Performance increase for 100D. 0-100 in 3,3 sek

[PhaseWhite]

I am sure there is some room for improvements if you really don't care about reliability at all, but Tesla builds road legal cars, not racing cars. So no, they can't just increase power a lot.

@R.S Thank you for chiming in. Could you please take a look at my analysis below and share your thoughts?

Looking at motor specs on wikipedia, the S75 is listed at 285KW Max motor power. And both 75D and 90D are listed at 386KW motor power. I'd assume the 75D and 90D use the same rear motor as S75, so if this is accurate, then the front motor is only capable of 100KW.

Also looking at max power (battery output) S75 is about 280KW (this is close to the max motor)... But in the 90D it's 310KW, so quite a bit shy of potential motor output.

Seems more like the bottleneck right now is current draw from the battery pack. With 310KW, that's ~775A draw at 400V (I know I'm ignoring voltage drop so probably a bit more).

To get to 345KW output on the 90D/100D (0-60 in 3.3 seconds according to Tesla) that would take 862A + more after voltage drop. Considering that P90/100 can pull 1500-1600 amps, that seems to be within the realm of possible.

Also given that the front motor is capable of 100KW and the rear is capable of 286KW, 345KW combined should be possible based on just motor limits. Thus I think 90D and 100D are likely capable of 345KW P85D performance (pre-ludicrous upgrade). This also aligns with the possible slip up of listing the 100D with 3.3 second 0-60 that spawned this thread.

Tesla Model S - Wikipedia

 

[R.S]

@R.S Thank you for chiming in. Could you please take a look at my analysis below and share your thoughts?

Looking at motor specs on wikipedia, the S75 is listed at 285KW Max motor power. And both 75D and 90D are listed at 386KW motor power. I'd assume the 75D and 90D use the same rear motor as S75, so if this is accurate, then the front motor is only capable of 100KW.

Also looking at max power (battery output) S75 is about 280KW (this is close to the max motor)... But in the 90D it's 310KW, so quite a bit shy of potential motor output.

Seems more like the bottleneck right now is current draw from the battery pack. With 310KW, that's ~775A draw at 400V (I know I'm ignoring voltage drop so probably a bit more).

To get to 345KW output on the 90D/100D (0-60 in 3.3 seconds according to Tesla) that would take 862A + more after voltage drop. Considering that P90/100 can pull 1500-1600 amps, that seems to be within the realm of possible.

Also given that the front motor is capable of 100KW and the rear is capable of 286KW, 345KW combined should be possible based on just motor limits. Thus I think 90D and 100D are likely capable of 345KW P85D performance (pre-ludicrous upgrade). This also aligns with the possible slip up of listing the 100D with 3.3 second 0-60 that spawned this thread.

Tesla Model S - Wikipedia

AFAIK both the front and the rear motor are the same on the regular Ds. There is a slight difference in gearing, but back when they stated front and back motor hp they were the same. I actually also makes a lot more sense to produce the same motor twice, than having two different ones.

There also is a lot of confusion on motor power with Tesla. Because they sometimes stated maximum output power, sometimes they stated how much power their motors are rated at and sometimes they picked a number they just seemed to feel comfortable with. At lest it seems that way. So I'm not sure how much the motors in a 90D and a 75D really differ. I'd say they are exactly the same, but maybe the inverters are different, who knows.

Battery power also doesn't really seem to be a problem and it's actually pretty easy to guesstimate how much power a 75kWh pack could actually produce. Roughly 75% of the power a 100kWh pack can produce.

So given that the motor efficiency isn't too different, at least not as much that it would really affect this estimation, we can estimate how much power it could make, if it had the right motors. At least if we ignore fuses and wiring differences, which are the least expensive parts in this equation.

A P100D puts out about 680 hp, 505 kW, so a 75D with the right motors could put out about 510 hp, 380 kW. The 100D, of course can put out as much as the P100D, if it had the P100Ds rear motor, basically by definition.

So I think the motors (and of course inverters) are the main issue. Can they handle the power, or not.

IMO they can't, not the ones they use right now. If they added the bigger rear motor, though, even a 75D should easily beat the P85D.

