Stop the Press! Tesla announces REAL HP numbers for P85D and P90L

[lolachampcar]

How is it people think the slightest disagreement with a company must be resolved by the company buying the car back and the customer being banned from ever buying the company's product again? That leaves no room to discuss the vast majority of issues one might have with a company.

It's hard when I see others attacking poster's for their positions to keep this in mind but I really can disagree with someone without impugning their integrity or calling into question their motives. Over time, I have come to understand how both sides can hold the opinions they hold; I'm just glad mine falls more towards the centrists among us.

 

[Andyw2100]

How is it people think the slightest disagreement with a company must be resolved by the company buying the car back and the customer being banned from ever buying the company's product again? That leaves no room to discuss the vast majority of issues one might have with a company.

Thank you!

That's what a bunch of us have been saying for a while, but because we've been firmly on one side of the debate for a while I think our saying it is discounted. Perhaps your saying it will be discounted less!

 

[P85DEE]

In part because everyone at Tesla is afraid to step in when Elon misspeaks.

So are you blaming "everyone at Tesla" who didn't "step in" when Elon misspoke?

What do they owe us all for this act of negligence?

Also, when did Elon misspeak?

 

[rns-e]

Mistakes such as not finding out what was meant by "691 horsepower motor power", as opposed to just assuming that it simply meant "691 horsepower"

And where is HP suppose to come from if not the motor? There is no such thing as battery hp, or gasoline hp or what ever hp when selling a car. There is motor hp which makes the car move. Tesla advertised the P85D with 691 hp at the motor and in no situation does it deliver 691 hp at the motor. It delivers a maximum of 463 hp at the motors as stated by Tesla. But you know that and yet you keep thinking that repeating "691 horsepower motor power" is the golden ticket that is going to get all this go away.

 

[P85DEE]

How is it people think the slightest disagreement with a company must be resolved by the company buying the car back and the customer being banned from ever buying the company's product again? That leaves no room to discuss the vast majority of issues one might have with a company.

It's hard when I see others attacking poster's for their positions to keep this in mind but I really can disagree with someone without impugning their integrity or calling into question their motives. Over time, I have come to understand how both sides can hold the opinions they hold; I'm just glad mine falls more towards the centrists among us.

The "disagreement', as outlined on this forum many times, is hard to describe as a "slight" one.

Judging from the accusations and comments being made and which have been made on this matter, and up to this point, it would appear that this "disagreement" is anything but "slight" based upon the words of those who claim to have not received what they paid for because they were "mislead".

 

[Kalllagtunet]

Canuck, are you an attorney?

Yes, but please don't take anything I post as a legal opinion. I don't have all the facts to properly provide an opinion and, more importantly, no one is paying me here for my opinion.

Canuck do you have from your perspective as knowledgeable in the field of law an understanding of what type of legal advice Tesla have been given (As an US company I will assume that the legal department in Tesla (or external advisor) have been directly involved) prior to the changes that in fact have been done on their web site with regards to HP numbers.

First change: Removing any trace of a combined number of HP motor power (the infamous 691.) and just giving the HP motor separately for the two motors.

Second change: Start referencing to the R85 testing standard

Third change: Include information of 1 foot roll out on their 0-60(0-100 numbers much later in time in Europe) numbers.

Fourth change: Post a technical blog explaining HP numbers but omitting actually state the battery limited HP number for the model in the lineup that actually are limited by battery power.

Fifth change: Include the battery limited HP number of the actual vehicle in addition to the separate motor HP number.

 

[P85DEE]

And where is HP suppose to come from if not the motor? There is no such thing as battery hp, or gasoline hp or what ever hp when selling a car. There is motor hp which makes the car move. Tesla advertised the P85D with 691 hp at the motor and in no situation does it deliver 691 hp at the motor. It delivers a maximum of 463 hp at the motors as stated by Tesla. But you know that and yet you keep thinking that repeating "691 horsepower motor power" is the golden ticket that is going to get all this go away.

There is no doubt in my mind, that any compensation that Tesla would forced into paying for this matter, should be cause for them to strongly consider any future business dealings before proceeding with such.

