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

[P85DEE]

People may be choosing to reluctantly pay the extra $5000 because it's the better option. Not paying it might be viewed as cutting off your nose to spite your face. People opting to pay it might be very annoyed that it is not being given to them at no charge, but if they don't want to take Tesla to court for whatever their reason may be, and do want the additional power they had expected in the first place, their only option is to pay the $5000 to receive it. If they are planning on living with their six-figure investment for quite some time, the $5000 additional cost adds a fair amount of value. Additionally it may increase resale value by more than $5,000.

In my opinion there is nothing at all inconsistent with someone being upset with Tesla over the horsepower issue, and still opting to pay the $5000 for the Ludicrous upgrade.

Well, there's being "upset with Tesla over the horsepower issue", and then there is "being irate with Tesla over the horsepower issue".

The posts give me indication that both situations exist within this membership.

No matter where this matter goes from here, it is no doubt going to come across as odd in the eyes of many, that one would argue that they are "upset" with Tesla because they were deceived and shortchanged by Tesla, because based upon their facts, they did not get the horsepower from Tesla that they paid for.

But to then follow that up by handing Tesla more of their money, knowing full well that based upon the same identical facts that they used to argue that they were shortchanged by Tesla to begin with, that they still will not have the horsepower that they originally paid for the first time they opened their checkbooks....well that is no doubt going to raise some eyebrows.

The part above in bold, is not their "only option". They could sell the car that they were shortchanged on in the first place, take the proceeds from it plus the $5K they would have spent in an effort which would be known beforehand to offer a compromise well short of 691 horsepower, and buy something else with it.

Of course though, many probably will not do that. Many wanting to "fix" this matter, will simply buy Ludicrous.

This is part of why I said earlier, this Ludicrous upgrade, has perhaps the best potential for retiring this matter altogether.

In fact, the possibility exists, that of those who are currently disgruntled about this matter, a large percentage of that group may become considerably less irate about it should Ludicrous provide a significant performance increase, irrespective of it's "horsepower".

Which, would of course, say quite a lot.

I don't see people paying for Ludicrous, and then still complaining.

 

[Andyw2100]

In fact, the possibility exists, that of those who are currently disgruntled about this matter, a large percentage of that group may become considerably less irate about it should Ludicrous provide a significant performance increase, irrespective of it's "horsepower".

Which, would of course, say quite a lot.

That may be.

And if so, the question is how much happier would everyone have been, and how much better off would Tesla have been if instead of charging the $5000 they had just given the upgrade at no charge, as may have been their original intention? Is whatever revenue they will be booking worth the disgruntled customers, and the ill-will, as opposed to the positive press they would have received and good-will they would have generated if they had just provided the upgrade at no charge.

We may never know the answers to those questions, but it is something to consider.

 

[whitex]

However that is an entirely different matter from paying for goods which I'm arguing that I never, ever, ever received, namely 691 horsepower, and then opening up my wallet and pulling up more money, knowing that even after that additional money, I still won't receive the goods (691 horses) that I'm arguing that I had originally paid for and was entitled to, but did not get.
So in effect, I'm walking into a situation knowing that after all the smoke clears, after I open my wallet yet again, I still won't be whole,.... still won't have my 691 horsepower, even after spending the extra money.
But I'm going to do that anyway? Especially if part of my argument is that I was deceived to begin with?

Ok, a more appropriate example - assume you bought a V12 car then found out only 8 cylinders are firing. Car manufacturer adds a footnote (after you bought it) that only 8 of the 12 cylinders can be used at any time because the fuel pump cannot feed all 12, but that's ok because the car software that makes the engine run on just 8. Then the manufacturer offers to enable 2 more cylinders by upgrading the fuel pump hardware, but you still only get 10 cylinders firing rather than the 12 that the car has but cannot use. Do you upgrade the pump before you go after the manufacturer?

And what of the ones who went ahead and paid?
Should they then come back and argue that they had to pay for what Tesla gave to others for free? Others who were in the same boat as they?

If a settlement was offered, offering 90KWh Ludicrous upgrade in return for waiving and all claims to the 691hp, those who paid but are still willing to sign the waiver would get their money back (and if they only paid for P85DL they would still get a 90KWh battery). I think people would be understanding and willing to compromise on 532hp + 5KWh in exchange for the 691hp they were sold, but that's just my opinion.

 

[P85DEE]

Ok, a more appropriate example - assume you bought a V12 car then found out only 8 cylinders are firing. Car manufacturer adds a footnote (after you bought it) that only 8 of the 12 cylinders can be used at any time because the fuel pump cannot feed all 12, but that's ok because the car software that makes the engine run on just 8. Then the manufacturer offers to enable 2 more cylinders by upgrading the fuel pump hardware, but you still only get 10 cylinders firing rather than the 12 that the car has but cannot use. Do you upgrade the pump before you go after the manufacturer?

