My theory, which I posted back in the beginning of September, is that Tesla switched to using 0 to 60 time with rollout, as they centered their marketing campaign on matching the performance of McLaren F1, which was 3.2sec with roll-out.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Stop the Press! Tesla announces REAL HP numbers for P85D and P90L
- Thread starter Matias
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Driving Dynamics Model S
My theory, which I posted back in the beginning of September, is that Tesla switched to using 0 to 60 time with rollout, as they centered their marketing campaign on matching the performance of McLaren F1, which was 3.2sec with roll-out.
MikeBur
ManualPilot
And that change in measurement methodology should have been explicitly called out, yes.
- - - Updated - - -
Being explicit. I'm going to spend some of my life elsewhere for a while. That doesn't mean I agree with anything... Just to be explicit on the whole silence is acquiescence goading ;-)
It is not in separate parts of the announcement. it is in two sentences, one spoken immediately after the another. I made a transcript of the several sentences in *exactly* the same order as spoken by Elon. You can review my transcript here.
thegruf
Active Member
If I have learned one thing from this forum it is that, never mind rose tinted spectacles
black is actually white
who'd have known eh?
black is actually white
who'd have known eh?
The main problem here is logic vs. emotion. Logic dictates that Tesla is correct and this is a ridiculous argument. Emotion dictates that Tesla intentionally used the intricacies of the logic to mislead the ill-informed and should make things right. The problem is that emotion is subjective and logic is objective. Can anyone disprove the logic as outlined below?
FACT A: The front and rear motors in the P85D are manufactured to be capable of producing 691 HP (ECE 85)
FACT B: The battery, inverter, fuse in the P85D is not capable of producing 691 HP
FACT C: The 0-60 time (with roll-out) is achievable as advertised by Tesla
FACT D: The 0-60 time is achievable because of the torque produced by the combined motors, with the battery, fuses, and inverter as they currently exist on the P85D
PROPOSITION E: If the front and rear motors were redesigned to be less capable (not rated at 691 hp combined) (disproving FACT A), the car would not produce the required torque (FACT D) to meet the advertised 0-60 times (FACT C).
This is the only thing that matters. Ignore FACT B for a minute. If FACT A was changed (the capability of the motor was less than 691 hp combined), then FACTs C and D would be false. Therefore, logic dictates that the motor is in fact 691hp and advertising it as such is in line with the other metrics advertised.
Maybe a simple program would make it clear:
float hpTorqueMultiplier = 1.033; //just for to match the 713ft/lb numbers
float torque = combinedPowerCapability * hpTorqueMultipler;
float calculateZeroToSixty(float inputTorque){
//calculate distance to travel and time based on torque
}
//Test case
int combinedMotorPowerCapability = 691;
assertLessThan(calculateZeroToSixty(torque), 3.1); //returns true
Basically, the relationship between the rated motor hp capability and torque is central to the acceleration claims. Stating a rated capacity that is less would be doing everyone a disservice.
FACT A: The front and rear motors in the P85D are manufactured to be capable of producing 691 HP (ECE 85)
FACT B: The battery, inverter, fuse in the P85D is not capable of producing 691 HP
FACT C: The 0-60 time (with roll-out) is achievable as advertised by Tesla
FACT D: The 0-60 time is achievable because of the torque produced by the combined motors, with the battery, fuses, and inverter as they currently exist on the P85D
PROPOSITION E: If the front and rear motors were redesigned to be less capable (not rated at 691 hp combined) (disproving FACT A), the car would not produce the required torque (FACT D) to meet the advertised 0-60 times (FACT C).
This is the only thing that matters. Ignore FACT B for a minute. If FACT A was changed (the capability of the motor was less than 691 hp combined), then FACTs C and D would be false. Therefore, logic dictates that the motor is in fact 691hp and advertising it as such is in line with the other metrics advertised.