 

[dsm363]

How is it people think the slightest disagreement with a company must be resolved by the company buying the car back and the customer being banned from ever buying the company's product again? That leaves no room to discuss the vast majority of issues one might have with a company.

It's hard when I see others attacking poster's for their positions to keep this in mind but I really can disagree with someone without impugning their integrity or calling into question their motives. Over time, I have come to understand how both sides can hold the opinions they hold; I'm just glad mine falls more towards the centrists among us.

Agree. There is a lot of that going around now. Like most things the truth lies in the middle. Tesla is not some evil company that deliberately sought to trick their customers nor are all the customers completely at fault. Tesla certainly has some responsibility in the confusion. Question is wether that rises to the level that they must compensate people somehow.

 

[stopcrazypp]

In part because everyone at Tesla is afraid to step in when Elon misspeaks.

I've seen the argument brought up many times that Tesla should be expected to "correct" the media on this. However, I think that is an unreasonable expectation, since I have never seen companies do that for things that err on the side of being positive to the company.

As for this particular matter, it seems there is a portion of people what implies "horsepower" with no modifier as defined to be "horsepower the car makes at the motor shaft with the entire system factored in", so that journalists are "wrong" when they say that the Model S has "691 hp". However, I do not think that is a general definition of horsepower (there's already been discussion up thread about this) and if someone takes a control survey, I don't think it will turn up that definition.

I'm not going to jump into the whole discussion about the blacklist. Ultimately it has been applied when individuals sue or directly threaten to sue Tesla (via a letter from an attorney or communicating with Tesla through an attorney), but not something Tesla has applied broadly. I don't think it would necessarily apply here.

 

[wk057]

If there are personal attacks or harassment please report it. Just because people disagree with you doesn't make that harassment. I'm glad you've found reasonable people to talk with you though.

Good point about reporting -- that tends to get directed moderator attention (as designed).

That said, the tone overall has been out of hand for a while and it's unfortunate that folks have checked out of the "public" discussion not because the issue has been resolved or positions have been identified and accepted, but because of perceived bullying. Formal "personal attacks" and "harassment" are specific types of issues, but general broad bullying unfortunately happens a lot lately (and perhaps it did before but escaped my notice). The value of TMC is diminishing because of it. (You'll note that some of us have nearly "checked out" entirely.) I still plan on attending Connect (I'm optimistic and I have friends I want to reconnect with), but the forum is less appealing lately.

As an example, the (ex-)mods tend to chime in (Bonnie especially, kudos to her) when people jump in with "troll!" for threads started by new members reporting service issues, and such. But when it comes to the word "horsepower" apparently different rules seem to apply for some reason.

I've given up reporting posts. I've been told to report posts for lesser offenses than listed on the reporting page, and the majority of those reports have been ignored, so, I'll leave it to others.

I agree that the tone of this discussion and the treatment of some people by some people from both sides of this argument has been out of line and counterproductive. Heck, the majority of the posts since my last post aren't even on topic, let alone useful.

Agree. There is a lot of that going around now. Like most things the truth lies in the middle. Tesla is not some evil company that deliberately sought to trick their customers nor are all the customers completely at fault. Tesla certainly has some responsibility in the confusion. Question is wether that rises to the level that they must compensate people somehow.

I think the better question is, regardless of whether or not they *must* compensate early P85D buyers in some way after having to do so after some legal or pseudo-legal battle, *should* they just do so of their own accord without being force to do so? I think the latter would leave a much better taste and would be the right thing to do.

Something like this would be perfect (NOT ACTUAL NOTE/LETTER): "Dear P85D Buyer: After some internal review, we realize that the specifications shown for the P85D prior to XX/XX/XXXX may have been misinterpreted by some customers. We apologize for this confusion and assure you that it was not our intention to mislead our customers with our product specifications. While we believe the specifications are in fact accurate, we understand how they could have been misunderstood and we want to make sure that you, our customer, are aware that we have taken steps to clarify these specification. We value you as a customer and we want to make sure your experience with Tesla is always top notch. As a token of our appreciation, we are extending an offer of (insert some small but reasonable gesture here) to all P85D buyers who purchased prior to XX/XX/XXXX."

