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

Motor Trend: World Exclusive! 2012 Tesla Model S Test and Range Verification

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
#41
I'm not certain about all of this as well but this is what I understand at the moment.

I don't think it's been shown that the Model S cuts off all residual draw on the battery, just that they have improved things so that the draw is much less or they've reserved more room at the bottom of the pack for this reason (or maybe both). I don't think range mode in the Model S opens up extra range at the bottom of the pack as well (only allows you to charge fully). The Model S can be left unplugged for a year at 50% SOC which I don't think you'd get away with on the Roadster by a long shot.
 
#42
Wow. Just going back over the story to digest the details and the car comparisons -

Code: 
		                Base Price 	Weight 	        Power   0-60 mph 	60-0 mph 	Lat grip
BMW M5 	                        $92,095 	4384 lb 	560 hp 	3.7 sec 	110 ft 	        0.94 g
Mercedes-Benz CLS63 AMG 	$96,805 	4256 lb 	550 hp 	3.9 sec 	113 ft 	        0.92 g
Porsche Panamera Turbo S 	$176,275 	4388 lb 	550 hp 	3.5 sec 	105 ft 	        1.00 g
Tesla Model S P85 	        $105,400 	4766 lb 	416 hp 	3.9 sec 	105 ft 	        0.92 g

They put the price of the Signature version of the car, but those are very attractive comparisons. The production version of MSP beats all of those cars once you factor in the tax credit, but even at full retail price it's essentially the same price as the BMW M5 while having similar driving dynamics. When you factor in instant throttle response it really is hyper competitive with the best in the world.

MotorTrend -

And in the real-jousting that sometimes erupts on highways (you know what I'm talking about), it's probably the quickest
Click to expand...

Oh, and you get this too -

During our drive, we used 78.2 kW-hrs of electricity (93 percent of the battery's rated capacity). What does that mean? It's the energy equivalent of 2.32 gasoline gallons, or 100.7 mpg-e before charging losses. That BMW 528i following us (powered by a very fuel-efficient, turbocharged, direct-injected 2.0-liter four-cylinder engine) consumed 7.9 gallons of gas for a rate of 30.1 mpg. The Tesla's electrical energy cost for the trip was $10.17 (at California's average electrical rate); the BMW's drive cost $34.55. The 528i emitted 152 lbs of CO2; the Model S, 52 -- from the state's power plants.
Click to expand...

Edit -

Also, it should be noted that the ONLY place you get these numbers in an ICE vehicle is at sea level under ideal conditions -

When we crunched the numbers (with no weather correction because the car doesn't ingest air), the car's 0-60-mph time was 3.9 seconds, and it ssshhhhhh-ed past the quarter-mile mark in 12.5 seconds at 110.9 mph.
Click to expand...
 
#43
mapping their route at http://www.jurassictest.ch/GR/ plus added the second passenger to details of car yields a range of 240 miles. (the map image the speed says 55-69 on I15 not 65mph):
240Range2.png
So estimates with hill calculations really help.
 
#45
daxz said:
A couple of the pictures with the car on the highway show the windows partially rolled down. That could contribute to some aerodynamic drag (they weren't smoking in Elon's car were they?). And one was leaning on the window with door open :crying:
Click to expand...
CapitalistOppressor said:
They probably didn't use Range Mode.
Click to expand...

Not sure there was something wrong, they were reporting headwinds, and the passenger asked him to be smoother so he probably wasn't as smooth as necessary to reach the "at constant speed" value (on the graph, about 260 to 263 miles at constant 65 mph), and too fast (highway speeds) to reach the EPA level (265 miles).

I'd think with headwinds and other small reducing factors, 10.2% within 265 miles and 8.5% within 260 miles is close enough. I'd guess an experienced range-optimizing driver could then reach the official values easily (in the absence of headwinds). However, it does mean that one has to leave a certain buffer (and not make sudden uphill detours when it is getting close, unless you don't mind charging).
 
Last edited:
#48
ckessel said:
Odd the numbers for 0-60 and skidpad are so much better than those from InsideLine.
Click to expand...

Different methodologies. MotorTrend isn't even using a skidpad. They are using a figure 8, which is apparently a better format for MSP.

The 0-60numbers are from MotorTrends fudgy rollout calculations. They don't use a direct measurement of 0-60 like Edmunds does, and they also don't use an actual measurement including a 1 foot rollout (which Edmunds measured at 4.0 0-60). Instead they introduce a fudge factor intended to replicate a 1 foot rollout, but really corresponds with a rollout of between 12"-16".

Except in drag racing it's meaningless, but in fairness publications like MotorTrend and Car and Driver first started doing these measurements using drag racing techniques. It's now possible to directly measure them using accelerometers, but the magazines prefer to use the old method because it helps them sell magazines and it's a kind of tradition anyways.
 
#49
CapitalistOppressor said:
The 0-60numbers are from MotorTrends fudgy rollout calculations. They don't use a direct measurement of 0-60 like Edmunds does, and they also don't use an actual measurement including a 1 foot rollout (which Edmunds measured at 4.0 0-60). Instead they introduce a fudge factor intended to replicate a 1 foot rollout, but really corresponds with a rollout of between 12"-16".

