Newer P90DL makes 662 hp at the battery!!!

[sorka]

I think it was sorka who said that the car was traction limited up to about 47 mph. I know very little about this drag racing, but if what sorka says is true, there's extra torque we're not using, so the additional rotational inertia shouldn't make any difference in the first 60'. I guess the tackiness of the drag strip surface may minimize any difference in tire grip for different wheels on this car.
I think the highest trap speed was for a car that didn't lower tire pressure for increased grip. Since there seems to be little difference in grip at the low end, maybe a tire with lower rolling resistance will help at the top end where these cars are weakest.

Slight mis-characterization. When I say traction limited, I mean Tesla has calculated how much torque they can apply, with a nice safety margin, before traction is lost. If traction is ACTUALLY lost, the car will pull back almost all power until traction is restored. The car won't detect how much traction it has and raise power to the limit of actual traction. Therefore adding sticker tires won't make any difference unless you drop so much weight off the wheels that the torque goes up at the same motor power level because lower rotational inertia translates into more measured torque in acceleration(at static speed with an eddie current PAU the wheel weight won't matter).

Adding weight to wheels will slow you down. Removing weight from the wheels will result in faster acceleration from 0 to 45 MPH. But if it's possible to remove enough weight from the wheels that you lose traction, then you really will hit the limit.

 

[sorka]

You'd think, but in my P85+ I can consistently get the rear end to break loose if I get hard on the accelerator as I'm changing lanes to pass. The tail will continue to drift out until I get off the accelerator.

I've had a few P85 loaners and the traction control is nearly non existent. Not only that, on the P85, there is a setting to completely turn it off. I actually found it kind of fun but a little scary powering out of corners. The PD power out of corners with much more stability and acceleration as you've already noticed.

 

[sorka]

That's just not true. Why is it so hard to understand that a SANS PANO car, like MT had, is necessary to get 10.9 in the original version...

Except that:

1) MT doesn't count. Nobody has gotten close.
2) Tesla didn't say 10.9 second*

* sans pano required.

 

[CraZ8]

Slight mis-characterization. When I say traction limited, I mean Tesla has calculated how much torque they can apply, with a nice safety margin, before traction is lost. If traction is ACTUALLY lost, the car will pull back almost all power until traction is restored. The car won't detect how much traction it has and raise power to the limit of actual traction. Therefore adding sticker tires won't make any difference unless you drop so much weight off the wheels that the torque goes up at the same motor power level because lower rotational inertia translates into more measured torque in acceleration(at static speed with an eddie current PAU the wheel weight won't matter).

Adding weight to wheels will slow you down. Removing weight from the wheels will result in faster acceleration from 0 to 45 MPH. But if it's possible to remove enough weight from the wheels that you lose traction, then you really will hit the limit.

So are you saying that getting a set of say lighter 20 inch staggered wheels with stickier rubber over the stock 19s will not necessarily result in lower trap times because the traction control does not allow for power supply right up to the level of slippage? I was all set to go this route

 

[sorka]

That's not a good question to ask. There are two sides of this argument as to whether a 90v1 sans pano car can achieve a 10.9s quarter mile. One side "wins" if a single 90v1 sans pano car gets a 10.9 timeslip. But the only way for the other side to "win" is if every single 90v1 sans pano car ever made is tested and doesn't get 10.9. So really we should be encouraging those with 90v1 sans pano cars to go to the dragstrip.

With the way that Tesla advertised it, *most* V1P90DLs should be able to make 10.99 without any special requirements or restrictions.

 

[sorka]

The main issue continues to be lack of information.
Why do more recent ludicrous cars put out more power?
Future buyers of these cars will want to know.
This will likely be an ongoing issue and I believe is a consequence of the continuous improvements made that are never announced.

What's amazing is that Tesla has said nothing. They're suddenly putting out cars putting out 70+ more hp and they say nothing.......crickets. Thing is if they did mention this but kept the 10.9 spec the same, it would force them to publically reconcile the V1 cars as having slower 1/4 mile times than the V2 cars which are still speced at 10.9...an actual achievable 10.9 with a jocky.

 

[sorka]

So are you saying that getting a set of say lighter 20 inch staggered wheels with stickier rubber over the stock 19s will not necessarily result in lower trap times because the traction control does not allow for power supply right up to the level of slippage? I was all set to go this route

Just the opposite. Lighter wheels will result in faster acceleration at the same motor torque than with heavier wheels. But the current/torque@rpm ramp curve is fixed at a value that is below the calculated traction limits for the the stock wheel setup (19x8). As you lighten the wheels, you get closer to your traction limit because the car putting out the same torque at each RPM regardless of what you have on your wheels. But if you can lighten your wheels enough that you're now exceeding actual traction, then traction control will kick in and kill power. Stickier tires will compensate for that by increasing your actual physical traction limit.

