission for Taycan Turbo has lower rated horsepower than on the Porsche website.
EPA rated horsepower (according to their specific guidelines) =/ “HP motor power” or “overboost power” or other marketing terms on websites.
horsepower measurements on the dyno or CANbus or calculated by other methodologies are all less important than timeslips.
Being concerned about various horsepower calculations instead of timeslips is like being concerned about Usain Bolts VO2max instead of his 100m dash time.
Last edited:
So you do not accept EPA documents as facts, why don't you just say that.
Timeslips does not tell you anything about acceleration above 50, 70 or 90 mph, but horsepower does. But you sound like a smart guy that knows his way around the car.
Can you tell us about the correlation between torque, motor rpm's and horsepower and how they affect one another at different speeds? You know the rpm maximum is about 18.000 in the P85D which it reaches at about 150 mph. The electric motors loves torque and are happy to put out maximum at 1 rpm. So at which rpm does the torque start to drop if the car has 449 hp vs 691 hp?
And why is it important to know this? Could it tell us something about the kind of acceleration we have available at different speeds, because torque is important to have when you want to accelerate?
And would a marketing HP figure tell us as buyers more about top end acceleration? Or is this information only available on timeslips and 100m dash times?
Timeslips does not tell you anything about acceleration above 50, 70 or 90 mph, but horsepower does. But you sound like a smart guy that knows his way around the car.
Can you tell us about the correlation between torque, motor rpm's and horsepower and how they affect one another at different speeds? You know the rpm maximum is about 18.000 in the P85D which it reaches at about 150 mph. The electric motors loves torque and are happy to put out maximum at 1 rpm. So at which rpm does the torque start to drop if the car has 449 hp vs 691 hp?
And why is it important to know this? Could it tell us something about the kind of acceleration we have available at different speeds, because torque is important to have when you want to accelerate?
And would a marketing HP figure tell us as buyers more about top end acceleration? Or is this information only available on timeslips and 100m dash times?
Epa rated power is one fact and another fact is that it isn't the same as HP motor power.
When will you accept that fact?
And both of them matter to me as much as Usain Bolts VO2 max.
Meanwhile I have fun at the drag strip and you whine forever and ever about marketing language while apparently ignorant of actual real performance.
You probably have never even been to a drag strip or even own a dragy. So without any real experience you imagine that peak horsepower is more informative than 1/8 mile or 1/4 mile or similar times. Smh. A steep slope power curve with a higher peak could actually be slower than a lower peak but flatter curve.
Single Peak hp datapoint is worthless compared to actual performance results.
When will you accept that fact?
And both of them matter to me as much as Usain Bolts VO2 max.
Meanwhile I have fun at the drag strip and you whine forever and ever about marketing language while apparently ignorant of actual real performance.
You probably have never even been to a drag strip or even own a dragy. So without any real experience you imagine that peak horsepower is more informative than 1/8 mile or 1/4 mile or similar times. Smh. A steep slope power curve with a higher peak could actually be slower than a lower peak but flatter curve.
Single Peak hp datapoint is worthless compared to actual performance results.
Last edited:
Correct, I have never been to a dragstrip and I don't own a dragy. I bought a car that I can use on normal roads and drive on the German Autobahn going on vacation in Europe.
I love that you need to use words like whine when you run out of actual arguments. Tesla lied, they kept lying even though they knew it was a lie. Just say that you are okay with Tesla lying and that you do not understand the correlation between HP and top end acceleration, you won't be less of a man for admitting that ;-)
I guess you have never been on a motorway with no speed limit and therefore have no idea about top end acceleration and how that correlates to the HP.
Top end acceleration is actual performance results, just not an actual result you know anything about
I love that you need to use words like whine when you run out of actual arguments. Tesla lied, they kept lying even though they knew it was a lie. Just say that you are okay with Tesla lying and that you do not understand the correlation between HP and top end acceleration, you won't be less of a man for admitting that ;-)
I guess you have never been on a motorway with no speed limit and therefore have no idea about top end acceleration and how that correlates to the HP.
Top end acceleration is actual performance results, just not an actual result you know anything about
beatle
Active Member
Well, 691 - 520 = 170hp or so, give or take a few hrspr. If the car actually made close to 691hp it'd be as fast as a MSP, maybe a bit quicker. If your response to this is again going to be, "but it's fast enough as is!" then I feel sorry for you.
I am still happy with the car as is, but I don't think anyone should be lied to.
Where is the lie here? Tesla All Wheel Drive (Dual Motor) Power and Torque Specifications
I never said it is fast enough period. Indeed, I’m now driving a plaid while keeping the P85D as a hand-me-down because its value to me is much higher than the resale value. It is a great car and still going strong at 80k miles.