The gesture could be anything really... a discount off of a future purchase or bonus value on a trade in, discounted pack upgrade, free or discounted service plan or warranty, free or discounted Ludicrous update, some exclusive swag, who knows. Anything would be better than nothing.

That ship has probably sailed though at this point, though.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Canuck do you have from your perspective as knowledgeable in the field of law an understanding of what type of legal advice Tesla have been given (As an US company I will assume that the legal department in Tesla (or external advisor) have been directly involved) prior to the changes that in fact have been done on their web site with regards to HP numbers.

First change: Removing any trace of a combined number of HP motor power (the infamous 691.) and just giving the HP motor separately for the two motors.

Second change: Start referencing to the R85 testing standard

Third change: Include information of 1 foot roll out on their 0-60(0-100 numbers much later in time in Europe) numbers.

Fourth change: Post a technical blog explaining HP numbers but omitting actually state the battery limited HP number for the model in the lineup that actually are limited by battery power.

Fifth change: Include the battery limited HP number of the actual vehicle in addition to the separate motor HP number.

I don't think the "changes" you describe are enough. If Canuck was to represent Tesla's side, he would need to know internally what drove those decisions, not simply the results which can be open to interpretation.

For example, here's my interpretation:
1) That number was pulled in May response to the 691hp thread saying it was misleading. That does not mean Tesla thinks it is wrong, simply that Tesla is listening to customer complaints (they perhaps thought this would let the thread "die" as some expected it would).
2) The R85 standard was actually referenced since *before* the P85D and other dual motor cars came out. This was not something Tesla pulled out afterwards.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/show...or-P85D-and-P90L/page81?p=1229983#post1229983
3) This can be interpreted as clarification, not a correction. Ultimately they have not changed their 0-60 numbers advertised (and as has been pointed out many times, US automakers tend to advertise this way by default).
4) Much interpretation has gone into this, but it can be very similar to #1. Stating the battery-limited number may be interpreted as the 691hp number being "wrong" (which some have done exactly that in this thread), so Tesla had avoided doing so for the P85D all this time.
5) I expected actually Tesla not to do this until after there is some kind of material change (like a new motor or new SAE rating standard), but they did (but did so in a way that kept "motor power" going and still as the primary metric). Again similar to #1, this may simply be Tesla listening to consumer concern (again perhaps it will let the thread die as some also predicted when this happened), not necessarily them admitting fault.

 

[brianman]

So are you blaming "everyone at Tesla" who didn't "step in" when Elon misspoke?

What do they owe us all for this act of negligence?

Also, when did Elon misspeak?

No, I'm not saying that at all. You have a weird habit of working really hard to misinterpret the written word.

- - - Updated - - -

Let me simplify this for you such that we might get agreement.

it seems there is a portion of people what implies "horsepower" with no modifier as defined to be "horsepower the car makes somewhere in the system", so that journalists are "wrong" when they say that the Model S has "691 hp".

I think this is a better description. Do you not agree that if the vehicle has "691 hp" labelled that somewhere in the system it should be measurable as such? If not, then why not just say the motors support infinity horsepower and then let customers take you to court when in the year 3999 GWh batteries are available and the motors fail at around 800 hp?

 

[LetsGoFast]

Actually I think my words are still there.

But purely out of curiosity, what sense does it make for one to complain if one is not interested in having a "wrong" righted?

I sometimes complain about the weather. I do not expect those to whom I complain to have the ability to change it. I've been known to complain about how long it takes my wife to be ready to join me for dinner, but I have no illusions whatsoever that this will change.

Moreover, I would in fact like to see Tesla attempt to "right the wrong" -- I just disagree strongly with your proposed solution and with your attitude towards those who disagree with you in general.

 

[brianman]

Something like this would be perfect (NOT ACTUAL NOTE/LETTER)...

The other benefit of such a letter is that it would be "on the up and up" for Tesla to include *all* customers in the letter, not just those they think are upset. If the mission really is what matters, then being upfront and open with educating everyone is the right step.

 

[wk057]

The other benefit of such a letter is that it would be "on the up and up" for Tesla to include *all* customers in the letter, not just those they think are upset. If the mission really is what matters, then being upfront and open with educating everyone is the right step.