 

[PhaseWhite]

A P100D puts out about 680 hp, 505 kW, so a 75D with the right motors could put out about 510 hp, 380 kW. The 100D, of course can put out as much as the P100D, if it had the P100Ds rear motor, basically by definition.

While reading my own post I realized that the P85D 0-60 likely includes the motortrend rollout while the 4.2 second for 90D/100D did not according to reports I've read of forum members taking real measurements (actually hitting 4.2s) , which explains why it only takes another 35KW output to get there.

So perhaps a large part of the 3.3 second time that Tesla listed was a change in the measuring approach + a small tweak in power (+35KW), for the purposes of marketing and product segmentation

 

[Krash]

...The small motors, currently, are rated at 190kW each...Maybe the small and big motor combined, that would be, maybe, possible. But not two small motors.

I am not looking at the Wikipedia ratings. I am looking at Jason Hughes' observation about there being no difference between the P and non P versions of the drive units as well as Fred Lambert's observations about the increased limits of the inverter architecture, including his previous speculation about adaptations to the model S.

Essentially what I am speculating is that every car in the S lineup is going to get a 25% power performance increase, as soon as the battery packs can handle the additional power.

 

[R.S]

While reading my own post I realized that the P85D 0-60 likely includes the motortrend rollout while the 4.2 second for 90D/100D did not according to reports I've read of forum members taking real measurements (actually hitting 4.2s) , which explains why it only takes another 35KW output to get there.

So perhaps a large part of the 3.3 second time that Tesla listed was a change in the measuring approach + a small tweak in power (+35KW), for the purposes of marketing and product segmentation

Measuring could be an effect here, but the big difference between the P85D and the 90D is the large rear motor. It can produce much more torque, which helps low speed acceleration.

A 2000 kg car, ignoring the inertia of the wheels, with 400 hp and enough torque and traction to propel it with 0.7g can do 0-60 in 4s. If the motor has twice the torque, so twice the theoretical motor output, but the battery limits it to 400hp it could do 0-60 in 2.9s, if there would be enough traction at the wheels (1.4g basically racing tires).

Of course you could also achieve that with a twice as high gearing ratio, but if the car originally had a top speed of say 120mph, it only has a top speed of 60 mph afterwards.

 

[R.S]

I am not looking at the Wikipedia ratings. I am looking at Jason Hughes' observation about there being no difference between the P and non P versions of the drive units as well as Fred Lambert's observations about the increased limits of the inverter architecture, including his previous speculation about adaptations to the model S.

Essentially what I am speculating is that every car in the S lineup is going to get a 25% power performance increase, as soon as the battery packs can handle the additional power.

The Jason Hughes observation is actually the most interesting here, Lambert's observations were geared towards the Model 3 and those fan bloggers usually have really unreliable sources. And their speculation really isn't better than yours, or mine. Tesla representative at Model 3 event says that lack of instrument cluster should make it to production

I think the reason why the 75 and 75D got so much quicker, was because they just removed the software limit on them. I've seen some forum posts about 75Ds beating 90Ds in 0-60. The configurator numbers are just lower to make it seem like the 100D is still quicker, which it might not really be.

But that wouldn't really affect the 100s, neither 100D nor P100D, since they are already running without limits.

 

[Krash]

But that wouldn't really affect the 100s, neither 100D nor P100D, since they are already running without limits.

My point is of course those cars are running with limits. Look at the PowerTools runlog for bcampbelllds' S P100D. First it is torque limited, then it is power limited, then farther out in time it would maybe be battery pack limited then top speed limited. It looks just like the other graph:

 

[R.S]

My point is of course those cars are running with limits. Look at the PowerTools runlog for bcampbelllds' S P100D. First it is torque limited, then it is power limited, then farther out in time it would maybe be battery pack limited then top speed limited. It looks just like the other graph:
View attachment 245133

But that seems like a rather reasonable power graph for the large rear and small front motor. The 100D doesn't have the larger rear motor, which is a lot more powerful than the small motors.

This is the original P85D design studio info:

And 691 hp at the motor is pretty much what a P100D can achieve now. The 100D only has the two small motors, so 442 hp should be, if we assume they didn't change the motors a lot since then, the maximum power a 75D, or a 100D could put out right now.

