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

[JonG]

I have avoided this thread lately because I'm not even sure there is even a coherent argument from either "side". There are too many people with different opinions that I gave up trying to track it, so I just respond directly to certain points.

I will say that the points you laid out are all connected. If you believe 1) that the 691hp number is factually true, then depending on how you define "mislead", you may not believe that is misleading (esp. if you don't believe Tesla had malice). Then 2) and 3) would not follow.

If you believe that 1) the 691hp number is factually false, then 2) and 3) can easily follow. Thus most of the argument (at least when I was still able to follow it) was on whether the statement can be considered factually true and then the rest is just a tangent on that (with a whole side discussion about the 0-60 rollout which is somewhat related).

I guess we see things differently. You can make all factually accurate statements and yet the statements you choose to make can give a false impression -eg putting 691 motor power next to 4xx battery power for different cars are both in themselves accurate but the presentation can, to some, maybe not all, mislead.

Some are arguing the numbers are wrong, some just presentation of accurate information. They are different arguments

 

[WarpedOne]

...for different cars are both in themselves accurate but the presentation can, to some, maybe not all, mislead.

Yes.
It is called marketing.
Complaining about company X doing it and staying quiet about everybody else doing the same and worse is both hypocritical and dishonest.
In the end it results in damaging only X and no one else.

If you believe ...

Belief is basis of religion and this is what this thread is about - religious war on tesla.

There are those that believe tesla harmed them and there are those that argue that those people merely harmed themselves (if at all) by not exercising what nature gave them - common sense and reason.

 

[Auzie]

Yes.
It is called marketing.
Complaining about company X doing it and staying quiet about everybody else doing the same and worse is both hypocritical and dishonest.
In the end it results in damaging only X and no one else.


Belief is basis of religion and this is what this thread is about - religious war on tesla.
......................................

 

[lolachampcar]

WarpedOne,
If only it was that simple, this thread would have died a long time ago.
I've heard very good arguments on both sides.

 

[cynix]

I’ve mentioned this on a couple of accasions in the past: comparing ICE car to an EV, or treating EV specs with an ICE based set of mind is analogous to trying to fit a square peg into a round hole.

Because Tesla would never want anyone to compare a P85D to a McLaren F1…

 

[vgrinshpun]

Because Tesla would never want anyone to compare a P85D to a McLaren F1…

They compared specific functional metric - 0 to 60 acceleration. Two cars involved in this comparison are treated as "black boxes".

They did not open the black boxes and made inaccurate conclusions based on comparing technical characteristics of what inside the boxes (like horsepower).

The two approaches above differ fundamentally. I was emphasizing that the second approach does not work for two black boxes that have vastly different technologies and design inside of them. You are trying to take a pot shot using pseudo analogy that is not there.

This is a sad illustration of what level the discussion deteriorated to.

Perhaps WarpedOne is right after all, this is religious war and rational conversation becomes impossible.

 

[P85DEE]

I'll give this matter until about June of 2016 before it's completely dead or close to it.

I say say that because a lot of the more vocal people on it, are already starting to back off from discussing it.

The next big topics in here, in my estimation, will probably center around P90D quarter mile performance, but that one won't really blow up because there does not seem to be a large population of drag racers in here, and winter is coming and so many drag strips are closing for winter, particularly northeastern drag strips.

Also, if the car makes its number, 10.9 and I believe that it will, then that too will limit any controversy in it.

You may see some scattered skirmishes about the P85D ludicrous update.

The second big topic I'm thinking is going to involve autopilot and any changes to it, or incidents involving it.

But by June, this horsepower discussion as a stand alone and sustainable discussion, will be as dead as the Obama birth certificate discussions.

 

[Hookmaker]

A few facts as of today from the "other" side of the Atlantic. Two cases are currently pending first consumer judicial step: One in Denmark on behalf of a handful of owners and one in Norway representing 150+ P85D owners (25(!!)% of all P85D owners in Norway). Happy days!

 

[Discoducky]

A few facts as of today from the "other" side of the Atlantic. Two cases are currently pending first consumer judicial step: One in Denmark on behalf of a handful of owners and one in Norway representing 150+ P85D owners (25(!!)% of all P85D owners in Norway). Happy days!

Is there verbiage of the plaintiffs arguments available?

 

[vgrinshpun]

A few facts as of today from the "other" side of the Atlantic. Two cases are currently pending first consumer judicial step: One in Denmark on behalf of a handful of owners and one in Norway representing 150+ P85D owners (25(!!)% of all P85D owners in Norway). Happy days!

No new information in this post whatsoever.

Looks like an attempt to stir the pot. I wonder why.

 

[Hookmaker]

Is there verbiage of the plaintiffs arguments available?

Nope - closed cases.

@vgrinshpun - well, think what you want but it's facts and no quarrel!

 

[Discoducky]

Nope - closed cases.

@vgrinshpun - well, think what you want but it's facts and no quarrel!

It would be interesting to see a wiki put together that tries to best summarize what is the current set of known facts and timeline

 

[tomas]

Wow. Happy days and exclamation points? What a jaundiced perspective.

 

[bonnie]

But by June, this horsepower discussion as a stand alone and sustainable discussion, will be as dead as the Obama birth certificate discussions.

You must be new here. Nothing ever dies on this forum. Ever.

(I was going to give an example or two, but realized when I pulled those threads up that people would probably start commenting on them again. Not giving them the air time!)