Well, I would think all potentially affected customers would be sufficient. IMO this would be anyone that bought a P85D while their website had the 691 hp number, but I'll leave that to the folks above my pay grade.

 

[brianman]

Well, I would think all potentially affected customers would be sufficient. IMO this would be anyone that bought a P85D while their website had the 691 hp number, but I'll leave that to the folks above my pay grade.

Suppose I have a non-P*D and I refer a friend who buys a P*D. Wouldn't it better for Tesla to have included me in the letter such that I'm properly informed when referring potential customers?

Which is another problem with this whole mess. Referrals with mixed messages from Tesla on the subject. It's becoming a case study in how to mess up your product positioning.

 

[wk057]

Suppose I have a non-P*D and I refer a friend who buys a P*D. Wouldn't it better for Tesla to have included me in the letter such that I'm properly informed when referring potential customers?

Good point.

Which is another problem with this whole mess. Referrals with mixed messages from Tesla on the subject. It's becoming a case study in how to mess up your product positioning.

Not to get too OT, but the whole referral program is just the same nonsense to drum up purchases as the 691 HP/1-ft rollout/etc stuff, just in a different set of clothes. It all points to Tesla not in fact being as production constrained as they claim to be. If they had miles of orders waiting to be filled, why offer discounts/incentives for referrals? If they drummed up additional orders beyond the existing production constrained orders, why haven't wait times extended substantially? (Yes, they're ramping production faster, but not *that* fast.) Sure, Musk tried to explain this expensive program away by saying it supposedly costs them $2000 per customer acquisition anyway... but he neglected to mention that those costs didn't magically disappear with the referral program the that the referral program is an additional cost on top of the existing marketing infrastructure.

 

[tomas]

There was an earlier post (dozens of pages ago) where somebody asked "what remedy do you want". It appears (inferred from posts) that there are a wide variety of remedies people seek. Ranging from an admission and apology to upgrade to enable a full 691 HP at the axle. And everything in between. Including: free Ludicrous upgrade or $20k refund or buy back car.

For those in the admission camp - the website changes are likely all you will ever get. No company is going to "admit" something that opens the doors to claims. Instead, they will publish a different metric, while steadfastly insisting that what they originally published was also an acceptable metric. Sound familiar?

For those in the "gimme 691 at the axle" camp - just how do you think anyone could do this? You might as well ask for your money back.

For the in-betweeners, are you hoping that a young, growing, cash-constrained, profit-seeking company is going to reach into their pockets and give you a free upgrade or rebate? Only if there's no recourse. They are already offering the best upgrade they have roughly "at cost".

For those who just want Tesla to simply be more attentive to how they construe performance metrics - I believe that point has been received.

The problem with class actions (for anyone who is willing to pony up the effort to take it that far) is that all these camps - with their different expectations - are combined into one group, and they all share the same fate (usually settlement), which will probably not satisfy many (except all the lawyers). And, as has been pointed out upstream, others who didn't feel that harmed to begin with join the action mid-stream with their own set of expectations - or just after a buck if one comes flying their way.

I personally think the first 100 pages of this thread was worthwhile - to let Tesla know some customers felt deceived. Beyond that, what's the point? The Danish and Norwegian groups are following their process. I don't know the laws and procedures there, so not right to comment. I do know this: anyone who goes that path in US has a low probability of being satisfied.

 

[wk057]

They are already offering the best upgrade they have roughly "at cost".

I'll just argue that the Ludicrous mode fuse and contactor updates at $5000 is in no way shape or form "at cost." Edit: If that were true, then they've increased the cost of their battery packs by something like $4000, since they include this hardware now regardless of Ludicrous mode... which I highly doubt they've done.

 

[brianman]

I'll just argue that the Ludicrous mode fuse and contactor updates at $5000 is in no way shape or form "at cost." Edit: If that were true, then they've increased the cost of their battery packs by something like $4000, since they include this hardware now regardless of Ludicrous mode... which I highly doubt they've done.

Cost is a thorny subject at times. I suspect what they're considering "cost" here includes R&D and some budgeting for repairs/servicing of P vehicles if/when the new tech (fuse/contactor) has teething issues.

Purely conjecture on my part.