-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
Todd Burch
14-Year Member
I'm not claiming that you can recover the energy lost due to heat during acceleration. But you CAN recover about 85% of whatever kinetic energy you have through regen.
Point is, the statement that a 10% drop in weight yields a 10% improvment in range is not correct.
My interpretation of this is that it's a statement regarding continuous evolution.
Meaning 1 is likely heavier than 1001, 1001 is likely heavier than 2001, etc. (Assuming 1/1001/2001/... are equivalently configured.)
I don't think we'll ever know the exact transition numbers -- and there may be some overlap on the production line making it "complicated". Also, if we knew the numbers I suspect they would only be complete for like a week or a month and then a new entry in the "weight reduced" timepoints would be added.
HyperMiler
Member
Have any recently delivered Model S been put on a vehicle scale? Sounds doable.
If a few owners would do it, one could probably even do the maths on configuration items.
If a few owners would do it, one could probably even do the maths on configuration items.
chickensevil
Active Member
I know there is a truck scale near me I could take my car to and then subtract out my weight. I had to use it before when I was doing a travel claim in the military.
I have Vin 33xxx so it will give you a data point from a March production. The only thing is that the different configurations likely make the car vary pretty decently in weight. Like pana roof vs not. Sound package. Dual Chargers. Kid seats. The list goes on. I am willing to bet that there is a couple hundred pounds difference between a base 85 and a fully loaded P85+ with every option.
I have Vin 33xxx so it will give you a data point from a March production. The only thing is that the different configurations likely make the car vary pretty decently in weight. Like pana roof vs not. Sound package. Dual Chargers. Kid seats. The list goes on. I am willing to bet that there is a couple hundred pounds difference between a base 85 and a fully loaded P85+ with every option.
My S85, delivered Sep 2013, slightly exceeds 320 kW on the power meter.
A reputable Norwegian tuning shop (RS Tuning Bergen) recently dynoed a 60, S85 and P85 and got 305 hp from the 60, 405 hp from the S85 and 424 from the P. None of them were fully charged. To be fair, they had trouble measuring the P at lower speeds, and got a reading of 440 hp for a brief moment before the test equipment shut down due to overload. Article in Norwegian
I can feel the performance difference between 50 and 90 % SoC. I wish someone would test power and acceleration at 90 % SoC...
A reputable Norwegian tuning shop (RS Tuning Bergen) recently dynoed a 60, S85 and P85 and got 305 hp from the 60, 405 hp from the S85 and 424 from the P. None of them were fully charged. To be fair, they had trouble measuring the P at lower speeds, and got a reading of 440 hp for a brief moment before the test equipment shut down due to overload. Article in Norwegian
I can feel the performance difference between 50 and 90 % SoC. I wish someone would test power and acceleration at 90 % SoC...
Maybe this is a surprise to most of you, but kW measures the exact same thing as horsepower. 320kW = 429HP, at the inverter. Dyno is just effectively measuring efficiency, when it's not overloaded.
Nope, no surprise. The suprise is that the S85 reports slightly over 320 KW in some cases. Either what it reports is wrong or it really can output ~430 HP for a short time. If it's inverter numbers, that might explain part of it since the inverter to motor output isn't loss-less.
chickensevil
Active Member
Having watched a few episodes of Top Gear Australia now, I was rather surprised and found it a bit weird to hear them giving the specs of all the cars they were testing in kW instead of HP and since I am not familiar with the conversion it made it difficult to put in perspective... But yeah, who knew? Electricity compared to the power of a horse.
iKhalid
Member
Elon said in conference call, that a Tesla Model S built today is hundreds pounds lighter than the first cars.
Quote " The Model S has gotten steadily lighter over time. It's really like, you know, it's quarter a pound here, half pound there, but the Model S in production today is at least a few hundred pounds less than that in the start of production. And we'll continue to see improvements over time."
Quote " The Model S has gotten steadily lighter over time. It's really like, you know, it's quarter a pound here, half pound there, but the Model S in production today is at least a few hundred pounds less than that in the start of production. And we'll continue to see improvements over time."
Last edited:
chickensevil
Active Member
By the way these numbers would indicate natural improvements in the inverter. If you notice 305 is actually pretty close to the ratings posted by Tesla... clearly the power is limited by the battery. But the other two, while I realize you get a better inverter in your P85 both are significantly improved in performance outside of their rated numbers.
For quick comparison:
I went with the GB chart just so people also get a feel for the rated kW performance as well, but you can clearly see these tested numbers post well above the listing.
I hope when they do an update to the site that they publish this information and they should also make a news briefing about it. "We retested our Model S for 2015 and this is the newest specifications" or something like that. It has been said before, but I really wonder what the threshold is before they are required to update their specifications, and when would they potentially have to send it back to get crash tested again due to the weight changes and such.
It's actually a significant improvement for the S85 which based on these tests is an 11.9% increase compared to the P85 using the higher of the outputs is 5.8%. Seems that the S85 is an outlier and more tests are warranted to support the Norwegians testing.
Of course, I do hope the testing is accurate as it supports my purchase choice.
Hmmm, that S85 output is significantly higher than rated... if that's accurate, I'd like ot know what they would have ultimately measured the P85 at if they hadn't had problems.
It takes significantly more that 35 more HP to move a ~4700# load to 60MPH @ 3.9secs rather than 4.9...
When I said that my S85 has never exceeded 305 kW I was referring to the values obtained from the streaming API. Having said that, I have never seen the needle exceed the 320 kW mark on the dash either. It might be worthwhile to check what the true values are in your case because I am very surprised as well that you are able to exceed 320 kW in an S85.
chickensevil
Active Member
There was a dyno test of a P85 done in Canada which had the P85 come in at 436 HP at the wheel.
But know that there is a difference between peaking over 320kW from the inverter and what power you actually get to the wheels.
- - - Updated - - -
Oh, I also sent an email to ownership about this asking they review the real stats on the car from their own testing and update the website to reflect (including the recent comments about the changes in the weight of the car) and got a pretty fast response back stating that they would submit it as a feature request. So maybe we will see updated numbers posted to the website to better reflect this
Last edited:
Similar threads
