P85D motor hp controversy starts also to show in U.S. media

[brianman]

Others need it to drive exactly like an ICE with the started 691 hp motor power.

Where do you get this from? I don't think ANYONE is asking for these. I do see it thrown out as a strawman counterargument though; I have no idea why.

- - - Updated - - -

affects a few thousand buyers at most.

I disagree.

Firstly, a "few thousand buyers" is not a trivial amount for a company with < 100,000 cars delivered.

Secondly, it affects shareholders and the brand pretty significantly IMO. That's a far bigger issue going forward.

- - - Updated - - -

(a) Someone is saying they're not satisfied, (b) they don't know why they're not satisfied, and (c) don't know what it'll take to satisfy them (d) but demand to be satisfied. (e) Now, how does that sound reasonable?

(a) Correct.
(b) Incorrect.
(c) Incomplete -- the point is that they are not sure what Tesla would be willing to offer. I can think of a lot of things that would satisfy Andy that Tesla simply wouldn't go for.
(d) Demand? Overstating, IMO.
(e) When you have a mixed understanding of the situation, it makes it difficult to understand why it's reasonable I guess.

 

[Andyw2100]

Someone is saying they're not satisfied, they don't know why they're not satisfied, and don't know what it'll take to satisfy them but demand to be satisfied. Now, how does that sound reasonable?

I know exactly why I'm not satisfied: The P85D I purchased doesn't meet all the specifications it was supposed to.

I know one thing that would definitely satisfy me: get my P85D and everyone else's that cares about this to the point they're supposed to be. The problem is it's pretty clear Tesla just won't be able to do that.

So I am keeping an open mind with respect to what else, less than what they actually should have done in the first place, Tesla could do to satisfy me.

 

[brianman]

I know one thing that would definitely satisfy me: get my P85D and everyone else's that cares about this to the point they're supposed to be. The problem is it's pretty clear Tesla just won't be able to do that.

I think it's worse than that Andy -- I don't Tesla can do it (at < $20,000 per vehicle) in 2015. My understanding is that P90D (with Ludicrous) doesn't even meet the expectations set for the P85D at the D event. If their best offering doesn't meet the criteria, the odds of a retrofit doing it anytime soon is essentially zero.

 

[Andyw2100]

I think it's worse than that Andy -- I don't Tesla can do it (at < $20,000 per vehicle) in 2015. My understanding is that P90D (with Ludicrous) doesn't even meet the expectations set for the P85D at the D event. If their best offering doesn't meet the criteria, the odds of a retrofit doing it anytime soon is essentially zero.

Right. That's what I meant when I said they wouldn't be able to do it.

If Tesla could wave a magic wand, and give the cars the power they were supposed to have, I'd be satisfied. That's the somewhat ridiculous, hypothetical, just to satisfy S'toon's question. When I was in the realm of the realistic, and said I honestly didn't know what I wanted, I was accused of not being able to state what it would take.

 

[dsm363]

Where do you get this from? I don't think ANYONE is asking for these. I do see it thrown out as a strawman counterargument though; I have no idea why.

- - - Updated - - -


I disagree.

Firstly, a "few thousand buyers" is not a trivial amount for a company with < 100,000 cars delivered.

Secondly, it affects shareholders and the brand pretty significantly IMO. That's a far bigger issue going forward.

Because the people are saying that it better produce 691 hp before losses at the shaft at least and doesn't perform like a car that has 691 hp at higher speeds. Not sure how you missed that.

 

[dsm363]

I think it's worse than that Andy -- I don't Tesla can do it (at < $20,000 per vehicle) in 2015. My understanding is that P90D (with Ludicrous) doesn't even meet the expectations set for the P85D at the D event. If their best offering doesn't meet the criteria, the odds of a retrofit doing it anytime soon is essentially zero.

Other than the hp number it meets all the performance metrics they talked about. It doesn't perform like a car with 691hp at higher speeds because it doesn't produce that power but 0-60 and 1/4 mile time it does meet what they talked about.

 

[SDRick]

They say it's important to them because they only bought the car so they could brag to people how much HP it has.

Rich people problems.

I may be going out on a limb here but you don't come across as having much experience or exposure to high-performance automobiles.


I did not realize that accuracy and company integrity is only for the rich.

 

[brianman]

Because the people are saying that it better produce 691 hp before losses at the shaft at least and doesn't perform like a car that has 691 hp at higher speeds. Not sure how you missed that.

What does that have to do with an ICE?

That's like saying "people expect 4 wheels" meaning "people want an ICE".

- - - Updated - - -

Other than the hp number it meets all the performance metrics they talked about.

That's a weird phrasing, but I get your point. In engineering, you can do a lot of things that are "magical" if you ignore at least one of the requirements. As an example, I can drive more "Model S" miles in a day than you might think possible -- if you aren't clear to include the requirement that I cant' use multiple vehicles, or swap batteries, or tow it or ....

 

[dsm363]

What does that have to do with an ICE?

That's like saying "people expect 4 wheels" meaning "people want an ICE".

- - - Updated - - -


That's a weird phrasing, but I get your point. In engineering, you can do a lot of things that are "magical" if you ignore at least one of the requirements. As an example, I can drive more "Model S" miles in a day than you might think possible -- if you aren't clear to include the requirement that I cant' use multiple vehicles, or swap batteries, or tow it or ....

Because that's what people are comparing it to. Are they comparing it to another '691hp' EV I am unaware of?

There are numbers like hp and torque that imply a certain level of performance assuming you know everything else about the car, the driver, how that power is applied to the road...etc and then there are actual performance numbers like 0-60 time, 0-100, 1/4 mile time...etc which is what the actual car does outside the black box. Does the P85D miss any of the performance numbers Tesla talked about at launch? (Those being 0-60 and 1/4 mile time I believe). Yes, with a one foot rollout.

 

[brianman]

Because that's what people are comparing it to. Are they comparing it to another '691hp' EV I am unaware of?

There are numbers like hp and torque that imply a certain level of performance assuming you know everything else about the car, the driver, how that power is applied to the road...etc and then there are acutely performance numbers like 0-60 time, 0-100, 1/4 mile time...etc which is what the actual car does outside the black box. Does the P85D miss any of the performance numbers Tesla talked about at launch? (Those being 0-60 and 1/4 mile time I believe). Yes, with a one foot rollout.

Dual Motor Model S and Autopilot | Tesla Motors

The P85D combines the performance of the P85 rear motor with an additional 50 percent of torque available from our new front drive unit.

Should we start arguing what the word "combines" means? Or "additional 50 percent"?

The definition that "works" for Tesla's implementation is "has each of them, and sometimes uses one or the other" which -- for me -- would warrant avoiding using the word "combine" if I was writing the blog post.

 

[supratachophobia]

I think it's worse than that Andy -- I don't Tesla can do it (at < $20,000 per vehicle) in 2015. My understanding is that P90D (with Ludicrous) doesn't even meet the expectations set for the P85D at the D event. If their best offering doesn't meet the criteria, the odds of a retrofit doing it anytime soon is essentially zero.

See, this is what really confused me. It's one thing if they want to ignore the problem to make it go away, but by advertising the unattainable 730HP on the P90DL, they are just perpetuating the lie in an attempt to give validity to the previous misleading claim.

Just list the maximum HP the car can achieve with it's hardware and allow them to not subtract drivetrain losses. Real simple, it's what every other car in history has done, and it's as truthful as one can get given environmental factors that change.

 

[brianman]

See, this is what really confused me. It's one thing if they want to ignore the problem to make it go away, but by advertising the unattainable 730HP on the P90DL, they are just perpetuating the lie in an attempt to give validity to the previous misleading claim.

Just list the maximum HP the car can achieve with it's hardware and allow them to not subtract drivetrain losses. Real simple, it's what every other car in history has done, and it's as truthful as one can get given environmental factors that change.

It wouldn't be contradictory and it would be a huge step forward for everyone for J.B. to follow-up with another post with peak vehicle horsepower coupled with charts showing the horsepower curve for "typical traction" (on CA highways next to Elon's house during 70F sunshine or whatever).

As it stands, you're right -- they're doubling down on "problematic" data presentation.

 

[DoctorJJ]

Let me simplify:
"Some people (I would argue the majority) assumed that they could trust Tesla. Now a lot of those people don't."

