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

[stopcrazypp]

That's part of the whole point of J1349 Certified Horsepower. To help consumers of passenger vehicles in their purchasing decisions where horsepower is involved , so that they know what they are getting. It's been here for years. If you didn't know about it, well then it's on you. In part because horsepower, is horsepower.

The problem is SAE doesn't have a standard yet for EVs. They are the subject of the J2907 and J2908 standards, which are work in progress (WIP) and not finished yet.
http://www.sae.org/standardsdev/vehicleelectrification.htm

 

[Jian Yang]

Saving the picture

 

[flathillll]

Wrong. The internal impedance does vary with temperature enough to make a very noticeable difference in pulse/burst power. Not enough of a difference to measure 691HP on a dyno, but that is besides the point. Why else would the Ludicrous cars have a MAX BATTERY POWER setting that heats the cells!

Any yes I do have knowledge of your background. You r a daytrader who has been in trouble before

lol

I do have a custom pack made from Tesla cells and yes they perform best when hot (as any EV drag racer knows). Here is where I got them from:

"-DCIR falls significantly at higher temperatures. This helps to self limit thermal build up of the... as the cell heats up, it tends to actually produce less heat!
-Panasonic NCA cells exhibit significant "surface discharge," that is, they perform well in bursts, where DCIR is lowered for a short period of time after a rest."


View attachment 100298

The silence is deaf for one reason or another. I love you man but I have been doing this since 99. And I know what happened. I will leave it at that unless you want more

 

[dsm363]

The problem is SAE doesn't have a standard yet for EVs. They are the subject of the J2907 and J2908 standards, which are work in progress (WIP) and not finished yet.
http://www.sae.org/standardsdev/vehicleelectrification.htm

That's what I was thinking too. If they wanted to follow the ICE standard though could they come close or get it certified for a dual motor (or single) EV?

 

[rns-e]

I must say I have learned a lot reading the many posts in this forum, I knew nothing about EV cars when I bought my P85D, and had never had a true performance car before (which I think is true for many Danish and Norwegian owners).

One of the things I have done lately is to look back at how did Tesla market the cars before October 2014, to see if Teslas previous way of presenting their cars to the buyers would hold any clues to how Tesla could have avoided this 691 hp mess and all customers would have known what they was buying.

To sum my position up. I think Tesla has handled this whole 691 hp issue totally wrong and there are some very incriminating actions from Tesla along the way that makes me question their motives. And hence believe they intended to sell as many cars in Q4 as possible even if it meant changing the way they presented data to buyers into something that they knew could be misleading.

Let me just walk you through a few key decisions Tesla have made:

Prior to the P85D launch, it seams that Tesla had some very vital information on their site stating for each model the max output of the engine with an ** and the output of the engine with an *** and then the following explanation:

** = " tested in accordance with ECE R85 - This force measurement was taken without considering the battery"
*** = Specific vehicle performance considering the battery

For some reason Tesla made the choice to omit this information at some point and not include it in the presentation of the different models from Oct 2014 forward.

Let’s all agree at this point that if Tesla had maintained that information for the model range from Oct 2014 and forward there would have been a few threads fewer here at TMC.

Tesla chose to omit this information and present the 60D, 85D and P85D this way:

This is the presentation of data that I and many others placed our orders of the P85D on. All the defenders of Tesla can now say, that I and others should have done our homework better etc. but the fact is that these are the data Tesla presented us with to make our decision and we did. Please note that there is no * clarifying what motor power means – and let me remind you that in Denmark it just said ‘Ydeevne’ which is performance.

If Tesla (not posters defending Tesla in this thread) think that we should have included more information in our decision, then Tesla should have presented us with that.

Cars then starts to be delivered and when I get my car late march 2015 (6 months after order) I soon start wondering why the car does not feel as expected. Quick, but not as quick and not as fast as expected.

The next months Tesla starts to change the way they present the data, but at no point is Tesla trying to make it more transparent when it comes to the P85D

When presented with the above line up, your average Tesla buyer will not think anything else than that the P85D has 691 hp and the 85D has 422 hp (not going into the whole 0-60 times issue here) and think their overall performance will differ accordingly.

