Performance of P85D with Ludicrous upgrade review

[Andyw2100]

Question for those P85D owners that upgraded to the Ludicrous mode. Prior to the upgrade my 100% charge was 256 miles. After the Ludicrous upgrade, my 100% charge is 249 miles. Has anyone else seen a decrease in their 100% charge.

That's an interesting question and I hope others who have upgraded will share their experiences.

That being said, even if all of you who have upgraded have seen a decrease in rated range, that may not mean there's actually been a decrease in efficiency. Tesla my just be using a different formula to compute rated range, based on expectations of Ludicrous mode usage. The important question would be have you noticed any difference in efficiency when you drive?

 

[jpet]

I've heard from several P85D owners that installing 7.1 impacted the range figure so maybe it is unrelated to the Ludicrous upgrade.

 

[Firewired]

I've heard from several P85D owners that installing 7.1 impacted the range figure so maybe it is unrelated to the Ludicrous upgrade.

That's true for me. I am a 27k miles and my 90% pre 7.1 was 223, now after I am comsistently at 218.

 

[sorka]

Hmmm...doesn't sound like much of an --UP--grade at all!

Now of course if that was 453KW...

Oh geez. Yea, that was 453.

- - - Updated - - -

Question for those P85D owners that upgraded to the Ludicrous mode. Prior to the upgrade my 100% charge was 256 miles. After the Ludicrous upgrade, my 100% charge is 249 miles. Has anyone else seen a decrease in their 100% charge.

My 100% charge remained the same at 252 with range mode on. I've recently lost another mile at 80 and 90% so I wouldn't be surprised to see if it's actually dropped at 100% too to 251.

- - - Updated - - -

That's true for me. I am a 27k miles and my 90% pre 7.1 was 223, now after I am comsistently at 218.

I just charge to 226 (90%) yesterday with 16K miles with 7.1.

 

[NOLA_Mike]

I just charge to 226 (90%) yesterday with 16K miles with 7.1.

Just as an FYI, I'm at 220 rated miles at 90% with 21k miles on 7.1 with Range Mode OFF. I've seen no change with the firmware updates, just a steady drop of a mile about every couple of months.

Mike

 

[MarcG]

Just as an FYI, I'm at 220 rated miles at 90% with 21k miles on 7.1 with Range Mode OFF. I've seen no change with the firmware updates, just a steady drop of a mile about every couple of months.

Mike

Same here (see graph below), except I keep my range mode ON - and I have over 28k on my P85D :biggrin:

Once I get the Ludicrous upgrade --which could still be months away-- I'll report back on range differences, if any.

 

[3mp_kwh]

Been getting 221, but range charged the full duration, plus almost an hour, and noticed the next 90% brought it to 223.

I re-read the thread, and didn't find where someone was commenting on a higher HP delta, at lower charge states with Ludicrous. Something like 30hp up top, and closer to a 50hp gain at lower SOC. Also still curious on cold performance impacts. I've had the Max Power display "1+ hour", once or twice, and think its relevant for a good chunk of the year. TIA

 

[Evee]

Everything is fine. No range decrease. If you drive faster your power goes down faster, everyone knows that. Even those damn ice cars.

 

[sorka]

Oh geez. Yea, that was 453.
I just charge to 226 (90%) yesterday with 16K miles with 7.1.

Looks like I spoke too soon. Just charged today to 224 at 90% (range mode on) with 17K miles.

 

[Andyw2100]

Everything is fine. No range decrease. If you drive faster your power goes down faster, everyone knows that. Even those damn ice cars.

While I hope you are correct, and believe that you probably are, I'd like to point out for others that may have missed it that you did post the following just a few hours ago:

Just did my update, first in vegas, car is now REALLY ****ING FAST, and I thought it was fast before! Totally a worthy upgrade if you are on the fence.

So your point about "No range decrease" is not based on any lengthy set of experiences comparing pre and post Ludicrous efficiencies.

Again, I think you are probably right. I just wanted to help qualify your statement.

- - - Updated - - -

Looks like I spoke too soon. Just charged today to 224 at 90% (range mode on) with 17K miles.

It could just be the weather or the vagaries of pack balancing. I wouldn't sweat it too much.

 

[DillyBop]

so is there a consensus on what the 0-60 time is on a P85D with Ludicrous retrofit? yes, with 1ft-rollout! are we sub-3?

 

[rays427]

We had 2 P85D with ludicrous updates at the Sacramento Raceway. My first run was 11.345 at 117.67 second run 11.342 at 117.57 third 11.367 at 115.89 and fourth 11.513 at 116.03. I did not try launch control. The other car had a best of 11.366 at 115.99. His other runs were in the 11.5 to 11.6. I started at about 225 rated miles and was down to 210 on fourth run. The other car started at lower charge than my car which probably accounts for my cars better times. He did try launch mode which I believe was his best run. His last run was 11.6 which I believe was being affected by the lower charge. He had run a best of 11.63 without the ludicrous upgrade.

 

[P85DEE]

We had 2 P85D with ludicrous updates at the Sacramento Raceway. My first run was 11.345 at 117.67 second run 11.342 at 117.57 third 11.367 at 115.89 and fourth 11.513 at 116.03. I did not try launch control. The other car had a best of 11.366 at 115.99. His other runs were in the 11.5 to 11.6. I started at about 225 rated miles and was down to 210 on fourth run. The other car started at lower charge than my car which probably accounts for my cars better times. He did try launch mode which I believe was his best run. His last run was 11.6 which I believe was being affected by the lower charge. He had run a best of 11.63 without the ludicrous upgrade.