 

[bhzmark]

Except that:

1) MT doesn't count. Nobody has gotten close.
2) Tesla didn't say 10.9 second*

* sans pano required.

1) nobody has tried and failed -- with the same type of sans pano car that MT used.

2) Tesla should NOT need to say "the laws of physics apply to weighty options, and those who refuse to understand that will cause their own suffering, misery, distress and upset"

 

[MuppetOwl]

I agree that Tesla have not been clear on performance like on the P85D case where 0-60 (without information about roll out nobody in Europe use) and hp was was far from the real battery limited power.
But Tesla did almost 1 year later add some info about it. right before the P90D was released Tesla did update the web page footer with new performance information.


From Tesla webpage
Performance
Model S P90D base option acceleration ratings follow motortrend.com test procedure of subtracting the first foot rollout time to represent drag strip performance


My main language is not English, but the base option part of that I understand as Model s base version without extras like Panoramic roof etc. ?
1/4 mile is also a acceleration rating.

 

[fiksegts]

just got the info on the 11.152 run on DragTimes:

2016 Tesla Model S P90DL 1/4 Mile Drag Racing

This car has a 1071394-00-A battery, and therefore is a V2 car.... more power...

 

[sorka]

1) nobody has tried and failed -- with the same type of sans pano car that MT used.

2) Tesla should NOT need to say "the laws of physics apply to weighty options, and those who refuse to understand that will cause their own suffering, misery, distress and upset"

P85Ds with and without pano roofs have been reported to run the same times. There's no proof that the sans pano is any lighter. We have one reported case where two cars were weighed but one example is not enough to know if the lack of pano roof was the main difference in the weight. A hundred lb difference is not going to make up a .4 second deficit.

My 300ZX was able to achieve it's 1/4 mile times with the dual t-tops and did not require the cheaper solid roof to achieve it's times.

Tesla's not required to specify that you have to leave off the pano roof which they RECOMMEND and almost everyone gets to achieve a 10.9?

It's a moot point. Nobody has gotten close with a V1P90DL and nobody ever will. Nobody's even gotten close.

 

[Alex(AUS)]

The tesla racing channel run proves alot. They actually had 2 cars with very similar specs, no sunroof and the lightest of light drivers (sorry tesla racing channel guy). The experience of this guy racing and performance he is able to extract is beyond reproach. Both have the L uprgade advertised at 10.9. However, after numerous runs, the p85d and indeed early p90ds cannot possibly run a 10.90 (as advertised by tesla). I dont believe you can have better objective/comparable evidence using the lightest configuration on 100s of passes by the most experienced driver than that.

I am sure fiksegts may have had 1 or 2 VERY experienced passes ...

BTW .. who would have imagined you need 121-122mph to run a 10.9 ...?

 

[bhzmark]

just got the info on the 11.152 run on DragTimes:

2016 Tesla Model S P90DL 1/4 Mile Drag Racing

This car has a 1071394-00-A battery, and therefore is a V2 car.... more power...

Yes, That's st Charles. But There was a different 11.51 that was reported up thread but not yr website for the version 1 best. On dragtimes the best version 1 is a 2015 with pano (can tell in the pic) and probably subwoofer and dual charger that gets 11.22.

 

[bhzmark]

P85Ds with and without pano roofs have been reported to run the same times. There's no proof that the sans pano is any lighter. We have one reported case where two cars were weighed but one example is not enough to know if the lack of pano roof was the main difference in the weight. A hundred lb difference is not going to make up a .4 second deficit.

My 300ZX was able to achieve it's 1/4 mile times with the dual t-tops and did not require the cheaper solid roof to achieve it's times.

Tesla's not required to specify that you have to leave off the pano roof which they RECOMMEND and almost everyone gets to achieve a 10.9?

It's a moot point. Nobody has gotten close with a V1P90DL and nobody ever will. Nobody's even gotten close.

The only p90dls without Pano roof that we know with experienced instrumented testing are Motor Trend (v1) and tesla racing channel (v2) car. Both of those go faster than their pano burdened counterparts. Those who believe in physics will not be surprised by that result.

One anecdotal report on p85ds the same with and without are not enough data points to support the claim that pano doesn't matter.... and--physics..

I'm amazed that people otherwise intelligent enough to buy a Tesla dont understand that heavy options have performance consequences.