If they put the larger unit in back, or improve the motors, it could of course go higher than that. But I don't expect large changes in output, maybe based on rating methodology, but not because of major improvements to the motor.

 

[SucreTease]

Even weirder: This 100D in Spain is listed with a 0-100 km/hr time of 5.0 sec: Model S 100D 5YJSA7E29HF203488 | Tesla
https://www.tesla.com/es_ES/new/5YJSA7E29HF203488
Sadly, this suggests that 3.3 sec might be just another error.

 

[evster]

Here is a 100D in Denmark listed 0-100km/h @ 3.0 sek. This is a serious issue and quite embarrassing for Tesla being all over the place with performance specs. Being a company focusing so much on digital services throughout the ordering process they need to get this right.

View media item 117264

 

[R.S]

Even weirder: This 100D in Spain is listed with a 0-100 km/hr time of 5.0 sec: Model S 100D 5YJSA7E29HF203488 | Tesla
Sadly, this suggests that 3.3 sec might be just another error.

Here is a 100D in Denmark listed 0-100km/h @ 3.0 sek. This is a serious issue and quite embarrassing for Tesla being all over the place with performance specs. Being a company focusing so much on digital services throughout the ordering process they need to get this right.

View media item 117264

How hard can it be to just get 0-60 mph/0-100 kph right? What's next, wrong range numbers, Model S with 6 seat option, A X 75D with 3.2 l of engine displacement?

 

[evster]

Re-uploading the image of the 100D in Denmark with 0-100 in 3,0sek

 

[Krash]

I am kind of surprised that nobody we know bought one of these cars advertised at 3.3. How long does it take to get them? Are they sitting around at a Service Center in Denmark? Or are they in a warehouse in the Netherlands and it takes a month to get them?

 

[Burnt Toast]

Re-uploading the image of the 100D in Denmark with 0-100 in 3,0sek

Probably proof that there is a glitch in the matrix. Long time to fix this issue though.

 

[evster]

And in the UK 100D specified with 0-60mph in 3,3 sec. Should have been a different figure here since it's 0-96km/h time...

 

[headcase]

A lot easier to have typos on the web, than it is to engineer the motors with more speed.

Sorry, but unless someone actually has proof, this is just some sloppy typos on various web pages.

 

[SucreTease]

This 100D in Denmark is listed with a 0-100 km/hr time of 3.0 sec: Model S 100D 5YJSA7E2XHF203497 | Tesla Danmark

 

[malcolm]

US Current Inventory S 100D's still showing 0 to 60 mph at 4.3s.
e.g.: Model S 100D 5YJSA1E21HF201554 | Tesla

Various European Current Inventory S 100D's showing 3.3s or less:
e.g: Model S 100D 5YJSA7E2XHF203497 | Tesla Danmark
Model S 100D 5YJSA7E29HF193772 | Tesla Deutschland

Maybe last month's eclipse is to blame, or there's some sort of Firmware Shuffle going on in particular markets.

Or it's a typo.

 

[tkdkenny]

This may have been said before but: I think this is definitely a glitch (maybe a hacker having some fun?). Why would new inventory cars have a faster 0-60 than a new custom build? That doesn’t make any sense.

There is also disparity for the S75, but in the other direction. New build 4.3s, new inventory 4.6s. (in the UK). Oddly, the S75D is the same in both.

 

[evster]

There is for sure a glitch and performance figures are all over the place on tesla.com. Either way, to me this indicates clearly what is going on. There will be a performance improvement announced for the non performance 100-packs. But it will not be as low as we hav seen. The main mix up is between 0-60mph and 0-100km/h and Tesla really need to regression test their webb.

If Tesla want to keep things in the dark for us they need to hide the factory codes from the configurator and from our specs. E.g. the separate battery discussion with BTX8 batteries delivered in EU and now the latest APH3 hardware. Sigh.

Based on what has been said and what has been not this is what I predict it will look like for Model S when Tesla sort things out. For 75 and P it's already known and 100D will simply just fall between them in terms of performance:

75D
0-100km/h: 4,4 sec
0-60 mph: 4,2 sec

100D
0-100km/h: 3,5 sec
0-60 mph: 3,3 sec

P100D
0-100km/h: 2,7 sec
0-60 mph: 2,5 sec