wallet.dat
Member
I certainly hope so. On the list of lap times for production cars, that P85 time is slower than a Range Rover (8:55), and only quicker than a 2002 VW GTi (9:09) and a 1960 Trabant -- a production car with 20 bhp.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
P85D Nurburgring Edition
- Thread starter Ludus
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Future Tesla
I would be interested to know why you think this as I have thought the opposite.
Its my understanding that the power limitation issue is as a result of the motor windings getting too hot and causing limp mode, if that is correct, then the best way to achieve a fast time would be to completely turn off regenerative braking and rely solely on friction brakes for slowing down.
Not having to convert kinetic energy back into electricity will reduce part of the load on the Motor\s as they will heat up if being used hard for acceleration as well as regeneration, so not using it for regeneration would delay the onset of over temperature limiting and potentially offer full performance for a whole lap.
That's what I thought too, but after asking the guys over at teslarati about this very line of thinking, they pointed out that they did test and refuted this: Teslarati 48 Returns to Buttonwillow Race Track - TESLARATI.com (in the comments)
See John Tamplin's comments to get a real good feel for where the most likely improvements need to be.
qwertzy
Member
rolosrevenge
Dr. EVS
Shinkaze
New Member
Drifting aside, racing is the opposite of what you just said. It is a crucible for finding new efficiencies. Energy wasted is cargo wasted. When you tune a motor for performance you inherently improve it's efficiency with ruthless abandon.
In fact I would strongly argue that EV development is retarded by the focus on commuting efficiency, when we've learned that that most advances in automotive technology come from the trying new things at the race track. Having retail customers evolve EV's mean we're not going to get a better Prius until the next generation Prius. At the racetrack, cars evolve weekend to weekend.
There is an element of advertising, case in point F1 tire sponsors are purely promotional. This is why Michelin actually pulled out and focused on Le Mans and other series as their racing budget comes from their R&D spend, rather than marketing spend like other manufacturers. To paint a broad pen and say it's only about advertising is either simple minded, or (more likely because Elon is smart), he's telling you the Tesla owner how to think about it (manipulation) which is what every smart CEO does around their product. (control the conversation by dictating the frame it will be perceived from).
An honest racing effort with Tesla technology would be a smart way to rapidly find new efficiencies and create more durable product.
+1. Perhaps the comments at a shareholder meeting were meant to appease shareholders immediate concerns about cash flow etc. I think it's insane to say Tesla don't care about performance given their actual actions - Ludicrous even (see what I did there?)! Their first car was an utterly impractical performance roadster. Their next car is a performance sedan with supercar acceleration? And specific P versions. Then P + versions.... Tesla understand the importance of motorsports, and they speak with their actions - design, product line, participation in events like Refuel, etc.
I think some people here sound like old fuddy duddies.
If a car is reliable under high performance stress it will be reliable everywhere. Also, if we're having fun doing it, is it really a waste?
Shinkaze
New Member
You can actually design around the weight. Since the GT-R was mentioned earlier, it's worth pointing out that it is actually a very heavy car for the lap times it generates. That is because the GT-R was actually designed with a weight and foot print FIRST then everything else came later. The reason they designed fora such a heavy bogey was traction. Because a modern passenger car generates very little weight through downforce, physical weight actually helps mechanical grip. This is a different animal from INERTIA which does work to strain the grip of the tires as well as dampen acceleration and deceleration. When Porsche cried foul over the GT-R's seaminlgy impossible lap times, the head engineer flately stated the GT-R doesn't defy physics it just merely applies physics properly.
The same can very well be true of a Tesla or any other "heavy" performance car, IF the suspension and packaging are thoughtfully applied. Where the weight is in the car makes a huge impact. 50 pounds out of the passenger compartment makes little difference to handling, but 50 pounds off the nose and your polar moment of inertia just tipped in a hugely favorable way.
Finally it's all about the tires and how they respond to the track. This is where I sometimes frown on "tunning by Nurburgring" as it's not a very good real world analog. A Car tunned for stop and go freeway commuting is not going to do well at the track, nor is a track tuned car ideal for urban driving. That said, the Model S is set up as a Grand Touring car, so whose to say it might be a track darling waiting to happen, though I imagine the suspension engineers were not thinking the same way as Porsche, so it might take a fair amount of work to figure out what a good set up should look like.
This is why I circle back to my previous statement that evolving a Tesla by track testing could probably lead to some interesting discoveries and perhaps a more dynamic vehicle. I for one would be a fan of such a project.
Similar threads
- Article
