Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

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

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Was thinking that myself.



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.
Yet it beats cars that are lighter and are advertised to have 707 hp.

QED
 
Yet it beats cars that are lighter and are advertised to have 707 hp.

QED

So, you're saying that the P85D, which was advertised with 691 HP, wouldn't be bested by say... oh, I don't know, a similar weight (heavier) EV that has say, 650 real horsepower?

In that case you're telling me a P90DL (with the correct "battery horsepower" advertised well below 691 HP) can't beat a P85D. I'm pretty sure everyone with at least one eye and a brain knows this not to be the case.

Yeah, I think the only explanation is trolling at this point, unfortunately. To what end, no clue.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rns-e
So, you're saying that the P85D, which was advertised with 691 HP, wouldn't be bested by say... oh, I don't know, a similar weight (heavier) EV that has say, 650 real horsepower?

In that case you're telling me a P90DL (with the correct "battery horsepower" advertised well below 691 HP) can't beat a P85D. I'm pretty sure everyone with at least one eye and a brain knows this not to be the case.

Yeah, I think the only explanation is trolling at this point, unfortunately. To what end, no clue.
I'm saying what I said. P85ds beat the lighter and 707 rated horsepower hellcat. . .
 
That wasn't something that was in dispute here, but alright. Cool.

"Let the record show that the witness refused to answer the question."
lol. What was the question? I thought it had something to do with the car performance? I just expressed that the car performance that I care about was better than expected based on the marketing and website info from Tesla.

Those who care about car performance by looking at canbus data numbers aren’t concerned about the same performance that matters to me.
 
lol. What was the question? I thought it had something to do with the car performance? I just expressed that the car performance that I care about was better than expected based on the marketing and website info from Tesla.

Those who care about car performance by looking at canbus data numbers aren’t concerned about the same performance that matters to me.
To which the obvious response is "Why does anybody care about what matters to you if you don't care about what matters to anyone else?"
 
Thank you CAN Bus numbers readers :)
Loving the new battery data for the Plaid.
2300 sustained amps. Wow!
Loving the new timeslips for plaid. Low 9s in the 1/4 and low 6 in the 1/8. And loving the passing power. wow.

I have no idea what the plaid canbus numbers are. And being happy with the timeslips in hand, I don’t know why I’d care much or look for a reason to complain about they said.

I suppose it is interesting to talk about the full power curve — your reference to “sustained” which is quite different from the P85D which dropped off quite a bit after the intial launch — also evident in Dragy’s g meter.

And really the slope of the power curve is more important than any brief instant of peak power.

I wonder if Canbus readers would have been more happy with a higher brief peak power at a price of steeper downward slope and resulting less performance. Probably they would be happier since they never actually get a timeslip and would never know — and would just be happy admiring the peak power number. .
 
It's pretty irritating that you're making "CAN bus readers" out to be some trivial group of people to put down, as this is clearly not what the issue is here. No matter how much you try to belittle those who actually care that their vehicles underperform vs their advertised specs, it doesn't change the fact that Tesla lied and mislead people about the performance of the P85D.

Even the very first post in this thread, well before anyone posted about any CAN data, is complaining about a lack of performance compared to the advertised spec.

So stop with the fake notion that people are only complaining about metrics shown via CAN. It's clearly just trolling at this point. If you're happy with the performance and don't care about the actual specs, good for you. Doesn't mean Tesla gets a pass on misleading everyone.

And for the record, a great many of the people disappointed and who feel cheated by Tesla's misleading claims DO go to the drag strip and other places where real world performance matters, myself included.

Here you go:

I got beat by a stock GTR Nismo, 600 HP ICE, by a full two tenths in the 1/8th... a car a real 691 HP EV would have handily beaten... including the P90DL variants, which actually reach almost 691 HP, based on time slip data alone (I've personally raced in that particular P90DL... oh and there's a similar Nissan GTR shown in that video, too). CAN bus data is just one of many metrics added to the pile to prove Tesla's deceit.

