Calling P85D owners world-wide for survey and complaint letter

[Hybris]

My point is that I dont believe there is a 0.5s difference with rollout or not. I did say nothing about how fast the Tesla is without rollout...

-- - -

If you read the "history" page at the website of the Danes they say that Tesla has downgraded performance in April. They state that he car had higher performance before.

Performance history | P85D Owners Missing Performance

Not based on real measurement but videos etc as far as I can read the "before". So the point would be:
1. What was the real 0-100 kph performance before April? Real measurementd without rollout any reliable source with data a car spec?
2. What is the real 0-100 kph performance after April? Real measurement without rollout. Dont see data on their site but should be easy for others to test and verify.
3. Verified differ ece between 1-2! If there is a 0.5s firmware downgrade that would be a true scandal! smaller variations in the 0.1-0.3s but 0.5s is much...

so the point is not with our without rollout. Its rather the difference in performance over time... That change would not be ok if true as downgrading a car by the manufacturer would be close to scam. Should be the same issue 0-60 and with our without rollout then...

 

[Magus]

And people complain about us Americans. Wow is this complaint lame. The complainers data is cherry picked.

 

[lolachampcar]

nope
658 or so hp max efficiency (depending upon what battery voltage you use) when launched
760 or so hp max when you change out the fuse(s) and contactor with a Ludicrous upgrade
I fail to see a disagreement with my statement.

Lastly, Tesla does not allow for high current draws for extended periods of time. It remains to be seen if they relax that restriction with Ludicrous.

 

[Hybris]

And people complain about us Americans. Wow is this complaint lame. The complainers data is cherry picked.

Should be easy to verify if we have some cars Vbox or strip times in February to March? Run the same tests today and verify if there is a 0.5s difference. No matter rollout or not... If true it should be similar loss of performance no matter if we do 0-60, 0-100 with/without rollout. The % loss in power should be pretty easy to verify if its in the 0.5s range?

 

[darthy001]

My point is that I dont believe there is a 0.5s difference with rollout or not. I did say nothing about how fast the Tesla is without rollout...

Here are Sorkas numbers from the US. 0.35seconds difference for the roll-out there.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/51563-Calling-P85D-owners-world-wide-for-survey-and-complaint-letter/page2?p=1110664#post1110664

I already showed the numbers from dragtimes which are similar. I dont know if the last 0.1-0.2seconds difference shown in Danish results where there from day1 or not. That is something the danes needs to prove, but no matter what the 0-100kph times are off by 0.4-0.5seconds in all of these tests.. Even initial ones from dragtimes etc. If some of that is due to Tesla reducing power in an OTA or not is not something I can confirm. I just notice the danes are very clear on this, and I hope they have data to back up their claims..

Take the best example of 0.427seconds from sorka off the advertised number and that is a 13% worse real-world result than the advertised figure.

Edit: looking at all of this I am getting sceptical about the claims that this was done OTA to be honest. I believe the car simply never came close to the 3.4 and later 3.3seconds 0-100kph at anytime. Worst part is that if this holds true for Ludicrous that wont event get to the 3.3second mark. Forget about the 3.0seconds they are advertising with at the moment. That is truly ludicrous I would believe

 

[dsm363]

Again the 3.3 second time for 0-100kmh appears to be with a one foot rollout so any tests would need to include that to compare against 3.3 seconds.

 

[Hybris]

The OTA downgrade is a serious claim and should be verified! Any early P85D with measurements in February-March should be able to confirm with some testruns... I think this serious claim is hidden in discussions around rollout or not...

Is there a P85D with 265, PS2 that can verify their performance numbers? Dont find the data on the Danes site. 245 with continentals could be 0.2s difference. When I do max acceleration the DSC lamp is never triggered. Any tests between PS2/265 and continentals square 245 setup under similar conditions?

- - - Updated - - -

Again the 3.3 second time for 0-100kmh appears to be with a one foot rollout so any tests would need to include that to compare against 3.3 seconds.

Optimal would be a car with some runs before April and then the same runs in as similar conditions as possible. A 0.5s deviation should be pretty easy to see.. The point is the difference. Did Tesla send out an OTA performance downgrade in April? Yes/No. ;-)

 

[darthy001]

Again the 3.3 second time for 0-100kmh appears to be with a one foot rollout so any tests would need to include that to compare against 3.3 seconds.

I don't agree with this as the claim towards Tesla is that they advertised and still advertise with no information about roll-out... So for us europeans that actually mean that 0=Zero and not 3-4 the claim holds Tesla claims a 3.3second 0-100kph with no info about roll-out. Thus I hold them to that claim. I don't see any reason why non-US owners should fallback to some strange notion of 0-whatever not actually being measured from a standstill..

Throw in the mentioned disclaimer from Tesla and I agree fully though.

Edit: or where you commenting on the claimed OTA-update worsening performance?

- - - Updated - - -

Optimal would be a car with some runs before April and then the same runs in as similar conditions as possible. A 0.5s deviation should be pretty easy to see.. The point is the difference. Did Tesla send out an OTA performance downgrade in April? Yes/No. ;-)

Just out of curiousity: if it turns out the car has always been 0.5seconds off of the advertised speed. Are you OK with that no matter what?

 

[dsm363]

I don't agree with this as the claim towards Tesla is that they advertised and still advertise with no information about roll-out... So for us europeans that actually mean that 0=Zero and not 3-4 the claim holds Tesla claims a 3.3second 0-100kph with no info about roll-out. Thus I hold them to that claim. I don't see any reason why non-US owners should fallback to some strange notion of 0-whatever not actually being measured from a standstill..

Throw in the mentioned disclaimer from Tesla and I agree fully though.