What kind of 60ft times were you getting Ray?

 

[Andyw2100]

We had 2 P85D with ludicrous updates at the Sacramento Raceway. My first run was 11.345 at 117.67 second run 11.342 at 117.57...

I believe this is awfully close to what several of the P90DLs have run, right? (I believe there are a few outlying P90DL runs that are a little better, but the majority are in the 11.3 plus range, right?)

So it seems, at least for now, that the upgraded P85Ds are actually pretty darn close to the P90DLs performance-wise. Or am I mistaken?

 

[P85DEE]

I believe this is awfully close to what several of the P90DLs have run, right? (I believe there are a few outlying P90DL runs that are a little better, but the majority are in the 11.3 plus range, right?)

So it seems, at least for now, that the upgraded P85Ds are actually pretty darn close to the P90DLs performance-wise. Or am I mistaken?

That's the way it's looking right now.

There's not a dime's worth of difference in the quarter mile results at this time.

What is the difference in power produced between a 90% SOC and a >95% state of charge?

I'm wondering if Ray's results may have been better had he been closer to a full charge.

Also waiting to hear about his 60ft times.

 

[Andyw2100]

That's the way it's looking right now.

There's not a dime's worth of difference in the quarter mile results at this time.

What is the difference in power produced between a 90% SOC and a >95% state of charge?

I'm wondering if Ray's results may have been better had he been closer to a full charge.

Also waiting to hear about his 60ft times.

That, then, begs the question as to what the future holds. What I mean is if Tesla ever gets the P90DL to the promised 10.9 spec 1/4 time, do we think it is likely that our upgraded P85Ds will get pulled to that spec as well? That would be pretty sweet, and if that were to happen (or even come close to happening) this would be one situation in which we could say that Tesla did under-promise and over-deliver, at least with respect to what they were promising on the website when it came to the P85D upgrades. (Musk's initial announcement made it sound like the upgraded P85Ds would be much closer to the P90DLs than the info that was eventually published on the ordering page did, which is why I am differentiating between the two.)

 

[sorka]

That, then, begs the question as to what the future holds. What I mean is if Tesla ever gets the P90DL to the promised 10.9 spec 1/4 time, do we think it is likely that our upgraded P85Ds will get pulled to that spec as well? That would be pretty sweet, and if that were to happen (or even come close to happening) this would be one situation in which we could say that Tesla did under-promise and over-deliver, at least with respect to what they were promising on the website when it came to the P85D upgrades. (Musk's initial announcement made it sound like the upgraded P85Ds would be much closer to the P90DLs than the info that was eventually published on the ordering page did, which is why I am differentiating between the two.)

We're near the limits of traction until 35 MPH and then after that it's a full 1500 amps according to all the CAN BUS graphs showing up. So the only way we get more power in the P90DL is if the fuse limit is higher than 1500 amps and they're just not using it yet.

 

[lolachampcar]

It looks a lot like Tesla is very purposefully controlling power for the first second of every run and that the amount of power they are allowing is the same from P85D to P85DL. Check out the plataeu on torque and very steady current rise for the first second of this D to L comparison #166. I believe the battery can source current faster so the it would be possible to get more torque in that early period (assuming Tesla's HP numbers for the motors themselves is accurate). If Tesla is tightly controlling the first second as it appears, there will never be much of a difference in low speed performance no matter what is done (drag radials, prepped track, etc.).

The next real data point for me will be a XDL run. If a faster current ramp is possible, I would think that is where Tesla would employ it

 

[Cottonwood]

It looks a lot like Tesla is very purposefully controlling power for the first second of every run and that the amount of power they are allowing is the same from P85D to P85DL. Check out the plataeu on torque and very steady current rise for the first second of this D to L comparison #166. I believe the battery can source current faster so the it would be possible to get more torque in that early period (assuming Tesla's HP numbers for the motors themselves is accurate). If Tesla is tightly controlling the first second as it appears, there will never be much of a difference in low speed performance no matter what is done (drag radials, prepped track, etc.).

I always thought that the torque and therefore the current is limited to avoid wheel slip at lower speeds. If that is true, then better tires should accept more current, and limited traction (wet, snowy roads) should cause lower current draw.

I guess that I will just have to set up for logging some other than perfect situations after I get my upgrade.

 

[ArtInCT]

I always thought that the torque and therefore the current is limited to avoid wheel slip at lower speeds. If that is true, then better tires should accept more current, and limited traction (wet, snowy roads) should cause lower current draw.

I guess that I will just have to set up for logging some other than perfect situations after I get my upgrade.

Cottonwood, like you, I understood the torque limit to be one of traction limits which are there to minimize wheel/tire spin. At best you get a chirp or a scuffing.
Are we not understanding this correctly Lola?
Is this just a static power mapping that has no feedback from the wheels?

this could be easy to test... just throw a nice patch of sand ahead of the tire patches for about 10 feet with a broom and then do a launch with your CAN bus and see what the result would be... Some loss of traction should occur and power diminished to match the coefficient of traction available.