Teslas answer to their 'confused customers' (that is actually the term Tesla uses in the press in Denmark and Norway) is to keep removing data instead of just presenting the one number everybody is asking for.

Even when asked directly by numerous customers about the hp of the P85D Tesla does nothing. Do not answer any letters or e-mails and do not engage in any dialog what so ever.

Until they issue a blog post, that hints at a battery limit, but still do not come out with the true hp of the P85D. What is even worse, is that while the blog post speaks of how Tesla used to present data, once again Tesla omits the fact that they used to present battery limited performance data.

With all this in mind, I find it hard to believe Tesla was not fully aware of what they were doing when presenting the P85D as a 691 hp car.

 

[P85DEE]

The problem is SAE doesn't have a standard yet for EVs. They are the subject of the J2907 and J2908 standards, which are work in progress (WIP) and not finished yet.
http://www.sae.org/standardsdev/vehicleelectrification.htm

That's what I was thinking too. If they wanted to follow the ICE standard though could they come close or get it certified for a dual motor (or single) EV?

Yeah, but we've been told before that "horsepower is horsepower".

There can be but two real reasons for that SAE Certified Horsepower logo to be absent when any manufacturer's "horsepower" numbers are referenced for any of his vehicles in the manufacturer's ad copy.

1. The manufacturer elected not to participate in the certification process.

2. There is no SAE provision for the manufacturer's motor type, which would allow for participation in the program and thus witness verification of the stated horsepower numbers.

Both are legitimate cause for extreme caution when considering a vehicle purchase if "horsepower" is the reason why you're whipping out your checkbook.

SAE Certified Horsepower.

If what you're buying has no corresponding standard within it's industry, then you assume the risk. That's whether you're buying food, drink, cars, etc.

So while indeed there may not be a standard for electric vehicles yet, which would allow for independent SAE witness verification of stated "horsepower" numbers........that's arguably even more reason for caution when the manufacturer states anything having to do with "horsepower".

"Horsepower is horsepower". You've heard that mantra in here now more than one time.

Since no means of independent horsepower verification exists for EVs, those complaining about this matter should have avoided EVs altogether if they were buying based upon "horsepower" numbers, as they are not SAE Certified Horsepower numbers.

That's been my position on this matter all along, and why I don't see what all of the ruckus us about.

 

[P85DEE]

....Tesla chose to omit this information and present the 60D, 85D and P85D this way:

View attachment 100335

.....
The next months Tesla starts to change the way they present the data, but at no point is Tesla trying to make it more transparent when it comes to the P85D

View attachment 100337

When presented with the above line up, your average Tesla buyer will not think anything else than that the P85D has 691 hp and the 85D has 422 hp (not going into the whole 0-60 times issue here) and think their overall performance will differ accordingly.

....
With all this in mind, I find it hard to believe Tesla was not fully aware of what they were doing when presenting the P85D as a 691 hp car.

That's not what it says though. What does it actually say? That's the sticking point here.

Also, on a side note, it was curious to see the mileage figures change once the 65mph reference was eliminated.

When it comes to the P85D, I consistently see "horsepower motor power" in it's description.

I don't see "691 horsepower", I see "691 horsepower motor power"

It is not Tesla's fault if some of us did not read closely enough, because it plainly states "horsepower motor power".

Those arguing that they've been tricked really have no leg to stand on.

A. They either did not read the information that you have shown in the above two instances carefully.

B. They did in fact read it, but did not take the time to obtain a definition of the term "horsepower motor power", never took the time to learn what "horsepower motor power" is which is in fact used in both descriptions above.

Neither is Tesla's fault.

****BTW, does anyone know how much "battery limited maximum motor shaft power" the Model S 60D makes??

Wonder if it's the same as the 85D.

The 85D, is said to make 422 horsepower in that last graphic in the above. And "376 horsepower motor power" in the graphic above that one, same as the 376 horsepower motor power stated for the Model S 60D.:wink:

So do they both have 422 horsepower??? After all, they both state the same "376 horsepower motor power". Take a look at the last two graphics again, if you need to.