So seriously, just stop with the putting down of people who actually care that they were cheated.
 
Last edited:
  • Funny
  • Like
Reactions: bhzmark and rns-e
It's pretty irritating that you're making "CAN bus readers" out to be some trivial group of people to put down, as this is clearly not what the issue is here. No matter how much you try to belittle those who actually care that their vehicles underperform vs their advertised specs, it doesn't change the fact that Tesla lied and mislead people about the performance of the P85D.

Even the very first post in this thread, well before anyone posted about any CAN data, is complaining about a lack of performance compared to the advertised spec.

So stop with the fake notion that people are only complaining about metrics shown via CAN. It's clearly just trolling at this point. If you're happy with the performance and don't care about the actual specs, good for you. Doesn't mean Tesla gets a pass on misleading everyone.

And for the record, a great many of the people disappointed and who feel cheated by Tesla's misleading claims DO go to the drag strip and other places where real world performance matters, myself included.

Here you go:

I got beat by a stock GTR Nismo, 600 HP ICE, by a full two tenths in the 1/8th... a car a real 691 HP EV would have handily beaten... including the P90DL variants, which actually reach almost 691 HP, based on time slip data alone (I've personally raced in that particular P90DL... oh and there's a similar Nissan GTR shown in that video, too). CAN bus data is just one of many metrics added to the pile to prove Tesla's deceit.

So seriously, just stop with the putting down of people who actually care that they were cheated.
Hello how would I be able to get in contact with you? It’s regarding a model Y.
 
It’s pretty irritating that some people forget about the weight of the car.

According to this calculator: eighth mile calculator with incremental - racingcalcs

a 2015 GTR Nismo weighs 3800 lbs plus 200 lbs of driver and gas etc: with 600 hp should run a 7.23 1/8 mile
the video shows 7.15 so within a 10th.

a 2014 P85D weighs 5000 lbs plus 200 lbs of driver and charging cables with 691 hp should run a 7.53 in the 1/8 mile.

Your video shows the P85D doing 7.35 ..

so it must have more than 691 hp! congrats!


It's pretty irritating that you're making "CAN bus readers" out to be some trivial group of people to put down, as this is clearly not what the issue is here. No matter how much you try to belittle those who actually care that their vehicles underperform vs their advertised specs, it doesn't change the fact that Tesla lied and mislead people about the performance of the P85D.

Even the very first post in this thread, well before anyone posted about any CAN data, is complaining about a lack of performance compared to the advertised spec.

So stop with the fake notion that people are only complaining about metrics shown via CAN. It's clearly just trolling at this point. If you're happy with the performance and don't care about the actual specs, good for you. Doesn't mean Tesla gets a pass on misleading everyone.

And for the record, a great many of the people disappointed and who feel cheated by Tesla's misleading claims DO go to the drag strip and other places where real world performance matters, myself included.

Here you go:

I got beat by a stock GTR Nismo, 600 HP ICE, by a full two tenths in the 1/8th... a car a real 691 HP EV would have handily beaten... including the P90DL variants, which actually reach almost 691 HP, based on time slip data alone (I've personally raced in that particular P90DL... oh and there's a similar Nissan GTR shown in that video, too). CAN bus data is just one of many metrics added to the pile to prove Tesla's deceit.

So seriously, just stop with the putting down of people who actually care that they were cheated.
 
Last edited:
Are you having a hard time understanding? The car does not have 691 hp - it's actually very simple. The reason you are seeing the performance you are talking about is torque, as I've told you before. So many posts from you and the still do not have 691 hp
 
  • Funny
Reactions: bhzmark
Are you having a hard time understanding? The car does not have 691 hp - it's actually very simple. The reason you are seeing the performance you are talking about is torque, as I've told you before. So many posts from you and the still do not have 691 hp


Ok. I agree you are literally correct. There are not 691 real live horses in the frunk.

But if we actually care about performance, the P85D just performs equivalent to (or in the above case even better than!) having 691 real live horses in the frunk!

Do I have it now?
 