But I did say that it met the actual performance metrics that were represented. And they have held strong over time as well — performing much better than expected.
I feel sorry for the people who are driving the same car that I am still enjoying (especially the proper steering wheel) but just complaining and suffering and causing themselves so much upset. really sad
beatle
Active Member
Try here:
As for your quoted article, it is condescending to the point that it assumes everyone reading it is stupid.
When measuring the power available to move the vehicle, the comparative measure is that of horsepower and torque. Nobody cares how many watts a car is rated for. This is about comparing all vehicles against something they can all be measured by. If someone then cares enough to compute kw from the hp figure, they can just convert hp to kw by multiplying by 0.7457.
As for the electric power and fuel analogy, that's an interesting one. The "missing 170hp" is like having an ICE that's capable of flowing enough air to make 671hp, but the fuel system can only flow enough to make 525, so the car must be advertised as 525hp. Ultimately the entire system is what is advertised, and the weakest link is what ultimately determines the output.
Being that this thread is over 6 years old and I bought my car only 2 years ago, I knew what I was buying and I bought it anyway. That doesn't mean the original principle of promising one thing and delivering less goes by the wayside. Sympathy isn't needed, just acknowledgement of the facts.
As for your quoted article, it is condescending to the point that it assumes everyone reading it is stupid.
When measuring the power available to move the vehicle, the comparative measure is that of horsepower and torque. Nobody cares how many watts a car is rated for. This is about comparing all vehicles against something they can all be measured by. If someone then cares enough to compute kw from the hp figure, they can just convert hp to kw by multiplying by 0.7457.
As for the electric power and fuel analogy, that's an interesting one. The "missing 170hp" is like having an ICE that's capable of flowing enough air to make 671hp, but the fuel system can only flow enough to make 525, so the car must be advertised as 525hp. Ultimately the entire system is what is advertised, and the weakest link is what ultimately determines the output.
If Tesla were selling crate motors, they could legally advertise the motors combined output as 691hp, but they're not. They're selling a vehicle. To eliminate the necessary battery "variable" is to hide behind the fact that the one that comes with the vehicle is not actually capable of delivering the current that the motor demands to reach its maximum output. The EU (and US) should tighten their requirements to advertise the motor shaft output when connected to the battery sold with the vehicle so manufacturers can't inflate their vehicles' power ratings.
Being that this thread is over 6 years old and I bought my car only 2 years ago, I knew what I was buying and I bought it anyway. That doesn't mean the original principle of promising one thing and delivering less goes by the wayside. Sympathy isn't needed, just acknowledgement of the facts.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
So if you look at CAN bus data from the new Plaid, Tesla is near 1 MWatt draw from the battery :0
I remember battery gate oh so well but I gotta agree with Elon when he said Plaid is fast enough. I do miss the idea of the Plaid+'s range.
I think Plaid makes up for the shortcomings in my P90DL and I love the idea that I paid almost exactly the same amount for both cars.
I remember battery gate oh so well but I gotta agree with Elon when he said Plaid is fast enough. I do miss the idea of the Plaid+'s range.
I think Plaid makes up for the shortcomings in my P90DL and I love the idea that I paid almost exactly the same amount for both cars.
Many people these days don't seem to be able to acknowledge facts. I feel like this wasn't as much of a problem ~15 years ago, and has all but become its own pandemic in the past 5 years... but what do I know.
The P85D does not produce 691 HP. (Neither does the P85DL, for that matter.) This is a well established, independently verifiable fact. This has nothing to do with how "happy" you are with the performance, or any other subjective metric. Horsepower is a well-defined unit, and can be measured definitively multiple different ways.
You get decent quarter mile times? Good for you! You know what though? They'd be even better if the car didn't taper torque at ~400-450 HP and actually had 691 HP as advertised. Maybe we need some kind of "new math" to show that Tesla's 691 HP number is still valid and "prove" this doesn't matter, though. Until then... well, we're here in the real world.
I thought this particular case was pretty well settled that Tesla mislead people, including multiple legal settlements along those lines.
If you publish a specification, and then your product can't meet (or even come close to) that specification under any circumstances... then well, you're in the wrong for publishing that specification. Just because other published specifications are somewhat accurate doesn't excuse the blatantly misleading ones.
Coming along almost a year later to try and explain away the misleading spec doesn't solve the issue either... just a bunch of hand waving and non-solutions, just like the people who still try to say this isn't an issue. JB (author of the linked post) wrote this, and would know perfectly well that this was misleading (torque vs HP). If the spec was valid, why did it need clarification (an asterisk, if you will) in the first place?
