-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Krugerrand
Meow
SDRick
Active Member
Has anyone produced evidence that in fact the motors are not "rated" at a combined 691 hp? My suspicion is that in fact these motors are capable of this output and properly rated.
The rating isn't really a factor. If the motor is rated for 1,000,000 HP it doesn't make a difference if the car can't put the power down.
The car was advertised to have 691 HP. It does not. There was no asterisk to a footnote that said something like, "With future improved battery components" or anything of the sort.
SDRick
Active Member
To my knowledge the "car" was not advertised as 691 hp by Tesla, the motor rating was.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
To stir the pot???
Pissed because non-letter writers were posting in the let's send a nasty gram to Tesla thread.
Insufficient love or attention at some point in his/her life (I'm sure I qualify on this one).
I could go on but you get the point...
Good point.
In any case, saying that the company can advertise a full car with numbers for the motor that are theoretical numbers that the motor could potentially produce in situations NOT RELATED TO THE CAR I'M BUYING makes no sense. That would be like Honda changing their specs for the Civic to say 500 HP. Then when someone gets their car and finds out it actually only has 150 HP, then they complain for Honda to tell them, "Oh, that's just what the motor is capable of not what the car can actually do. You have to get this $5000 turbo + NO2 upgrade to actually get closer to 500HP. We just focus on other performance metrics."
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Or, perhaps Tesla told you they put a 470 hp motor in the back and a 221 hp motor in the front then you assumed you could just add the two (which I am sure is something Tesla was inviting). Sure, you can add the two but we all know what the battery can deliver so, unless there are magic particles involved, the car can only put down so much power.
And WK, I'm not letting you off the hook given that you, if anyone on this forum, knows the car can only put down what the battery can deliver yet you bought the car anyway. I was with you more on the range rub and kinda going along with the autopilot bitch perhaps with a little more understanding.
Last edited:
SDRick
Active Member
On this I think we agree. Yes, you did not buy a motor, you bought a car that was equipped with motors with a combined motor power "rating" of 691 hp.
I did no such math. Tesla showed and showcased the combined 691 HP number. The CEO of the company confirmed this is interviews. Tesla staff confirmed that the performance would be that of a car with 691 HP when specifically talking about high speed performance where my P85 was lacking. Come on now.
I'll quote the screenshot above:
View attachment 90606
Edit: Oh, and on the battery comment. I of all people know what the battery can deliver, and it definitely can deliver the power required for this performance and I knew this at the time I ordered having already done one tear down and testing of the 85kWh pack modules by that time. Tesla knows this as well, and has since admitted that the components they used are incapable of handling that power. It's not my fault they used the wrong fuse and contactors.
Last edited:
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
Nope, not letting you off the hook. If we are standing outside and I tell you it is perfectly sunny while the rain is pouring down on you, you know something is not right.
The car you bought does have that much motor hp in the front and the rear, you simply can not get the maximum out of both of them at the same time. Is that honest advertising, no. Does it rise to the level that you are owed something, no.
The car you bought does have that much motor hp in the front and the rear, you simply can not get the maximum out of both of them at the same time. Is that honest advertising, no. Does it rise to the level that you are owed something, no.
CarlK
Active Member
Terrible analogy. In this case the real story is that Tesla demonstrated a car with substantial performance improvements above and beyond my existing vehicle. They confirmed multiple times the performance relationship with the 691 HP number in multiple personal and public conversations. If the car can not put out 691 HP that number never should have been tied to the car.
Dishonest advertising? dishonest (adj.) - intended to mislead or cheat.
Let me fix that for you: False advertising. You know what? That's illegal.
SDRick
Active Member
Herein lies some of the problems. First, you say Tesla staff confirmed... Do you have proof?
Even if they did confirm that the performance would be that of a 691 hp car, this too could be an accurate statement based on the other printed advertised metric 0 to 60.
A Bentley 2013 continental V 12 weighs approximately 5000 pounds has over 600 horsepower with the 0 to 60 around four seconds. Where's the beef?
I do have emails and SMS messages from multiple people at Tesla confirming this, specifically with regard to high speed performance. No, I will not be posting them here since it's certainly not the fault of these individuals that they were mislead by their higher ups. Edit: Actually, I even have a voice message in response to some comparison questions that mentions: Yeah, and with 691 HP [the P85D] will smoke the P85 on the highway
The 0-60 is cool, but I specifically asked about high speed/highway performance.
Sure, and that heavier car rolling side by side with a me at 60 MPH would blow away the P85D 60-100 MPH.
--
On a side note, found a reference to the RX8 horsepower issue where Mazda bought back cars over a 4.8% HP discrepancy: Mazda Offers to Buy Back RX-8
With the P85D we're looking at more like a 20+% discrepancy.
SDRick
Active Member
So what is your point? You claim to have this "evidence" about high-speed performance claims but do not want to share. If "Yeah, and with 691 HP [the P85D] will smoke the P85 on the highway" is your best evidence it is not very compelling and may be a difficult measure to quantify in court.
Had I done the extensive due diligence you claim to have done before purchase I might be upset as well. But I also know that salesman often do not know the car as well as the customer and have been known to stretch the truth a bit to make a sale. If you really have this "evidence" either share it with the company or an attorney and let us know if there is any there-there.
Fortunately, the emails/sms/voice messages I have are not really the issue. I will share them as deemed appropriate with Tesla and/or my attorneys, but certainly not publicly since that would require substantial censoring to protect privacy. As a matter of fact I have quoted some of these messages in my conversations with Tesla and they've been as dismissive as you saying things along the lines of the individuals simply should not have told me these things and passing the blame to the front line employee instead of owning up to the misinformation.
Interestingly enough, my prior conversations with Tesla about the P85D purchase last year were not intended to second guess or seek confirmation on the listed specs as if I felt they needed to be questioned. There was a lot of questions for clarification on autopilot and the timeline for it, since it was ambiguous. However, most of the spec questions and answers were simply brought up as part of the conversations I was having while contemplating proceeding with the transaction to trade my P85 and buy the P85D. I honestly never thought I'd have to look back at those conversations as "evidence."
But, Tesla has bigger problems than some conversations with front line employees, IMO, so, I'm not really concerned.
Similar threads