The question I would ask is why Tesla decided to say the car had 691 hp when independently verifiable data (and later, comments from Tesla management) says the car can not produce that level of power? They should have just said performs as good or better than ICE with 691 hp and they would have been just fine.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhzmark
It’s pretty irritating that some people forget about the weight of the car.

According to this calculator: eighth mile calculator with incremental - racingcalcs

a 2015 GTR Nismo weighs 3800 lbs plus 200 lbs of driver and gas etc: with 600 hp should run a 7.23 1/8 mile
the video shows 7.15 so within a 10th.

a 2014 P85D weighs 5000 lbs plus 200 lbs of driver and charging cables with 691 hp should run a 7.53 in the 1/8 mile.

Your video shows the P85D doing 7.35 ..

so it must have more than 691 hp! congrats!
So, first it's "I'm happy, so you should be" to belittling "CAN bus readers" because they never actually race their cars.... to, "well, you lost the race because the car is too heavy and this useless ICE HP calculator says you should have over 691 HP ICE equivalent, so Tesla is still right!"

moving-goalpost.gif

🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄🙄

I didn't buy a 691 HP ICE. I bought what was supposed to be a 691 HP EV. A 691 HP EV would have handily won that race, as proven in my last post.

This discrepancy is super obvious in P85D vs P85 races:

Hows the 691 HP P85D just barely walking away from the 400-something HP P85 after the initial dual motor torque launch? Hmm? Oh right, it doesn't have 691 HP. It actually only has 40-ish more HP than the P85... and walks away exactly like it has about 40 more HP... not 250 more.

Oh, and the above race was before I modded that P85 to have more HP than a P85D really has. After the initial launch, the modded P85 would catch up to the P85D in a 1/4 run.


Tesla is wrong here. Get over it.
 
Last edited:
  • Funny
Reactions: bhzmark
The question I would ask is why Tesla decided to say the car had 691 hp when independently verifiable data (and later, comments from Tesla management) says the car can not produce that level of power? They should have just said performs as good or better than ICE with 691 hp and they would have been just fine.

Yes I agree. And frankly that is all it means to me. With no plans to read CANbus data (and knowing that momentary peak data is pretty useless anyway) and no plans to put the car on the dyno, but with plans to actually drive the car with plenty of Wide Open Throttle events, the actual performance is all that mattered.

Momentary peak horsepower —however measured — is not a very useful metric. The performance is much more dependent on the slope of the power curve, or in other words the area under the power curve. There is no agreed metric for that, but the best way to indicate it is the 1/8 mile or 1/4 times. That’s what matters to most who care about acceleration performance.

That is also reflected in the reported fact of the “modded P85 catching up to” the P85D. Do you see how the “catching up” is more a function of the area under the power curve, and not the peak momentary power? Do you see how peak momentary power, especially when it might, or might not, decline rapidly, is not very useful?

I guess there are others who care more about the peak momentary horsepower that they admire, or lament, as the case may be, reported through some (reliable?) interface on their phone. shrug. Not sure why that would matter more than the actual acceleration results except for people who just want to find something to complain about even where there is no actual real life harm or injury suffered since the car actually performs better than a car with 691 horsepower would be predicted to perform.
 
Last edited:
Been reading this saga for fun, but def gotten into “religious debate” territory now. No one is saying real world perf at the strip doesn’t matter or speak for itself. Still a very powerful car.
The simple fact being stated is that the P85D (I’m an owner btw) should’ve never been published as a 691hp vehicle. That’s it. Nothing about how well it still performs on the track. If Tesla or anyone else could show a dyno proven 691hp, we wouldn’t be 100 pages into this.
I still would’ve purchased the car for the insane perf that I’ll never fully/routinely use, but point still remains it never made 691hp.
To turn up the contrast… what if they published it as a 1000hp car? Same points from you? Prob not I suspect and you’d call BS?
 