The other thing I see above, and ask about, is how come the 85D has more "horsepower" 422, ..than "horsepower motor power" 376.?

You see, now, your second graphic and your last graphic, are telling me that the 85D and the 60D have the exact same "horsepower", .....since it was already established in your next to last graphic that they have the same "horsepower motor power" which was "376".

So is it true??? Do an 85D and 60D have the same 422 horsepower? I mean they both have the same "376 horsepower motor power". Because if so, then that would mean that a P85D........does not have much more horsepower than a 60D or about 46hp, if the graphic at the very beginning of this thread is referenced.

Who in here believes that? If so, then I invite any who does, to line up in their 60D, against me in my P85D, at the drag strip of my choice so that we can test the validity of that theory.

On a serious note, and all kidding aside, your post tells me, that there is more involved than simply reading the numbers and adding them together and coming up with a horsepower number.

 

[brianman]

Since no means of independent horsepower verification exists for EVs, those complaining about this matter should have avoided EVs altogether if they were buying based upon "horsepower" numbers, as they are not SAE Certified Horsepower numbers.

If Tesla's approach to promoting and selling their cars leads to this conclusion, then they're failing on the "Secret Plan" mission terribly.

 

[P85DEE]

If Tesla's approach to promoting and selling their cars leads to this conclusion, then they're failing on the "Secret Plan" mission terribly.

There is no "secret plan".

But rather there is the responsibility of the consumer educating himself, landing squarely on the shoulders of that consumer.

SAE Certification has been out there for nearly 10 years. It is there to guide consumers who use horsepower as a criteria in their purchasing decision.

If you or anyone else were buying a car because of "horsepower", well then what independent verification did you have that any manufacturer's horsepower numbers were accurate?

You don't see that logo, you don't know what you're getting.

When it comes to cars.........horsepower is horsepower. And thus any consumer, in this day and age, who elects to buy a car basing his purchasing decision on "horsepower" and does so in the absence of that SAE Certified Horsepower logo, is taking a chance. I don't care what the vehicle uses for fuel.

 

[Discoducky]

If Tesla's approach to promoting and selling their cars leads to this conclusion, then they're failing on the "Secret Plan" mission terribly.

There is no "secret plan".

But there is a secret 'master' plan http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me

So did the website always say "horsepower motor power" from the beginning? This seems to bode well for improved performance once the other bottlenecks are removed from the drivetrain to realize the true power of the death star...I mean motor

 

[dsm363]

But there is a secret 'master' plan http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me

So did the website always say "horsepower motor power" from the beginning? This seems to bode well for improved performance once the other bottlenecks are removed from the drivetrain to realize the true power of the death star...I mean motor

'horsepower motor power' was used everywhere in the world except Denmark I believe where a bad translation to 'performance' was used instead.

If the 60D and the 85D have the exact same horse power (since 'horsepower motor power' is apparently meaningless) then why is the 85D quicker to 60mph? That should have been a red flag to some.

 

[P85DEE]

But there is a secret 'master' plan http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/secret-tesla-motors-master-plan-just-between-you-and-me

So did the website always say "horsepower motor power" from the beginning? This seems to bode well for improved performance once the other bottlenecks are removed from the drivetrain to realize the true power of the death star...I mean motor

I thought he was referring to some conspiracy or another.

- - - Updated - - -

'horsepower motor power' was used everywhere in the world except Denmark I believe.

If the 60D and the 85D have the exact same horse power (since 'horsepower motor power' is apparently meaningless) then why is the 85D quicker to 60mph? That should have been a red flag to some.

A side effect of his post, while probably not intended, actually bolsters the position of those of us who believe this to be less of an issue than it actually is.

His post can be used to conclude that the 60D and the 85D, having the same stated "horsepower motor power", must also have the same "horsepower".

And if that is true, and why would it not be if they have the same "horsepower motor power", and the argument in here has been that the P85D is not much more powerful than the 85D, well then by extension the P85D must not be much more powerful than the 60D since it's just as powerful as the 85D as they have the same "horsepower motor power".

I'm glad that he posted this in here so that we could see it.