 

[fiksegts]

on a ~4,900 pound car, the "reported" ~1-2% difference in weight just doesn't make a significant difference, just like the lighter wheels don't make a significant difference either.... I personally saw pano vs non-pano P85D cars run the 1/4 mile, same day, same track, why would I expect a bigger difference in the P90D?

I'm amazed that people otherwise intelligent enough to buy a Tesla dont understand that heavy options have performance consequences.

 

[P85DEE]

I take week off from this thread and that's when all the action happens

So what is Tesla going to do to make whole the first generation of P90DLs that can't break the 10s?

Well that's a loaded question and assumes that those people were shortchanged in the first place.

"If" they even were, well then only two things can happen.

Tesla can voluntarily admit it, or they'll have to be forced to admit it.

I wouldn't bet on either.

However the periodic updates could perhaps give them an out without them ever having to admit ever short changing anyone if that's what they did.

 

[TIppy]

If traction is ACTUALLY lost, the car will pull back almost all power until traction is restored.

So if slip start is enabled, does this allow the torque to go above the calculated torque limit, or moderate how much torque is reduced when traction is lost? Seems like the cars could be faster if they'd let a competent driver with better rubber get closer to the traction limit than their programmed safety margin. As it stands now, stickier rubber only seems to help for lateral acceleration, and you'd expect the 21" wheels, even with sticker tires, to under perform the 19s, unless they roll better.

You did say traction limited, not torque limited, so I didn't mischaracterize your statement.

 

[P85DEE]

Except that:

1) MT doesn't count. Nobody has gotten close.
2) Tesla didn't say 10.9 second*

* sans pano required.

Yeah. But why tell us. We can't fix that. Sue 'em.

With the way that Tesla advertised it, *most* V1P90DLs should be able to make 10.99 without any special requirements or restrictions.

Sue the bastiches. Complaining to be us isn't going to "make this right"

What's amazing is that Tesla has said nothing. They're suddenly putting out cars putting out 70+ more hp and they say nothing.......crickets. Thing is if they did mention this but kept the 10.9 spec the same, it would force them to publically reconcile the V1 cars as having slower 1/4 mile times than the V2 cars which are still speced at 10.9...an actual achievable 10.9 with a jocky.

St Charles at 496KW, apparently has more power than the first P90DL cars.

But thus far has only managed about a .10 improvement over his 11.1516 from several months ago.

 

[bhzmark]

on a ~4,900 pound car, the "reported" ~1-2% difference in weight just doesn't make a significant difference

This calculator estimates hp and weight and ETs. http://www.torquestats.com/

Putting in the MT p90DL weight (4689 lbs = 2127 kgs) and adjusting HP to get desired ET yields:

When car and driver weighed a full optioned P85D it tipped the scales at 5010 lbs. A 321 lb difference for Pano, SAS, power hatch, dual charger etc. http://media.caranddriver.com/files...g-term-intro-review-car-and-driverp85dlti.pdf

Then leaving the HP for a P90DL the same but adding 321 lbs (145 kilos) for the normal complement of pano, power hatch, SAS, UHF, yields:

a .3 difference.

Weight matters.

This calculator may not track the response of the Tesla motor performance against weight exactly, but it ought to be roughly close.

The red sans pano lightweight MT P90DL weighed in at 4689.

That is super light. It probably didn't have SAS or power hatch either.

And look -- no chrome (indicating no premium package with power hatch and other stuff) and sitting coil high :

So no power hatch or SAS or anything else weighty -- explains the lightweight MT car and the non-ringer, no special Tesla built on a grassy knoll, P90DL that gets a legitimate 10.9 with v1. But it is a bit of a unicorn to be so minimally optioned.

But weighty options have consequences.

 

[St Charles]

So if slip start is enabled, does this allow the torque to go above the calculated torque limit, or moderate how much torque is reduced when traction is lost? Seems like the cars could be faster if they'd let a competent driver with better rubber get closer to the traction limit than their programmed safety margin. As it stands now, stickier rubber only seems to help for lateral acceleration, and you'd expect the 21" wheels, even with sticker tires, to under perform the 19s, unless they roll better.

You did say traction limited, not torque limited, so I didn't mischaracterize your statement.

I think what he is saying is that power isn't applied immediately. it ramps up and by the time full power is applied to the motor, the car is traveling at about 45MPH. You can see this in the datalogs I have attached here. Why we call this traction limiting is because it is possible to immediately apply maximum power immediately rather than building it as we see here. If we were to apply all 450kW there is no chance that the car would keep traction and drivetrain components would break.