Maybe a simple program would make it clear:
float hpTorqueMultiplier = 1.033; //just for to match the 713ft/lb numbers
float torque = combinedPowerCapability * hpTorqueMultipler;
float calculateZeroToSixty(float inputTorque){
//calculate distance to travel and time based on torque
}
//Test case
int combinedMotorPowerCapability = 691;
assertLessThan(calculateZeroToSixty(torque), 3.1); //returns true
Basically, the relationship between the rated motor hp capability and torque is central to the acceleration claims. Stating a rated capacity that is less would be doing everyone a disservice.
It is obvious that optics that I learned in high school is totally different from what was taught in yours. No amount of rose tinting can make black appearing as white. :smile:
thegruf
Active Member
FACT: I don't believe Tesla originally quoted the P85D 0-60 time with rollout.
I believe they expected to upgrade the car with software to actually deliver a true 0-60 as specified.
But this all went pear shaped when the hardware could not sustain it.
The so called "Motor Trend Standard Rollout" -lol (quite possibly due to suggestions on this site) then became an escape route for Tesla to massage the numbers into some sort of retrospective plausibility.
I think that part of the problem here, is that your decimal is off.
Its not 2 seconds. It's 0.2 seconds.
Rollout is a moot point.
Anyone in Europe who bought say a Corvette, or other performance American car, do you think that the 0-60 time stated by GM was with or without rollout?
But when Tesla states a 0-60 time with rollout, all of a sudden it's evidence of some conspiracy or another.
Rollout is moot.
As already mentioned, it would be extremely difficult for anyone in here to make 50 efforts, let alone 100, at running a 0-60 time to consistently get to within a 0.2 second spread between the results, and over a variety of pavement conditions, pavement types, concrete vs asphalt, and weather conditions.
And I'm probably being generous on the "50". Many won't be able to get within a 0.2 second spread with 20 attempts.
The rollout matter, is a flat out non issue.
Last edited:
EM said half again as much power, but he didn't say under what condition. So one can analyse the context of the speech and interprets the meaning or follows the gut feeling to assume the meaning, it matters not. Well English is not the most precise language in the world, and no one knows for sure what did EM mean unless we ask him. So any accusation or defending effort around what EM said on launch party is pointless.
thegruf
Active Member
Respectfully, you are flat out wrong.
Rollout accounts for iro 10% of the acceleration figure to 60mph
A 10% change is most definitely significant.
No you're wrong. I was quoting the difference between the 85D and the P85D and the difference in price between the models.
You state the 0.2s due to roll out is irrelevant as few are paying 5k for an extra 0.2s because it's not worth it.
I'm saying people were expected to pay in the region of 20k for what is now only about a 0.8s improvement but at the time they were told it was 2s (3.2 v 5.2). So why is that worth it?
In the last year the only real news on the P85D is that it's not as quick or powerful as people thought.
The only news on the 85D is that it's got faster and more powerful.
For many, that significantly closed gap is an issue and is raising questions on the original numbers and the integrity of Tesla. I fail to see why anybody would find that odd behaviour given its taken so long for a more complete set of numbers to be published.
Understood. Respectfully I think you're wrong.
First off, how do you arrive at 10%?
If JB is right about approximately 2 tenths difference, well then we're looking at the stated 3.1 being a from a standstill number of 3.3 seconds. A 6.1% reduction would take that 3.3 seconds down to 3.1 seconds.
So I don't know how you're arriving at the 10% figure.
The other thing that experience has taught me, is that one cannot not look at performance times so much in terms of "percentage of improvement" when comparing those times.
Part of why "percentages" may or may not be significant is in the number that you started with.
If I take my Z06 to a performance shop and it's running 10.90 seconds in the quarter, and I decide that I want to improve that by 10%, that's going to take off 1.1 seconds in the quarter and I'm going to risk making it unstreetable.
But no, I think what we are talking here is a long way from 10% improvement using the rollout
- - - Updated - - -
That Tesla improved the performance capability of the model next to the P85D, the 85D, well that's called progress.
You can't get upset because Tesla elected to close the 0-60 performance margin between your car and the car beneath it.
Of the amount of margin that you lost, all but 2 tenths of a second of it, or the time it takes your car to travel a mere 11 inches at full pedal, can be attributed to Tesla's update to the 85D.