No. He's still holding me hostage.

How am I going to pay him for 12, argue that I only got 8, and then turn around and give him more of my money for 10 when I'm arguing that right now and as we speak, he already owes me 12 and cheated me out of 12 to begin with by giving me 8?

I'm going to pay him for 12, get 8 and then bring him another fist full of dollars to get 2 shy of what I'm claiming that he already owes me???

If a settlement was offered, offering 90KWh Ludicrous upgrade in return for waiving and all claims to the 691hp, those who paid but are still willing to sign the waiver would get their money back (and if they only paid for P85DL they would still get a 90KWh battery). I think people would be understanding and willing to compromise on 532hp + 5KWh in exchange for the 691hp they were sold, but that's just my opinion.

Well I appreciate hearing your opinion. Here is mine.

No matter which side one falls on in this matter, Ludicrous upgrade is something both sides can definitely look forward to and hopefully be proud of.

Its hard to find an example of anything else like it.

So so if you're unhappy about the hp matter, well then it appears from the preliminary results, you can become a happier owner with Ludicrous and if you are already a happy owner, then it appears that it might do the same for those as well.

All parties stand to win with Ludicrous. It gives everybody a chance to move beyond this matter. I would not be able to say the same were there no offer of a Ludicrous upgrade.

Nothing wrong with a win/win scenario.

 

[whitex]

Tesla is not going to give anyone a free upgrade to Ludicrous IMO. They might offer to buy back some vehicles in Norway but if they were going to offer free Ludicrous upgrades they would have done it by now. That ship has sailed.
And frankly as a shareholder I'm glad they aren't. I'd rather the company part ways with owners that feel unhappy and litigious and focus on more important matters.

That makes you a very short-sighted shareholder. Forget that Tesla may actually eventually have to settle this in courts and settlements have costs (legal and compensation), but more importantly consider Tesla's business model - word of mouth, no official advertising at all. Now consider pissing off the people who bought your top tier product, probably your most valuable advertising resource, plus future customers as they are likely to buy more. Consider my case, I spent over $200K with Tesla in the last 2 years. I was thinking of getting a Model X towards the end of next year, but as things are right now that is not going to happen. Also, if and when I do, not likely I would pick their top tier product anymore, nor recommend one. I was talking about my friend earlier who wanted to replace his pickup with a Tesla, but Model S cannot tow his 6000lb boat trailer, so I was recommending to him to buy an X, as it has towing capacity advertised to handle it. I recently told him "I would wait to see if it really can tow this, or will there be "battery limited" or "brake limited" tow capacity spec once the car is out and it turns out nobody can actually tow the rated capacity trailer. I also told him to put little weight on what the sales people are telling him, like whether you can launch a boat into the water with Model X - I say until you can hook the board up on the test drive, then drive the back wheels into the water and launch the boat, there is no way to tell whether Model X will do what he needs". No insult intended to the sale people, they are just as misinformed as the rest of us.

My question - for the owners that feel taken advantage of and upset, would you feel satisfied if Tesla refunded your purchase amount in exchange for your vehicle back and the inability to purchase Tesla vehicles in the future? I'd honestly like to know if this is the outcome some are seeking.

Wow, now that is even more short-sighted. Even Steve Jobs, with all of his arrogance would never ban his top tier customers. I hope you are not running a business.

Let's assume any sort of freebies and handouts are off the table (which they are), how do you feel Tesla can make you whole and at what cost to future buying opportunities?

Making someone whole implies compensation, so if that's off the table, nothing can be done to make anyone whole.

As far as cost benefit analysis, I hear that the 90KWh battery upgrade retail price with installation is ~$22K (this assumes trading in the 85KWh battery for Tesla to use a refurbished parts), so the cost is probably around $11K. This would avoid having to train techs to upgrade the existing batteries with new fuses, which from what I hear is neither simple or quick, therefore training everyone to do that and/or shipping batteries around service centers and not paying for them to actually do it is a cost saving that could be used to justify why just give the 90KWh battery rather than upgrade 85's. The $20K difference between 85D and P85D very likely contained a decent profit margin it already - usually top tier upgrades do, so in this case Tesla would give back the profit they made on that upgrade. If that customer buys 1 more Model S or Model X, Tesla makes net money on that ($10K profit in a Model S). If that customer recommends to others, more money is made. Even if that customer pays for another $20K upgrade in the future, chances are that's a high margin upgrade which would quickly pay for the original good will gesture. But all that said, it's Tesla's decision, not mine, not yours.

 

[wk057]

This thread is still going? Looks like it's way off topic again anyway, and rehashing the same old things that have been said over and over again..... as always.