  • Like
Reactions: lolachampcar
Yes I agree. And frankly that is all it means to me. With no plans to read CANbus data (and knowing that momentary peak data is pretty useless anyway) and no plans to put the car on the dyno, but with plans to actually drive the car with plenty of Wide Open Throttle events, the actual performance is all that mattered.

Momentary peak horsepower —however measured — is not a very useful metric. The performance is much more dependent on the slope of the power curve, or in other words the area under the power curve. There is no agreed metric for that, but the best way to indicate it is the 1/8 mile or 1/4 times. That’s what matters to most who care about acceleration performance.

That is also reflected in the reported fact of the “modded P85 catching up to” the P85D. Do you see how the “catching up” is more a function of the area under the power curve, and not the peak momentary power? Do you see how peak momentary power, especially when it might, or might not, decline rapidly, is not very useful?

I guess there are others who care more about the peak momentary horsepower that they admire, or lament, as the case may be, reported through some (reliable?) interface on their phone. shrug. Not sure why that would matter more than the actual acceleration results except for people who just want to find something to complain about even where there is no actual real life harm or injury suffered since the car actually performs better than a car with 691 horsepower would be predicted to perform.
You are (presumably given you quoted my post) asking me to comment on your area under the curve position so I will.

Tesla said the car made XYZ horsepower when, in fact, it did not. They knew what they were doing and came up with some BS story for Strauble to spew all the time knowing they did not make XYZ horsepower. It really is as simple as that. There is an old Swedish saying that goes something like - It's bad enough to do something stupid but do you have to sit there and defend it?

I'm not disputing area under the curve or ICE to BeV relative performance. From CAN data, you can clearly see the amp draw and voltage droop. Combine those two numbers and you have available power at the battery terminals. Tesla knows this and knows it did not peak at their claimed numbers let alone ride a flattened portion of the power curve above this level.

The reason I, and I suspect most of us, were pissed is the car had the performance so there is really no need to hype the numbers to the point of falsehood. It's a self inflicted wound that damages the brand and breaches trust.

Like many others, I had no interest in seeking compensation. I know Musk gets out over his skis on a regular basis but normally stays within the bounds of first principals. I applauded the smack on the nose for the lie in hopes it would pull him back from so close to the edge.

Musk has done an unbelievably good job of hyping a company and keep buzz/interest alive with zero to near zero marketing budget. That is one heck of a dancing bear act and, given deliveries that followed including the nut job that is Plaid, I'd say he has found a good long term balance.

I'm not sure I understand the focus on an "interface on their phone" as you call it. Perhaps it would be easier for some to understand if they looked at it simply as a HP/Torque curve from a dyno. Poking fun at the CAN interface is akin to poking fun at the inertia wheel on a rolling road dyno or, more accurately, the hall sensor that measures wheel rotation. That is lost on me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bhzmark
The reason I, and I suspect most of us, were pissed is the car had the performance

For me, since the car had the performance, I wasn't pissed. I enjoyed the performance untainted by being pissed. I recommend everyone try that.


The reference to reading power numbers on your phone is because the self inflicted outrage is a function of being able to get a new metric for a car without getting a time slip or going to the dyno: it Is just connecting to the car and reading a datastream.

Tesla made that possible and it is interesting to figure out the data, but it also allows people to get information and purport to say the cars power isn't what they want without actually even using the power in a way where they would even notice the difference. Lots of car magazines evaluated the p85d wrote that it had 691 horsepower, and never hinted that they thought anything was amiss because the car, as you say, had the performance.

They even put it on the dyno, and then watched it beat a 691 hp Lamborghini that was 900lbs lighter in the first 1/8 mile.

Read this from Road and Track . the dyno hp numbers are right there but they just marvel at the torque and giving the lighter lambo a bad time. Maybe they thought the traction control interfered with the dyno and likely it did somewhat Tesla P85D has dyno issues thanks to 864-lbs of torque

Its funny to think that if Tesla had encrypted canbus data, or otherwise made it unavailable, the few outraged could instead be enjoying their cars' performance, untainted by being pissed. and what a pleasure that is ---I did it for 80k miles.
 
Last edited: