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

[sorka]

The car has a power gauge built in. How can it possibly be deception when it's telling you in realtime?

Well, unless you're splitting pixels, it looks at first like it's saying 480 KW but the gauge is so compressed that each pixel at that scale is multiples if 10KW increments. And then there's the double tick with the lighter one on the left and darker one on the right above each number. There's no making sense of it. You have to pull that number from REST otherwise what you're looking at on the dash could be plus or minus 30KW around the 480 mark.

- - - Updated - - -

I definitely bought the car because I was let to believe 691 HP.

i definitely bought the car because I was led to believe that I costs $7 to fully charge my battery in my region at my rates.

i definitely would NOT have bought the car had I been told the true specs.

This all does not mean that I do not like the car or that I want to turn it in. It just means I was deliberately mislead. This is I am not happy about. The end does not justify the means.

tesla definitely knows the true HP OUTPUT and they know their system cannot produce this. Advertising motor power when the system cannot produce this HP rating is useless and I don't see any other purpose other than to deliberately mislead. I think most children can understand this. That's why I don't understand adults who don't get it.

+1

 

[ERP]

because it doesn't feel like an EV at 700HP

FTFY

 

[dsm363]

I definitely bought the car because I was let to believe 691 HP.

i definitely bought the car because I was led to believe that I costs $7 to fully charge my battery in my region at my rates.

i definitely would NOT have bought the car had I been told the true specs.

This all does not mean that I do not like the car or that I want to turn it in. It just means I was deliberately mislead. This is I am not happy about. The end does not justify the means.

tesla definitely knows the true HP OUTPUT and they know their system cannot produce this. Advertising motor power when the system cannot produce this HP rating is useless and I don't see any other purpose other than to deliberately mislead. I think most children can understand this. That's why I don't understand adults who don't get it.

You have no evidence you were 'deliberately' misled. Again, Tesla went with the only regulation in the world I believe addressing EV motor ratings. Sure, I see how it is misleading. Don't think really anyone disputes that but 'lying' and 'deliberately' misleading seem a little much.

 

[gavinwang]

I was directly disputing the notion that the majority of people have been mislead. I think this is a wild generalization, since the majority of people do not even purchase the P, much less ludicrous. So there may well be (as Lucky points out) a group of people that feel mislead, But certainly not the majority of purchasers, IMHO. I honestly could not care less if the number is 691, 1 or 1000, and I'll bet if you polled ALL purchasers (not just the ones with an interest in being vocal here) I think you'd find the same. It is meaningless because I love how it feels to drive the car. I test drove it twice and borrowed a friends for about 30 minutes of real-world driving and it was done. There was no salesman involved for me, as there hasn't been for my last several cars (I work with a broker who gets a fixed rate, regardless of what we purchase). I may also not be in the majority, but I'll bet that I'm closer.

Obviously I was referring to the majority of P85D customers in my post, who, caring or not but as long as they saw the number, could well have been led to believe what it would mean in normal circumstances. Non P85D customers are not relevant to this debate after all, and if you bought a 85D instead of P85D, I certainly understand why you "could not care less'.

 

[Stoneymonster]

Exactly - they seem capable of saying a 70D with 2x 259bhp motors can only produce 328bhp - so why is it not possible to do that with the P85D?

As has been said 1000 times before, because legal action was mentioned. They will *never* publish this number to cover their butts.

 

[gavinwang]

You have no evidence you were 'deliberately' misled. Again, Tesla went with the only regulation in the world I believe addressing EV motor ratings. Sure, I see how it is misleading. Don't think really anyone disputes that but 'lying' and 'deliberately' misleading seem a little much.

I'm taking a more moderate presumption here and wouldn't claim it was TM's intentional act, no crime here. But it was misleading and TM didn't take the high road.

 

[dsm363]

I'm taking a more moderate presumption here and wouldn't claim it was TM's intentional act, no crime here. But it was misleading and TM didn't take the high road.

I agree with that. It was misleading and wish they would have corrected it but the level of anger and threats of legal action likely stopped any effort they may have done to correct the number.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

I think Straubel already addressed why he feels putting out a battery power number is not an ideal comparative measure. For example the 600kW number put out by Mercedes. At what SOC, temperature, battery age is that number measured? Unlike with a motor/inverter, the battery power number changes drastically based on those variables.

Easy... qualify the battery power rating by those factors - temperature, SOC, battery age. It's not unlike ICE manufacturers specifying horsepower at a specific RPM. Not difficult.

 

[dsm363]

Easy... qualify the battery power rating by those factors - temperature, SOC, battery age. It's not unlike ICE manufacturers specifying horsepower at a specific RPM. Not difficult.

How many combinations would they have to list? 1-100%SOC, -30 to 120F in 1 degree increments, battery age by month....etc. I'm not even sure Tesla has that information.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

How many combinations would they have to list? 1-100%SOC, -30 to 120F in 1 degree increments, battery age by month....etc. I'm not even sure Tesla has that information.

Well, if Mercedes can do it so can Tesla.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Easy... qualify the battery power rating by those factors - temperature, SOC, battery age. It's not unlike ICE manufacturers specifying horsepower at a specific RPM. Not difficult.

There was one that Straubel didn't mention: pulse time. That can mean a drastic change in the rated number (1.5x-4.75x the continuous number). However, from a marketing standpoint how many asterisks does it require? None of the other automakers that advertise such a number have specified the conditions, so Tesla would be at a distinct disadvantage if they do.

What is far better is if the industry establishes a common standard (like the SAE standard being worked on right now). Tesla went with the EU ECE R85 standard and so far has been crucified for it by many here.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, if Mercedes can do it so can Tesla.

Except they didn't. Mercedes does not specify the conditions they got that 600kW number. Given the lower 0-60 performance numbers of the car, there is some doubt if their claim is even achievable in the car.

 

[vgrinshpun]

How many combinations would they have to list? 1-100%SOC, -30 to 120F in 1 degree increments, battery age by month....etc. I'm not even sure Tesla has that information.

There is fundamental problem with listing maximum battery power rating. One can specify ambient temperature, state of charge and age of the battery, and arrive at a number, call it Z. The thing that many people casually discussing this do not grasp is that it will not be possible to reach this rating in a real life conditions in a car at the time when motors reach speed at which they can use that much power.

Unlike any components in an ICE car the electrical output of the battery is based not only on factors I listed above, but also on the battery load profile *before* the time of the test. This is a key distinction between all power producing components in EV - battery, PEM, motor vs. internal combustion engine. The output of typical ICE does not depend on its load profile prior to measurement. For an EV, on another hand, since output of all power components - battery, PEMs, motors - is limited mostly by heat, the power output at any given moment will depend on the load profile *prior* to testing.

This is fundamental distinction which is not well understood by casual observers, and, really, is at the core of all misunderstandings. Like I said in another thread, square peg will not fit in the round hole.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

There was one that Straubel didn't mention: pulse time. That can mean a drastic change in the rated number (1.5x-4.75x the continuous number). However, from a marketing standpoint how many asterisks does it require? None of the other automakers that advertise such a number have specified the conditions, so Tesla would be at a distinct disadvantage if they do.

What is far better is if the industry establishes a common standard (like the SAE standard being worked on right now). Tesla went with the EU ECE R85 standard and so far has been crucified for it by many here.

- - - Updated - - -


Except they didn't. Mercedes does not specify the conditions they got that 600kW number. Given the lower 0-60 performance numbers of the car, there is some doubt if their claim is even achievable in the car.

I want to say that this is a good opportunity for Tesla to establish an understandable and consumer-friendly standard for its industry, but doing so would require updating the numbers to something lower, publishing another blog post, and then dealing with the customer fallout. I just don't see an elegant way for Tesla to address this issue without upsetting P85D owners. I feel that by perpetuating the current "motor power" rating, Tesla is going to continue angering new customers into the future. That could turn into quite a snowball.

- - - Updated - - -

I thought Mercedes listed a single number.

Then why can't Tesla? Someone said Mercedes lists a motor power number. Great! Someone said that number should ideally be qualified. Great! Whatever the case may be, there are other options available to Tesla. My point is that if Mercedes can advertise battery power, so can Tesla. Qualify it or don't qualify it, but wouldn't the additional information be welcome and an improvement?

 

[vgrinshpun]

Well, if Mercedes can do it so can Tesla.

There is no way Mercedes SLS electric can put 750hp to the motor shafts. It has 60kWh battery which will not be able to output the specified "potential" power of 600kW (this is 10C rate!) at the time it's 4 motors can use it. Merc SLS electric has exactly the same "problem" as P85D. If Andyw2100 or Sorka bought the SLS and took it to the dyno they would feel cheated in the same way they feel cheated with P85D.

In fact they would be upset even more, because on paper battery output of the SLS is higher than the combined motor rating, and yet, it would not be possible to get even close to 750hp on the motor shafts.

 

[AWDtsla]

Of course you can argue that no other company has had a dual motor car for purchase, but Mercedes has at least had the SLS Electric with quad motors and they list max motor power as 552KW total in addition to listing battery max power as 600KW.... So the only relevant example I know of, and that being a european car as well, lists both motor power and battery power.

I'm looking for this data, and I'm not seeing this on the US version of the website that it's serving me. All I see is 552kW/751hp, 0-62 in 3.9s, from a battery this 60kWh @ 400 volts. A couple magazine "reviews" quote the motor number.

They simply don't have the cells to output ANYTHING close to 552kW, forget about 600kW from the battery, and for a sum of $550,000. LOL. Is this car not even vapor? I don't see any for sale or any owner reviews. Might as well compare the horsepower of a unicorn.

- - - Updated - - -

Well, unless you're splitting pixels, it looks at first like it's saying 480 KW but the gauge is so compressed that each pixel at that scale is multiples if 10KW increments. And then there's the double tick with the lighter one on the left and darker one on the right above each number. There's no making sense of it. You have to pull that number from REST otherwise what you're looking at on the dash could be plus or minus 30KW around the 480 mark.

We're not splitting pixels, we're splitting hairs. Unless you're trying to find the Higgs Boson with it, it's close enough. The car tells you how much power you're getting the second you step on the accelerator.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

What's wrong with Tesla updating its specs to the following:

• 691 HP combined motor power (550 HP peak output)
• 0-60 in 3.2s (3.6s w/o 1-foot roll out)

This way, they can tell both stories. There will be some blowback from existing P85D owners, but isn't it better to deal with a small number today than a larger number tomorrow?

 

[vgrinshpun]

I'm looking for this data, and I'm not seeing this on the US version of the website that it's serving me. All I see is 552kW/751hp, 0-62 in 3.9s, from a battery this 60kWh @ 400 volts. A couple magazine "reviews" quote the motor number.

They simply don't have the cells to output ANYTHING close to 552kW, forget about 600kW from the battery, and for a sum of $550,000. LOL. Is this car not even vapor? I don't see any for sale or any owner reviews. Might as well compare the horsepower of a unicorn.

They rate battery as having "potential" output of 600kW. The car is not vaporware and based on professionals driven it on track is absolutely thrill to drive, but group of P85D owners that wrote letter to Elon Musk would feel that they did not get what they paid for (at $500K price tag, I suspect that they would feel much worth). There is no problem with either SLS nor P85D. The problem is that one can't fit square peg into the round hole.

 

[darthy001]

I'm looking for this data, and I'm not seeing this on the US version of the website that it's serving me. All I see is 552kW/751hp, 0-62 in 3.9s, from a battery this 60kWh @ 400 volts. A couple magazine "reviews" quote the motor number.

They simply don't have the cells to output ANYTHING close to 552kW, forget about 600kW from the battery, and for a sum of $550,000. LOL. Is this car not even vapor? I don't see any for sale or any owner reviews. Might as well compare the horsepower of a unicorn.

I know of one very famous owner here in Norway so the car is definately not vaporware. I've also seen it driven, by his wife, past me on my way to work several times the last year.

The stats are linked in another thread as well. Just google the name of the car and its on the official page from Mercedes.

Of course now the usual supsects are saying that Mercedes are listing incorrect numbers. What a bomb

The car has done a 7:56 on the Ring(almost a minute faster than a P85D), and cost more than 500000USD. I find it interesting that people laught at the range of the car while saying its not possible the draws unusually high power/discharge numbers. I would have thought is possible that Mercedes actually have some knowhow here. They even list experience derived from Formula 1/KERS and similar being utilised in the car on the same website.

But of course the numbers cant be true....

 

[AWDtsla]

But of course the numbers cant be true....

Forget about true, I don't even see them listed on mercedes website as you claim.

Prove it. Get a dyno plot, or a video of the quarter mile time. Basically anything resembling hard evidence. The ONLY thing I could find is a top gear test video, in which the electric was basically right in front of the normal sls, which runs a 11.7 quarter. Petrol vs Electric - Mercedes SLS AMG Battle - Top Gear - Series 20 - BBC - YouTube . So a 3700lbs AWD car with 740+HP does a quarter mile in ~11.6, ~11.5?

We're still mad about Tesla now?

 

[thegruf]

What's wrong with Tesla updating its specs to the following:

• 691 HP combined motor power (550 HP peak output)
• 0-60 in 3.2s (3.6s w/o 1-foot roll out)

This way, they can tell both stories. There will be some blowback from existing P85D owners, but isn't it better to deal with a small number today than a larger number tomorrow?

well put me in a Red Dwarf reality bubble.

five million posts on the subject (Tesla figures) and somebody states the flippin' obvious at last.
Well done that man. If you weren't the other side of the planet I'd buy you a beer

... not entirely sure Tesla will take you up on that suggestion immediately, though they may continue to shuffle in the right direction as fast as they dare without getting sued lol.