I'll just chime in and point out that $5k Ludicrous is not the solution to this. Ludicrous enables some additional power, but does not enable 691 HP at the pack... so, it doesn't solve the issue at all. Further, it is an additional cost to owners who didn't even get what they originally paid for. If it were free or very close to free for P85D owners who opted for it, then I would say that it was a best effort by Tesla to resolve the situation and would have at least a slightly different view on it. Instead it's a $5000 additional cost that still doesn't bring the car up to the original spec (which we now know is actually impossible with the 85 pack, regardless of contactor/fuse). That doesn't strike me as a solution. A step in the right direction, but I don't think $5k out of my pocket to partially fix a spec discrepancy of theirs is a very fair solution and not anything close to a best effort on their part. It appears to be a money grab completely unrelated to this issue, honestly. At $5k it's just cheap enough for owners to consider it, but still expensive enough for them to make triple digit percentage profits.

 

[P85DEE]

That may be.

And if so, the question is how much happier would everyone have been, and how much better off would Tesla have been if instead of charging the $5000 they had just given the upgrade at no charge, as may have been their original intention? Is whatever revenue they will be booking worth the disgruntled customers, and the ill-will, as opposed to the positive press they would have received and and good-will they would have generated if they had just provided the upgrade at no charge.

We may never know the answers to those questions, but it is something to consider.

To your part in bold, quite possibly yes.

They're not forcing anyone to sign on for this upgrade. One can still wash their hands of the whole matter and buy something else.

Many of those arguing that that they were shortchanged, will not only pay, but will justify paying, as they do not want to miss out on a good, if not great offering which has a limited time of availability.

Of that group, many will stop complaining.

Some will of course continue to complain, but there is no way to please everybody.

So taking dollars and cents into account, do you please as many as you can, or do you please as many as you think that you need to?

 

[vgrinshpun]

This thread is still going? Looks like it's way off topic again anyway, and rehashing the same old things that have been said over and over again..... as always.

I'll just chime in and point out that $5k Ludicrous is not the solution to this. Ludicrous enables some additional power, but does not enable 691 HP at the pack... so, it doesn't solve the issue at all. Further, it is an additional cost to owners who didn't even get what they originally paid for. If it were free or very close to free for P85D owners who opted for it, then I would say that it was a best effort by Tesla to resolve the situation and would have at least a slightly different view on it. Instead it's a $5000 additional cost that still doesn't bring the car up to the original spec (which we now know is actually impossible with the 85 pack, regardless of contactor/fuse). That doesn't strike me as a solution. A step in the right direction, but I don't think $5k out of my pocket to partially fix a spec discrepancy of theirs is a very fair solution and not anything close to a best effort on their part. It appears to be a money grab completely unrelated to this issue, honestly. At $5k it's just cheap enough for owners to consider it, but still expensive enough for them to make triple digit percentage profits.

...does not bring the car to what I wanted the original spec to be...

A step in the right direction, but I do not think $5k out of my pocket to partially fix a spec to where I wanted it to be...

 

[wk057]

...does not bring the car to what I wanted the original spec to be...

A step in the right direction, but I do not think $5k out of my pocket to partially fix a spec to where I wanted it to be...

And with yet another completely useless post by someone trying to make me out to be an idiot I'm back to remembering why I've been avoiding this thread.

 

[vgrinshpun]

It is interesting how some people seem to not be able to make their point without distorting reality. This should tell something about the validity of the point they are trying to make to begin with.

 

[wk057]

It is interesting how some people seem to not be able to make their point without distorting reality. This should tell something about the validity of the point they are trying to make to begin with.

There's no distorting reality on my part. You're the one that copy and pasted sections of my post and edited then to fit your fantasy, which contributes nothing but noise to this discussion.

 

[dsm363]

I'm happy we could all come to some sort of agreement.

 

[vgrinshpun]

There's no distorting reality on my part. You're the one that copy and pasted sections of my post and edited then to fit your fantasy, which contributes nothing but noise to this discussion.

Sure there is. Tesla supplied the car according to the published specs. At this point you just chose to read the specs in a way that is not consistent with their definition, apparently because you feel that this is the only way you can make your point.

 

[wk057]

I'm happy we could all come to some sort of agreement.

Yeah. Great isn't it?

.... wait, what?

- - - Updated - - -

Sure there is. Tesla supplied the car according to the published specs. At this point you just chose to read the specs in a way that is not consistent with their definition, apparently because you feel that this is the only way you can make your point.

Nope. I've noted multiple times, to your deaf ears, that at order time Tesla defined "motor power" as "power available at the motor shafts," when inquired for clarification, consistent with how many interpreted this. Only later did Tesla redefine this.