Except in drag racing it's meaningless, but in fairness publications like MotorTrend and Car and Driver first started doing these measurements using drag racing techniques. It's now possible to directly measure them using accelerometers, but the magazines prefer to use the old method because it helps them sell magazines and it's a kind of tradition anyways.
Click to expand...

"And were we to have measured those 0-60 mph times from the first twitch of accelerator movement instead of after the standard 1-foot roll-out, the Model S would be already off and away while the gas cars were still reacting to their suddenly opened throttles. It's a startlingly instant shove into the seatback."

You know in the camera world, they talk about shutter lag time. When you want to take a picture, you want to take it instantly... not press the button and wait around to see when the camera responds - meanwhile you kid is already off the diving board, and you missed it.

It would be interesting to measure 0-60 from the moment you press the pedal - and compare that to other cars. That dynamic would be turned on it's head.
 
#50
ggr said:
Quadratically, not exponentially. Sorry, mathematician, I can't help myself. Sort of like Brian with speeling.
Click to expand...

Lol. I'm a non-mathematician.

I didn't like calling it "exponential" because those represent really big increases, but I didn't know what wording to use. Figured exponential might be ok because I knew that air resistance increases according to something that I recall being the inverse square rule. But I may be just confusing it with how gravity or energy diffusion works. Regardless, I'm pretty sure there is a square of something in there and squaring involves exponents :p

- - - Updated - - -

SCW-Greg said:
"And were we to have measured those 0-60 mph times from the first twitch of accelerator movement instead of after the standard 1-foot roll-out, the Model S would be already off and away while the gas cars were still reacting to their suddenly opened throttles. It's a startlingly instant shove into the seatback."

You know in the camera world, they talk about shutter lag time. When you want to take a picture, you want to take it instantly... not press the button and wait around to see when the camera responds - meanwhile you kid is already off the diving board, and you missed it.

It would be interesting to measure 0-60 from the moment you press the pedal - and compare that to other cars. That dynamic would be turned on it's head.
Click to expand...

Even the straight accelerometer data you get from Edmunds is only really measuring when the car starts to move, not when you press the pedal. But they are also using either a programmed launch control like with the M5 DCT, or else revving the engine and popping the clutch. If they stomped the gas from idle those cars wouldn't come close to MSP.
 
#54
#56
MikeK said:
Yup. The decal set includes three stickers. A small one for the rear bumper, and two larger ones for the sides. In the photos, the car had one of the side stickers on the bumper, and didn't have the other two stickers affixed.
Click to expand...

I seem to remember someone here saying the placements were only recommendations by DMV and not legally enforceable. Can someone confirm?
 
#57
contaygious said:
Whoa 3.9 seconds? Where did that come from? Glad I got the biggest battery now with that range!

Also, thy said that's elon's car with the p85 badge. Strange he has a badge on it.
Click to expand...

For years many of us have been saying Carmakers should underestimate things like range and speed. Kudos to Elon/Tesla for obviously doing just that!

Underpromise and kick butt :)
 
#58
MikeK said:
Yup. The decal set includes three stickers. A small one for the rear bumper, and two larger ones for the sides. In the photos, the car had one of the side stickers on the bumper, and didn't have the other two stickers affixed.
Click to expand...

Those are the ugliest stickers I've seen. Surely the state could find someone with at least some talent to design them. A room full of monkeys could have created a more attractive design.
 
#59
NuclearPowered said:
...
Personally a bit dissapointed in the range. 300 to 265 to 215.
Click to expand...

First, their range was on the order of 235, not sure where 215 came from.
Second, until we can find out if they charged using range mode or standard, I wouldn't make any judgements.
Third, even if it was in range mode, they missed EPA range by about 10%. They mentioned sudden braking and acceleration and the drove with windows partially down. They also had mainly a headwind. So I wouldn't be too surprised at a 10% loss of range.
 
#60
loganss said:
Wish they would have put the mileage of the car and a shot of their energy usage graph from the screen. ....
Click to expand...


Brilliant. All EV reviews should include an annotated shot of the usage graph.

It's reeeeealy hard to not punch it in a Tesla it's so fun. I suspect their freeway driving was more fun than they even know.

BTW Kim is a real good guy. Nice to have him at MT on this. If I had his email I would pass on the marked up graph idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

P
  • Article
Five Year Review -- Tesla Model 3 Dual Motor AWD
Replies
19
Views
4K
Model 3
zoros
Z
V
Tesla Model X not charging
Replies
0
Views
635
Model X: Battery & Charging
visback
V
N
2012 Tesla Model S Drive Motor Advice
Replies
0
Views
1K
Service / Maintenance
Nviii
N
S
2012 Tesla Model S P85 Free Unlimited Supercharging with 4 Year Motor Warranty Seattle, WA
Replies
1
Views
1K
Model S
RobTreeman
R
G
  • Locked
Not Available 2022 Tesla Model S -Long Range - Refreshed Refresh (w/extras)
Replies
7
Views
3K
Model S
gofastr
G
Top
Back
Blog
New
Forum list
Marketplace
Menu