The large majority of the advantage margin that you lost, came because Tesla did that update. Not because of "rollout". Just 0.2 seconds of your lost advantage following the update, was due to "rollout"
And that's moot. It's making a mountain out of a molehill.
Thats a a risk you take when you buy the current top dog. That the gap between the car you bought and its siblings or newer models, could possibly close.
Last edited:
That is a good question. In case you are interested to consider what an .8s improvement in 0 to 60 mph acceleration is worth on the market, the comparison of Audi RS 7 vs. Audi S7 is in order. The premium Audi charges for a similar improvement in USA is $26K, or 30% more than Tesla. The difference in some European countries is in multiples, not %.
What Tesla charges for the upgrade in P85D is a bargain.
thegruf
Active Member
@P85DEE why do you continue to ignore the mountain of evidence showing that roll-out _at least_ removes 0.3seconds 0-60mph and even more 0-100kph? JB writing 0.2s in a blogpost does not magically make _every_ measurement shown on tmc wrong...
I thought you where reasonable until this rubbish.... But now I give up.
So it seems you win over me as well as wk057 with this constant blablabla. This is just not worth it, and I will spend my energy towards Tesla instead. They are suddenly the reasonable ones here! Go figure on that turn of events...
"The Defenders" was actually a brilliant term when I've seen the last few hundred posts here. Close link to mr iron man himself and all... Worst superhero group ever...
I thought you where reasonable until this rubbish.... But now I give up.
So it seems you win over me as well as wk057 with this constant blablabla. This is just not worth it, and I will spend my energy towards Tesla instead. They are suddenly the reasonable ones here! Go figure on that turn of events...
"The Defenders" was actually a brilliant term when I've seen the last few hundred posts here. Close link to mr iron man himself and all... Worst superhero group ever...
damn silly me, I forgot already
black is indeed white
And 691 Unicorn power = 463 Horse power !!
For that price Audi gives many exterior styling differences with carbon front spoiler and rear diffuser. A much better engine, gearbox, drive train, suspension parts, bigger brakes, another interior with more expensive material and better seats +++
Tesla. Red color brake calipers and larger old type engine in the back that cost almost the same to produce, if you did order earlier you did get some stiffer dampers they stopped using in April because of issues? And allowed to pay extra for a carbon spoiler and next gen seats in the beginning.
Last edited:
Now you're showing your ignorance between the differences between those cars. The RS7 and S7 have a lot more differences than just 0-60s. Brakes, suspension, differentials, standard spec, body work, wheels...
My point however was that if you (not you but the fanboy who don't have a bad word said against tesla) think 0.2s for 5k is not worth it, then 20k for 0.8s is not worth it. I didn't say whether I thought it was.
I think a more accurate assessment, is that you thought that our points of view on this entire matter, were the same, or perhaps even close, and now you're finding out that I could not disagree with some of the sentiment and discussion about deception on this matter more.
I think that some of it may be a cultural or a regional difference. By that I mean my own observations show me that in the U.S, and I grew up in the south and now live in the northeast, drag racing is ingrained in us.......and rollout has become so much ingrained in us, that for many of us we don't really regard it as a big deal.
We burnout, we stage, and we launch.
So part of what I see, is no doubt rooted in the fact that 0-60 times, well many of us here in the U.S. don't put a whole lot of stock in 0-60 times anyway since nobody "races" to 60 mph. The 0-60 metric these days is on its last legs.
Where I'm from, usually the crowd you see quoting 0-60 times are youngsters who just got their drivers licenses, driving Honda Civics, Subarus with neon everywhere, and regularly visiting Pep Boys. What I call the "Fast and the Furious" crowd. That's typically the crowd you'll see quoting 0-60 times.
Thats part of why my attitude toward "rollout" is that it's moot. Admittedly, to me, 0-60 borders on moot. I've never won any money racing anyone else to 60 mph.
Well, people are going to disagree with each of our positions on this matter darthy. Best thing to do is recognize that and do your best to state your position as best you can.
Good luck.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Locked
- Marketplace listing