Put in this context, it doesn't matter if you can or can't justify the numbers they put on the website. This is a fact that Tesla brought on themselves. I hope Tesla finds a way to address it going forward, otherwise I fear they won't last as a company.

- - - Updated - - -


Hopefully constructive feedback: Counterproductive post which says more about you than the people you're mocking.

It's a figure of speech. I don't actually laugh at anyone. I'm not sure how you being condescending to me, regarding your concerns about my post being condescending, is constructive feedback however.

 

[brianman]

I just laugh at the owners who ....

It's a figure of speech. I don't actually laugh at anyone. I'm not sure how you being condescending to me, regarding your concerns about my post being condescending, is constructive feedback however.

I've never heard this figure of speech before. Perhaps it's regional.

 

[vgrinshpun]

See, this is what really confused me. It's one thing if they want to ignore the problem to make it go away, but by advertising the unattainable 730HP on the P90DL, they are just perpetuating the lie in an attempt to give validity to the previous misleading claim.

Just list the maximum HP the car can achieve with it's hardware and allow them to not subtract drivetrain losses. Real simple, it's what every other car in history has done, and it's as truthful as one can get given environmental factors that change.

They are not ignoring the "problem" they are providing rating of their drive train according to the international Regulation ECE R85. This regulation directs manufacturers to rate EV drive train using combined rating of the motors without considering limitation of the battery. So according to ECE R85 P85D drivetrain is rated 259 (front)+503(rear) =762 motor hp

- - - Updated - - -

Others need it to drive exactly like an ICE with the started 691 hp motor power. This isn't a universal 'everyone is upset with Telsa over the P85Ds performance' issue.

Where do you get this from? I don't think ANYONE is asking for these. I do see it thrown out as a strawman counterargument though; I have no idea why.

From the letter P85D owners wrote to Elon Musk:
“The missing horsepower is quite noticeable at highway passing speeds. For example, from 70-90 mph, the P85D should perform like a car with a power to weight ratio of one HP for every seven pounds. Instead it performs like a car with one HP for every nine pounds. The result of this is that from 70-90 mph the P85D is easily outperformed by an Audi RS7 with a power to weight ratio of only one HP for every eight pound."

 

[stopcrazypp]

Is there a collective agreement on how the 'victims' would like Tesla to respond?

In other words, if the 'victims' had their way, Tesla would ______________________________ (pay money, free cars, free trip to mars).

That's the major thing. There is no collective agreement on how Tesla should respond. You could tell from the discussion on Andy's letter. There was really no "solution" presented that would satisfy everyone.

 

[sorka]

+1.....

It's safe to say many would not not have bought the P85D if it were advertised as 550 HP. Tesla knew the true HP. We did not. They also knows HP sells. We were sold.

You can safely put me in that camp. Had I known what I know now before I placed my order, I'd be driving around in an 85D instead.

- - - Updated - - -

Except that it is not true:

Tesla blog post: AWD Motor Power and Torque Specifications - Page 34

You made a very good educated guess on the maximum discharge rate of the 85 battery. I spent many hours reading and researching. Had I come across your post, I probably wouldn't have paid much attention to it at that point.

The problem with the article that you posted is that the author was guessing that the new numbers only take into account the capacity of the motor without the limitation of the battery on the single motor cars. The problem with that guess is that the P85 actually makes 472 hp even though it was previously rated at 416 hp.

But none of this matters. You're post and that one article doesn't constitute an official Tesla disclaimer on how horsepower is specified.

- - - Updated - - -

Nobody is saying that they were written by Tesla. Can we stop propping the myth that "nobody new"?

I agree. If you look at it that way. Maybe somebody knew. You made an educated guess and it was correct. I think the other respondents are assuming you were implying that it was readily available and widely known so that consumers could make informed decisions based on trustworthy published data. But you clearly didn't mean or imply that

- - - Updated - - -

So I should know the content of that blog post when I did order my car in October last year? And where in that blog post is the proof?

I have contacted Unece that have the ECE R85 standard, Type Approval standards and some testing laboratories. So we can get an answer and stop speculating how it should be tested and how the power figures can be published.