 

[Jian Yang]

This thread is like a 500-episode soap opera, you can skip 20 episodes very now and than and find yourself still on the track.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I guess we see things differently. You can make all factually accurate statements and yet the statements you choose to make can give a false impression -eg putting 691 motor power next to 4xx battery power for different cars are both in themselves accurate but the presentation can, to some, maybe not all, mislead.

Some are arguing the numbers are wrong, some just presentation of accurate information. They are different arguments

I view things the same way actually (that you can have a factually true statement, have no intent to mislead, still have it be misleading to people), but I am saying a good portion of people on this thread does not. They view the two as directly connected, so that drives their whole argument (and thus refusal to acknowledge certain points from the "other side"). Basically the view from one side that 691hp is a "fake" rating and only the 463hp is the true rating, then another side believes both are "true" ratings and given it is true, Tesla has no fault advertising one or the other. The legitimacy/prevalence of advertising using a standard that reflects power at a component level versus a vehicle level is also another discussion that drives this.

 

[vgrinshpun]

I view things the same way actually (that you can have a factually true statement, have no intent to mislead, still have it be misleading to people), but I am saying a good portion of people on this thread does not. They view the two as directly connected, so that drives their whole argument (and thus refusal to acknowledge certain points from the "other side"). Basically the view that 691hp is a "fake" rating and only the 463hp is the true rating, then the other side believes both are "true" ratings and given it is true, Tesla has no fault advertising one or the other. The legitimacy/prevalence of advertising using a standard that reflects power at a component level versus a vehicle level is also another discussion that drives this.

BTW, P85DEE dug out a reference to the MB SLS Electric 1/4 mile test done by C/D. They clocked it at 12.5 seconds, which is the same time as for P85D. MB SLS Electric weighs 263 lbs less than P85D.

It should be obvious now for everybody (I never doubted it) that MB stated motor hp in exactly the same way as Tesla, summing up four motors (751 motor hp). They also mentioned 600kW "potential" output from the battery, but as evident from the 0 to 60 and 1/4 mile times the battery limits motor output to significantly less than 751hp.

Otherwise one has to assume that MB does not know how to build cars if a two seat purpose built sports car with 751hp from the storied manufacturer with 89 years of experience can't beat 5+2 family sedan built by a newcomer, that is 263lbs heavier and has 691 motor hp, limited by the battery output to 463hp.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I'll give this matter until about June of 2016 before it's completely dead or close to it.

People have made similar predictions (just with different time frames) and turned out to be wrong. I think this topic has a long life ahead.

- - - Updated - - -

BTW, P85DEE dug out a reference to the MB SLS Electric 1/4 mile test done by C/D. They clocked it at 12.5 seconds, which is the same time as for P85D. MB SLS Electric weighs 263 lbs less than P85D.

I have doubts about that car too, but that 12.5 is just an estimate, not actually clocked. AFAIK there is no actual clocked number for that car.

I do know the SLS 751 motor hp / 552kW number is simply a sum of the motor power (just like Tesla) because they mentioned that during their cigarette boat advertising (each motor is 138kW, 138*4 = 552 kW).
http://www.emercedesbenz.com/autos/...coupe-electric-drive-inspires-cigarette-boat/

However, given there are no dynos or clocked top end acceleration numbers, so far it is inconclusive if the battery is a limiter. I will say a point that I believe have not really been brought up: it could be possible that every EV manufacturer is using the same "motor power" rating system as Tesla (namely testing with a power supply rather than factory installed battery) and it just happens that their car was not battery limited. You won't be able to tell until they make a car with sufficient motor power to greatly exceed the power available from the battery (AKA high performance EVs).

 

[Kalllagtunet]

Contrdictory facts are ignored again and again.

..and from their actual specs rather than the "points of interest" tutorial they have:

View attachment 100762

Which corresponds with 740 hp.

Can you provide some 1/4 mile time links? The only one I found a 1/4 mile race between the SLS AMG Black (622 hp) and the 1300 lb heavier SLS AMG Electric in which killed the 3400 lb black in the 1/4 mile despite NOT being much faster off the line. At higher speeds, the electric continues to put distance on the black. The black is speced 1/4 mile at 11.2 seconds. If the electric was only faster off the line and not obviously faster at higher speeds, I'd be willing to stipulate that it's low end torque allowing a faster launch, but at higher speeds, the maximum power(not torque) of each car are going to be at play here and and unless something was wrong with the black, the electric is putting out a lot more power after 60 MPH than the black is in order to keep on putting distance between the 1300 lb lighter car.

And why can't the battery provide the rated power? If it had the same Panasonic cells with the same cell level fuses, I'd take that as evidence by itself that it can't, but if the 18650 cells ar fuseless or something else entirely I'm just wondering how it was determined that the pack can't provide 552 KW?

BTW, I apologize in advance if the SLS Electric thing has been beaten to death. I searched but didn't find the discussions I thought I'd seen but didn't follow before.

 

[vgrinshpun]

Contrdictory facts are ignored again and again.

Are you talking about the guy driving in clown shoes?

He "simulated" Tesla roadster stopping on the track, with a dead battery, and pushed out by hand. That was a great shot, except that the car did not have dead battery - it was faked. Tesla later sued Top Gear, but the British courts did not find that Top Gear was at fault because Top Gear is an entertainment show and is allowed artistic freedom to fake reality to make a point (sounds familiar, isn't it?)

I am not sure what "facts" were you able to extract from this video.