No one is arguing Tesla advertised the rollout. That's unfortunately the convention here in U.S. and they didn't bother to qualify it here or in Europe. It is what it is though so any claims have to be based on what Tesla based their number on regardless of if you agree with a rollout or not. You can't say there is a 0.5 second difference from what Tesla got when they did a rollout and you didn't. You can disagree with Tesla using a rollout and not stating so but they got their numbers with that rollout.

 

[dsm363]

It Tesla released an update and made the performance worse then of course that is not right. They stated it improved with the update.
0.5 seconds is a big difference. If you had the exact same setup and conditions Tesla ran their test (which was likely ideal conditions) with brand new tires then yes, you might have a case.

 

[darthy001]

No one is arguing Tesla advertised the rollout. That's unfortunately the convention here in U.S. and they didn't bother to qualify it here or in Europe. It is what it is though so any claims have to be based on what Tesla based their number on regardless of if you agree with a rollout or not. You can't say there is a 0.5 second difference from what Tesla got when they did a rollout and you didn't. You can disagree with Tesla using a rollout and not stating so but they got their numbers with that rollout.

Hehe, I think we are discussing different things. I don't really care about what Tesla got, and those results are heavily verified in US-testing as we all know anyway. Other than that we mostly agree.

Question really is in relation for this thread and the danish owners: is it OK for Tesla to advertise a 0-100kph time that is impossible to get within 0.4seconds of in a real 0-100kph measurement? What are these owners entitled to if this is not OK?

 

[dsm363]

Hehe, I think we are discussing different things. I don't really care about what Tesla got, and those results are heavily verified in US-testing as we all know anyway. Other than that we mostly agree.

Question really is in relation for this thread and the danish owners: is it OK for Tesla to advertise a 0-100kph time that is impossible to get within 0.4seconds of in a real 0-100kph measurement? What are these owners entitled to if this is not OK?

It's impossible to get if Telsa included a rollout and they don't accept and include that in their tests. They will never reach that number without testing it the same way Telsa did (right or wrong). They probably aren't entitled to anything unfortunately.

 

[Hybris]

Well 3.3s vs 4s is not ok. With 265 and PS2 that is. Need more independent tests to get upset though. The points the Danes site is doing is saying the performance "was there" before and "now its not"... The rollout difference is a second topic.
What did INSANE Feel like | P85D Owners Missing Performance

 

[legislator]

When Tesla put up 691hp on teslamotors.com there was a note which said "** Tested in accordance with ECE R85. This dyno based test does not take the battery into account."

Why would you still think the car would be able to dyno 691hp with the 85kW battery?

 

[Johan]

When Tesla put up 691hp on teslamotors.com there was a note which said "** Tested in accordance with ECE R85. This dyno based test does not take the battery into account."

Why would you still think the car would be able to dyno 691hp with the 85kW battery?

Bulls eye.

 

[darthy001]

Well 3.3s vs 4s is not ok. With 265 and PS2 that is. Need more independent tests to get upset though. The points the Danes site is doing is saying the performance "was there" before and "now its not"... The rollout difference is a second topic.
What did INSANE Feel like | P85D Owners Missing Performance

Yes, then we are more in agreement I think. As mentioned a few times here I am more and more inclined to believe the performance was never there and that the danish owners has simply just never tested anywhere near the advertised numbers before the updates mentioned since it simply isn't possible. Getting used to the insane-launches is definately a possibility.

 

[MuppetOwl]

When Tesla put up 691hp on teslamotors.com there was a note which said "** Tested in accordance with ECE R85. This dyno based test does not take the battery into account."

Why would you still think the car would be able to dyno 691hp with the 85kW battery?

Cant find that anywhere on the Tesla site? Is is removed?

Also this is not only a P85D problem. Im sure also P90D and Ludicrous times is with rollout.

 

[darthy001]

When Tesla put up 691hp on teslamotors.com there was a note which said "** Tested in accordance with ECE R85. This dyno based test does not take the battery into account."

Why would you still think the car would be able to dyno 691hp with the 85kW battery?

Reference for this? There clearly is _NO_ "**"- in the shown screenshots from Denmark, and I cannot remember seeing that for Norway either!?
Example: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...691HP/page20?p=1021208&viewfull=1#post1021208

And what in the ECE R85-spec details what Teslas 85kwh-battery can output?

And why is this even relevant when Tesla is now saying the battery, with new fuses, is able to provide this power in ludicrous-mode?

- - - Updated - - -

It's impossible to get if Telsa included a rollout and they don't accept and include that in their tests. They will never reach that number without testing it the same way Telsa did (right or wrong). They probably aren't entitled to anything unfortunately.

Sadly precedence from other carmakers making unreal claims in the past makes it true I believe that they have no real case for the 0-100kph other than if they are able to prove that Tesla withheld information about the times here on purpose. The HP-case is another one where there is positive precedence in the legal systems and Tesla would be in trouble if someone took them to court in Norway at least.

Still think its curious that many of the Tesla fans, not directed at you, here think this kind behavior from Tesla is OK. As mentioned numerous times now Tesla doesn't need to falsely advertise their numbers to sell cars. They only stand to lose by it if this hits mainstream media.

 

[Matias]

When Tesla put up 691hp on teslamotors.com there was a note which said "** Tested in accordance with ECE R85. This dyno based test does not take the battery into account."

Why would you still think the car would be able to dyno 691hp with the 85kW battery?

Are you sure you are not mistaken this with P85? Do you have a screenshot?

Here's no such disclaimerView attachment 90606

 

[legislator]

I'm not saying it's still there, but now they state "motor power" and 221hp+470hp. It used to be under options/specifications. Search for "ECE R85" in your owners manual and you will see what Tesla means by "motor power"