Don't hold your breath. I sent them several emails over two weeks ago and I've heard nothing back yet.

- - - Updated - - -

0-60 in 3 seconds and people are complaining about the horsepower number...

Some but most of the others are complaining about passing power. The P85D performs and accelerates at freeways speeds exactly as fast as it should for the power it actually has which is 480 to 555 hp depending on state of charge. I think most were expecting 691 hp though.

 

[Andyw2100]

Others need it to drive exactly like an ICE with the started 691 hp motor power. This isn't a universal 'everyone is upset with Telsa over the P85Ds performance' issue.

Where do you get this from? I don't think ANYONE is asking for these. I do see it thrown out as a strawman counterargument though; I have no idea why.

From the letter P85D owners wrote to Elon Musk:
“The missing horsepower is quite noticeable at highway passing speeds. For example, from 70-90 mph, the P85D should perform like a car with a power to weight ratio of one HP for every seven pounds. Instead it performs like a car with one HP for every nine pounds. The result of this is that from 70-90 mph the P85D is easily outperformed by an Audi RS7 with a power to weight ratio of only one HP for every eight pound."

How does the quote you just used from the letter show support for dsm363's statement (that you also quoted) that we "need it to drive exactly like an ICE?"

All I was doing with those lines from the letter was giving an example of where the missing horsepower was felt.

 

[sorka]

I just laugh at the owners who are too proud to admit that they weren't smart enough to realize exactly what performance they were getting. The performance numbers were there for all the world to see from the very beginning. Just because you guys decided to use 691hp and a typical ICE hp/weight ratio performance metric, doesn't mean that it in any way should apply to the car you bought.

That's right. The wider power power band of the electric motor affording superior low end torque produces a better 0-60 time than any other 5000 lb ICE car that has 555 hp. After both the EV and ICE reach their PEAK power, their performance given equal power to weight ratios is comparable. The P85D accelerates from 50-70 exactly as fast as a 5000 lb car with 480 to 555 hp, depending on state of charge, should.

Performance characteristics aside, I wish I'd been smart enough to know that "691 hp" or "691 hp motor power" wasn't achievable. And when I first test drove a P85D and it was limited to 80 MPH. I mentioned to the sales guy that it didn't feel like a 700 hp car when punching it from 60 MPH. He explained to me that the speed limiter cuts power progressively long before 80 MPH so there isn't violent cut off in power. Had it not been speed limited, I would have immediately known that something wasn't adding up. However, given how fast it was from 0-60 and the fact that I wasn't considering the monster torque as the real reason for the low speed acceleration, I took his word at face value and believed it.

- - - Updated - - -

See, this is what really confused me. It's one thing if they want to ignore the problem to make it go away, but by advertising the unattainable 730HP on the P90DL, they are just perpetuating the lie in an attempt to give validity to the previous misleading claim.

Just list the maximum HP the car can achieve with it's hardware and allow them to not subtract drivetrain losses. Real simple, it's what every other car in history has done, and it's as truthful as one can get given environmental factors that change.

Did Tesla advertise a combined 762 hp somewhere(you mean that and not 730, right)?

- - - Updated - - -

They are not ignoring the "problem" they are providing rating of their drive train according to the international Regulation ECE R85. This regulation directs manufacturers to rate EV drive train using combined rating of the motors without considering limitation of the battery. So according to ECE R85 P85D drivetrain is rated 259 (front)+503(rear) =762 motor hp

Says who? What regulation requires EV manufacturers in the US to list combined motor capability instead of the actual horsepower produced. I have no issue if Tesla wants to run the their drivetrain through R85 certification for a European listing requirement but this does not direct them to list combined motor capability in place of actual horsepower. And if this was the case, how is it they didn't specify R85 or an asterisk next to where they listed "691 hp motor power" with the further disclaimer that this is not the actual power produced by the vehicle? Why is it they only listed ECE R85 in the manual and even then not in the manual when P85Ds first started shipping?

 

[AWDtsla]

You can safely put me in that camp. Had I known what I know now before I placed my order, I'd be driving around in an 85D instead.

I am in the know now and you can guess my decision.



Can you summarize what actions you'd like Tesla to take?