 

[kennybobby]

There is no "secret plan".

But rather there is the responsibility of the consumer educating himself, landing squarely on the shoulders of that consumer.

You have done an excellent job of explaining one of the basic principle of commerce, caveat emptor, and you were lucky enough to have the knowledge about the SAE certification to actually do 'due diligence' in your purchase.

Unfortunately very few other forum-member buyers had your level of knowledge at the time, and as a result went to the school of 'hard knocks' and had to learn the hard way after-the-fact about these definitions and performance implications.

As a result those folks are sharing their experience in the hopes of educating those that follow--live and learn and pass it on.

 

[rns-e]

That's not what it says though. What does it actually say? That's the sticking point here.

Also, on a side note, it was curious to see the mileage figures change once the 65mph reference was eliminated.

When it comes to the P85D, I consistently see "horsepower motor power" in it's description.

I don't see "691 horsepower", I see "691 horsepower motor power"

It is not Tesla's fault if some of us did not read closely enough, because it plainly states "horsepower motor power".

Those arguing that they've been tricked really have no leg to stand on.

A. They either did not read the information that you have shown in the above two instances carefully.

B. They did in fact read it, but did not take the time to obtain a definition of the term "horsepower motor power", never took the time to learn what "horsepower motor power" is which is in fact used in both descriptions above.

Neither is Tesla's fault.

****BTW, does anyone know how much "battery limited maximum motor shaft power" the Model S 60D makes??

Wonder if it's the same as the 85D.

The 85D, is said to make 422 horsepower in that last graphic in the above. And "376 horsepower motor power" in the graphic above that one, same as the 376 horsepower motor power stated for the Model S 60D.:wink:

So do they both have 422 horsepower??? After all, they both state the same "376 horsepower motor power". Take a look at the last two graphics again, if you need to.

The other thing I see above, and ask about, is how come the 85D has more "horsepower" 422, ..than "horsepower motor power" 376.?

You see, now, your second graphic and your last graphic, are telling me that the 85D and the 60D have the exact same "horsepower", .....since it was already established in your next to last graphic that they have the same "horsepower motor power" which was "376".

So is it true??? Do an 85D and 60D have the same 422 horsepower? I mean they both have the same "376 horsepower motor power". Because if so, then that would mean that a P85D........does not have much more horsepower than a 60D or about 46hp, if the graphic at the very beginning of this thread is referenced.

Who in here believes that? If so, then I invite any who does, to line up in their 60D, against me in my P85D, at the drag strip of my choice so that we can test the validity of that theory.

On a serious note, and all kidding aside, your post tells me, that there is more involved than simply reading the numbers and adding them together and coming up with a horsepower number.

'horsepower motor power' was used everywhere in the world except Denmark I believe where a bad translation to 'performance' was used instead.

If the 60D and the 85D have the exact same horse power (since 'horsepower motor power' is apparently meaningless) then why is the 85D quicker to 60mph? That should have been a red flag to some.

I thought he was referring to some conspiracy or another.

- - - Updated - - -



A side effect of his post, while probably not intended, actually bolsters the position of those of us who believe this to be less of an issue than it actually is.

His post can be used to conclude that the 60D and the 85D, having the same stated "horsepower motor power", must also have the same "horsepower".

And if that is true, and why would it not be if they have the same "horsepower motor power", and the argument in here has been that the P85D is not much more powerful than the 85D, well then by extension the P85D must not be much more powerful than the 60D since it's just as powerful as the 85D as they have the same "horsepower motor power".

I'm glad that he posted this in here so that we could see it.

Well - this is exactly what I mean. Posters defending Tesla in this thread are all fine with Tesla having deliberately removed important information, having potential buyers speculate on what it may or may not mean when Tesla is claiming the one or other thing, instead of Tesla just stating things clear and precise with the knowledge and data they have.

So your defense this time is, that I or any other buyer should have known from the 60D vs 85D hp data that the numbers of the P85D was not to be trusted. At this point I would like to introduce the 0-60 times, which by your analogy, it should be clear that the P85D is without roll out, since both the 60D and 85D is without roll out. Please tell me where a average buyer would have found the clues to the P85D was with roll out?