On the bright side, it appears Tesla has learned from this very specific mistake at some point, as modern vehicles seem to meet such specs that are independently verifiable. (Unfortunately that's just shifted their published shadiness to other areas... but those are stories for other threads and other times).
None of this excuses the fact that they mislead people in first place. Period.
The P85D does not produce 691 HP. (Neither does the P85DL, for that matter.) This is a well established, independently verifiable fact. This has nothing to do with how "happy" you are with the performance, or any other subjective metric. Horsepower is a well-defined unit, and can be measured definitively multiple different ways.
You get decent quarter mile times? Good for you! You know what though? They'd be even better if the car didn't taper torque at ~400-450 HP and actually had 691 HP as advertised. Maybe we need some kind of "new math" to show that Tesla's 691 HP number is still valid and "prove" this doesn't matter, though. Until then... well, we're here in the real world.
I thought this particular case was pretty well settled that Tesla mislead people, including multiple legal settlements along those lines.
If you publish a specification, and then your product can't meet (or even come close to) that specification under any circumstances... then well, you're in the wrong for publishing that specification. Just because other published specifications are somewhat accurate doesn't excuse the blatantly misleading ones.
Coming along almost a year later to try and explain away the misleading spec doesn't solve the issue either... just a bunch of hand waving and non-solutions, just like the people who still try to say this isn't an issue. JB (author of the linked post) wrote this, and would know perfectly well that this was misleading (torque vs HP). If the spec was valid, why did it need clarification (an asterisk, if you will) in the first place?
On the bright side, it appears Tesla has learned from this very specific mistake at some point, as modern vehicles seem to meet such specs that are independently verifiable. (Unfortunately that's just shifted their published shadiness to other areas... but those are stories for other threads and other times).
None of this excuses the fact that they mislead people in first place. Period.
In the real world find a car that weighs around 5k lbs, advertised around 690 horsepower, but was faster than a P85D.
Here's one data point: the much lighter, 707 horsepower Challenger, is routinely beat by the heavier P85D. I have done it myself many times because dragstrips are filled with hellcats.
Tesla Model S News and Reviews | InsideEVs
Get the latest on new Tesla Model S models including first drives, in-depth reviews, concept car photos, new features, recalls and more.
insideevs.com
Tesla Model S P85D vs Dodge Challenger Hellcat - Consumer Reports
Comparing the certifiably insane 691-hp Tesla Model S P85D and the patently ridiculous 707-hp Dodge Challenger Hellcat.
www.consumerreports.org
That's the real world.
Some people read Canbus data in the metaverse.
Others collect time slips in the real world.
Last edited:
Are you missing the point on purpose? Sure feels like you’re trolling at this point.In the real world find a car that weighs around 5k lbs, advertised around 690 horsepower, but was faster than a P85D.
Here's one data point: the much lighter, 707 horsepower Challenger, is routinely beat by the heavier P85D. I have done it myself many times because dragstrips are filled with hellcats.
Tesla Model S News and Reviews | InsideEVs
Get the latest on new Tesla Model S models including first drives, in-depth reviews, concept car photos, new features, recalls and more.
Tesla Model S P85D vs Dodge Challenger Hellcat - Consumer Reports
Comparing the certifiably insane 691-hp Tesla Model S P85D and the patently ridiculous 707-hp Dodge Challenger Hellcat.www.consumerreports.org
That's the real world.
Some people read Canbus data in the metaverse.
Others collect time slips in the real world.
Was thinking that myself.
In the real world find a car that weighs around 5k lbs, advertised around 690 horsepower, but was faster than a P85D.
Here's one data point: the much lighter, 707 horsepower Challenger, is routinely beat by the heavier P85D. I have done it myself many times because dragstrips are filled with hellcats.
Tesla Model S News and Reviews | InsideEVs
Get the latest on new Tesla Model S models including first drives, in-depth reviews, concept car photos, new features, recalls and more.
Tesla Model S P85D vs Dodge Challenger Hellcat - Consumer Reports
Comparing the certifiably insane 691-hp Tesla Model S P85D and the patently ridiculous 707-hp Dodge Challenger Hellcat.www.consumerreports.org
That's the real world.
Some people read Canbus data in the metaverse.
Others collect time slips in the real world.
As clearly noted above, time slips are not the metric in question. Yet again, you attempt to pivot the issue away from... well, the actual issue.
A true 691 HP electric vehicle will beat the 691* HP P85D. How do I know? Oh, right! I built an EV where I can set the max power to whatever I want up to about 1400HP. (So far only tested up to 950, though... WIP... oh, and it weighs 5900 lbs).
P85D does not have 691 HP.
Similar threads