I mean, if you can tell me where my car produces 691 HP "power at the motor shafts," by all means let me know. I have this and other variations of the same in written (electronic) correspondence with Tesla. Others have noted the same or similar. Edit: Reading that same email again, my speculation about significantly improved highway passing performance is confirmed in the same message, with reference to the horsepower increase. Edit 2: I even mention 691 HP by kW and how crazy that much power coming from the 85 pack is, also confirmed by this message. (Again, I'm not publicly outing the emails and conversations I've had with Tesla on this. It's not these peoples' fault they were given incorrect information to disburse.)

So, respectfully, just stop telling me how I feel and what I was supplied with and whatever other nonsense you're going to make up to twist things to your view, which is based 100% on hindsight and 0% on knowledge and experience with the topic.

Edit: Honestly, if you can seriously continue your campaign of putting down and down talking P85D buyers who took Tesla at their word on the 691 HP spec after you've specifically been informed directly and publicly (again) that Tesla had previously defined the "motor power" term in a way that contradicts your interpretation, then you're doing nothing but just trying to cause trouble and flare tempers. I hope the mods here recognize that fact, and I'll be sure to reference this and other posts in my future reports to that effect.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Respectfully?? You can't be serious.

Here te the selection from the few of your preceding posts:


...completely useless post by someone trying to make me out to be an idiot...

You're the one that copy and pasted sections of my post and edited then to fit your fantasy, which contributes nothing but noise to this discussion.


...I've noted multiple times, to your deaf ears...


... whatever other nonsense you're going to make up to twist things to your view.

Edit.
As for definition of "motor power" you interpretation is not consistent to how it is defined in ECE R85. I have no idea why you keep using "your interpretation". It is not my interpretation, it is what the standard says, and it is what car registration authorities in European countries take it to be. It is also what Tesla says it is.

I am also not talking down to anybody. In fact, if you'd like to discuss what talking down means, the selection of the quotes from few of your preceding posts shown above could come handy.

 

[wk057]

Respectfully?? You can't be serious.

Here te the selection from the few of your preceding posts:


...completely useless post by someone trying to make me out to be an idiot...

You're the one that copy and pasted sections of my post and edited then to fit your fantasy, which contributes nothing but noise to this discussion.


...I've noted multiple times, to your deaf ears...


... whatever other nonsense you're going to make up to twist things to your view.

So you're not going to respond to the fact that I've taken the substance out of your entire side of the debate (again), just that I used the word "respectfully" and you don't agree. Nothing to do with the topic. Got it.

For the record, it was much more respectful than I would have been had this been an average internet forum. You're welcome to have *that* discussion with me in private (not on TMC) if you dare.

 

[vgrinshpun]

So you're not going to respond to the fact that I've taken the substance out of your entire side of the debate (again), just that I used the word "respectfully" and you don't agree. Nothing to do with the topic. Got it.

For the record, it was much more respectful than I would have been had this been an average internet forum. You're welcome to have *that* discussion with me in private (not on TMC) if you dare.

I have zero doubt that if we are going to have "respectful" discussion according to whatever standard you think applies on other Internet forums, you'll win.

Peace, and have a good night.

 

[gsxdsm]

Wow, now that is even more short-sighted. Even Steve Jobs, with all of his arrogance would never ban his top tier customers. I hope you are not running a business.

Maybe you aren't aware, but Tesla *has* politely refused to sell additional cars to owners that have filed lawsuits against them. I would assume this trend would continue. As a business owner, I too would cease to do all future business with customers that intend to harm me.

 

[Canuck]

Wow, now that is even more short-sighted. Even Steve Jobs, with all of his arrogance would never ban his top tier customers. I hope you are not running a business.

Apple bans lots of customers.

Maybe you aren't aware, but Tesla *has* politely refused to sell additional cars to owners that have filed lawsuits against them. I would assume this trend would continue.

Yes:

Tesla Model X Cancellation

As a business owner, I too would cease to do all future business with customers that intend to harm me.

Of course. Me too. I can't imagine why any prudent business owner would continue to do business with customers who sued, or threatened to sue. Most successful business owners didn't get to that position by being stepped on.

 

[jpet]

It's hard to have your argument that you've been ripped off of your hard earned money, and that you didn't have delivered to you that which was promised in the first place, taken seriously, when you turn right back around and hand the entity which you claim ripped you off, still even more of your money..... and all the while knowing that even this extra money "still" won't get you what you claim that you were entitled to, paid for, but did not get in the first place.

Maybe this whole thing is NOT about the money? Many have tried to explain this to you by sharing their experience but this info seems to be considered irrelevant? In any case, it is clear that Tesla has listened to us since the way the car is currently being advertised is the way it should have been advertised in October 2014.