Again, had Tesla stayed true to their ways of presenting data, all the information had been available for the buyers, TMC many threads lighter, and you all did not have to dig out examples you think I and others should have interpreted in some specific way, although Tesla in no way or form did anything to explain what they meant, even though Tesla meant that precise information previously was important to potential buyers.

Remember, Tesla is selling cars to consumers, buyers of all sorts of professions, and should market their product accordingly for all their potential buyers to make informed decisions. That will insure the best company/owner relationship.

So simple - one information, they used to display about their cars, would have saved Tesla a whole lot of mess, owners a lot of time and maybe even insured better sales.

IMHO - The decision to discontinue presenting battery limited hp rating may be the single most expensive decision Tesla ever made and I think it may be one that will become a Business Case Story at several universities in consumer marketing and consumer law.

That is the one clear lesson I take from all these threads

 

[P85DEE]

You have done an excellent job of explaining one of the basic principle of commerce, caveat emptor, and you were lucky enough to have the knowledge about the SAE certification to actually do 'due diligence' in your purchase.

Unfortunately very few other forum-member buyers had your level of knowledge at the time, and as a result went to the school of 'hard knocks' and had to learn the hard way after-the-fact about these definitions and performance implications.

As a result those folks are sharing their experience in the hopes of educating those that follow--live and learn and pass it on.

I can think of very few excuses for any person in the market for a performance vehicle, of which the P85D is, or any performance car buff, to not be in the know about a 10 year old standard. The J1349 SAE Certified Horsepower effort and the certification process was instituted back in 2005.

If one doesn't know how to shop performance vehicles, then one should educate himself before, not after, opening his checkbook.

I'd tell anyone, if you're buying a performance vehicle based primarily on its "horsepower" rating, well then you need to know how those numbers in the manufacturer's ad copy are arrived at, and who aside from the manufacturer vouches for them.

Just as as you probably wouldn't buy a steak in the U.S. unless the USDA had some input as to it's safety, or was in effect vouching for it, you can eat it if you like. But if you get sick, then you bear some responsibility for your own illness. You didn't look for the stamp, or worse, you knew it was absent but you ate it anyway.

You either knew, or should have known that marking was absent and needed to have been there if you were going to consume that steak.

Same as if you're buying a car for reasons of "horsepower".

If that SAE Certified Horsepower logo is missing, I don't care what the reason is, well then you're liable to end up "sick" at the end of the day.

- - - Updated - - -

Well - this is exactly what I mean. You defenders are all fine with Tesla having deliberately removed important information, having potential buyers speculate on what it may or may not mean when Tesla is claiming the one or other thing, instead of Tesla just stating things clear and precise with the knowledge and data they have.

So your defense this time is, that I or any other buyer should have known from the 60D vs 85D hp data that the numbers of the P85D was not to be trusted. At this point I would like to introduce the 0-60 times, which by your analogy, it should be clear that the P85D is without roll out, since both the 60D and 85D is without roll out. Please tell me where a average buyer would have found the clues to the P85D was with roll out?

Again, had Tesla stayed true to their ways of presenting data, all the information had been available for the buyers, TMC many threads lighter, and you all did not have to dig out examples you think I and others should have interpreted in some specific way, although Tesla in no way or form did anything to explain what they meant, even though Tesla meant that precise information previously was important to potential buyers.

Remember, Tesla is selling cars to consumers, buyers of all sorts of professions, and should market their product accordingly for all their potential buyers to make informed decisions. That will insure the best company/owner relationship.

So simple - one information, they used to display about their cars, would have saved Tesla a whole lot of mess, owners a lot of time and maybe even insured better sales.

IMHO - The decision to discontinue presenting battery limited hp rating may be the single most expensive decision Tesla ever made and I think it may be one that will become a Business Case Story at several universities in consumer marketing and consumer law.

That is the one clear lesson I take from all these threads

Yeah, but since the 60D and the 85D have the same "horsepower motorpower" of 376, like it says in the information that you posted above, does the 60D have the same horsepower as the 85D?

 

[rns-e]

But rather there is the responsibility of the consumer educating himself, landing squarely on the shoulders of that consumer.

Well, this is here where Danish and Norwegian law may differ quite strongly from your point of way. Business' that sells to consumers and misrepresent data or present data that needs to be interpreted in a specific way, will find that it is the Business' responsibility to educate/inform potential buyers and not the other way around. You would be in for a hard landing with your approach over here.

 

[dsm363]

Well - this is exactly what I mean. You defenders are all fine with Tesla having deliberately removed important information, having potential buyers speculate on what it may or may not mean when Tesla is claiming the one or other thing, instead of Tesla just stating things clear and precise with the knowledge and data they have.

So your defense this time is, that I or any other buyer should have known from the 60D vs 85D hp data that the numbers of the P85D was not to be trusted. At this point I would like to introduce the 0-60 times, which by your analogy, it should be clear that the P85D is without roll out, since both the 60D and 85D is without roll out. Please tell me where a average buyer would have found the clues to the P85D was with roll out?

Again, had Tesla stayed true to their ways of presenting data, all the information had been available for the buyers, TMC many threads lighter, and you all did not have to dig out examples you think I and others should have interpreted in some specific way, although Tesla in no way or form did anything to explain what they meant, even though Tesla meant that precise information previously was important to potential buyers.

Remember, Tesla is selling cars to consumers, buyers of all sorts of professions, and should market their product accordingly for all their potential buyers to make informed decisions. That will insure the best company/owner relationship.

So simple - one information, they used to display about their cars, would have saved Tesla a whole lot of mess, owners a lot of time and maybe even insured better sales.

IMHO - The decision to discontinue presenting battery limited hp rating may be the single most expensive decision Tesla ever made and I think it may be one that will become a Business Case Story at several universities in consumer marketing and consumer law.

That is the one clear lesson I take from all these threads

My point is it was confusing and potentially misleading. I'm not against arguing that but it's not as clear cut as if Tesla wrote '691 hp' SAE certified and clearly falsified the test. They threw in 'horsepower motor power' and there were other signs it wasn't as simple as it appeared. Outside Denmark, I'm not sure people have a very strong case. They might have a good case in the eyes of public perception but Tesla didn't falsify or mislead based on a known testing standard. For those that hp was the #1 selling feature of the car I understand feeling mislead and upset about it but to argue for free things and for Tesla to 'make it right' by giving them exactly 691hp at the shaft is a little much at this point. That's not going to happen and it might be time to move on and enjoy the car or sell it and be done with this fiasco.

Yeah, but since the 60D and the 85D have the same "horsepower motorpower" of 376, like it says in the information that you posted above, does the 60D have the same horsepower as the 85D?

This is an excellent point. If Tesla set out to intentionally mislead people with the horsepower motor power issue then this was a poor attempt at that. To list two cars with the exact same amount of horsepower and the only difference being the battery size but different 0-60 times would give away their attempt to hide the trick of using the term "horsepower motor power".

 

[bonnie]

...You defenders...

No one is calling people 'trolls' or 'you attackers' for disagreeing with your opinion. How 'bout stopping using words that deliberately inflame? As soon as I see stuff like this in a post, I pretty much tune the rest of it out.

 

[rns-e]

Yeah, but since the 60D and the 85D have the same "horsepower motorpower" of 376, like it says in the information that you posted above, does the 60D have the same horsepower as the 85D?

Give it a rest, that is not the buyers responsibility to interpret that, but Teslas responsibility to present comparable and truthful information. For all I know they do and there may be some other reason for the slower 0-60 mph. What do I know, and what do I care? I'm buying the P85D.

- - - Updated - - -

No one is calling people 'trolls' or 'you attackers' for disagreeing with your opinion. How 'bout stopping using words that deliberately inflame? As soon as I see stuff like this in a post, I pretty much tune the rest of it out.

You are right, changed. Thank you for pointing it out

 

[dsm363]

Clearly Denmark is a different case because of the language used on the website with the poor translation to 'performance' and the different consumer laws. That almost deserves it's own thread as most of the arguments here might not apply there. Unless it was Norway I'm thinking about with the translation error on the website.