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

[vgrinshpun]

See, posting at 2:22am... Tempting to insert about obsessiveness extending into numerology here ;-)

Wow! This is a really good catch! I guess am guilty as charged, subliminally...

 

[MikeBur]

I don't think the owners' hand is weak. But I do agree they are acting bold, especially some in this thread.

It's a funny world. I interpreted yak's comments as TMs hand was weak and hence WHY it was being so bold. I guess there truly is 4 sides to any conversation:
1) What was intended to be said
2) What was said
3) What was heard
4) what was interpreted as being heard (i.e. Filtered input through someone existing perceptions/mental model)

It's late... ;-)

 

[Canuck]

You just have to try and attack me based on absolutes. Fortunately I don't have to answer to you... or anyone else for that matter.

But since we're here, the 90 kWh battery swap ordeal is not about buying another "product" from Tesla. When referring to "products" previously it was implied to be a vehicle, Tesla Energy item, or something that is offered for general sale. The thread about the 90 pack upgrade is about saving a crap load of money on batteries for my self, not about buying a Tesla product. $25k, if I could retain my old pack, basically lets my use my own battery for not much more than the cost of a salvage pack while also getting a range boost on my car. I'd be stupid not to try that route first, regardless of my feelings towards the company. I don't consider this buying a product from Tesla. I consider it buying a car part that just happens to be only made by Tesla. When they start selling 90 kWh packs on their website, let me know. Also, if it doesn't work out the way I want it to where I come out ahead with both packs in hand, then I won't be doing it. Pretty simple.

So, to clarify my previous points, I will not be buying another retail product from Tesla. Better? lol... some people... (starting to wonder why I cleared certain people off of my ignore list...)

I see. You won't buy another Tesla product like a Tesla Energy item, but that's different than buying a $25k battery from Tesla. Yes, that makes complete sense to me. I don't know why you needed all that extra explaining in your post. When you said "absolutely not" to ever buying another "Tesla product", of course you didn't mean "absolutely not" to ever buying another Tesla product. Right, got it now.

Oh, and when you buy another vehicle from them, years down the line, and I can almost guarantee you will, I hope my words, and this exchange, comes to mind. Regardless of putting me on your ignore list (as if I care -- but nice of you to mention what you think of me), you probably won't be able to ignore that thought from popping up. Something tells me, however, that you'll explain that away too.

It's a funny world. I interpreted yak's comments as TMs hand was weak....

Yes, me too, but sarcasm doesn't always come across well in print. I don't think it's fair to say that Tesla is the only party to this dispute who is "acting bold".

 

[Auzie]

A ruling in "Forbrukertvistutvalget" is legally binding, but this is low court so unless there is talk about petty cash or a very weak loser this will be appealed to the "Tingretten", which is the first of three courts in Norway where the Supreme Court will be the third. The funding of "step 2" is done by the consumer rights board, over the state budget.

Bear in mind that the media reports are made to sell newspapers, but they are right that the burden of proof is now on our shoulders.

What have happened so far is that the "Forbrukerrådet" (FR) has received 193 individual complaints following their complaints being denined when directed to Tesla. All of these are of course not identical, and there are probably a certain degree of complaints that have been submitted "just to be in on it". What the various complaints have said is impossible to know, and FR told Tesla that due to the amount of complaints they could choose one (of the 193) to proceed with instead of treating all 193 as individual complaints. Apparently they chose one that complained about HP, 0-100, missing updates, etc. Wisely enough, that creates an opportunity to use the chewbakka defence.

Most of us that complained early focused solely on the missing 700 HP. That will now be the focus for the "step 2" - we will be very crisp on the fact that Tesla sold us a 700 HP car, and gave us a car that will never be able to produce that amount of power. Ever.

(700 HP is what they told the Norwegian DMV - which again made all the insurance companies base their premiums on that number. Now Tesla have reverted and is marketing the car as a 463 HP vechicle. This has also been communicated to the DMV, and people are getting money back from their insurance companies... as one of the things we can use as proof that Tesla oversold the P85D.)



It is a possibility, but that would be totally up to the court to decide. Even if Tesla offer a buy back, this would probably be deemed unreasonable as long as the FX have made the car 30% more expensive compared to orders made before Christmas last year. What has been suggested is that Tesla offer a Ludicrous upgrade as compensation as that at least would bring the car close to the promised 0-100. I know the media talks about claims for payback of the difference between the P85D and 85D, but that will never happen and is not expected. But how many of us would have chunked out the extra $25k for 47 HP and some red calipers if we knew that was what we were getting?

That is quite comprehensive and informative, thank you for putting time into it.


The point below is quite interesting.

..............

What have happened so far is that the "Forbrukerrådet" (FR) has received 193 individual complaints following their complaints being denined when directed to Tesla. All of these are of course not identical, and there are probably a certain degree of complaints that have been submitted "just to be in on it". What the various complaints have said is impossible to know, and FR told Tesla that due to the amount of complaints they could choose one (of the 193) to proceed with instead of treating all 193 as individual complaints. Apparently they chose one that complained about HP, 0-100, missing updates, etc. Wisely enough, that creates an opportunity to use the chewbakka defence.
..............

My interpretation of the bold section is that FR is quite efficient in its approach. My interpretation is also that Tesla chose a complaint that was most representative and inclusive of all other complaints. Have they done otherwise, chosen more focused complaint, they would have run the risk of not addressing all concerns. My interpretation could be wrong, I was wrong more often than not.

......................
But how many of us would have chunked out the extra $25k for 47 HP and some red calipers if we knew that was what we were getting?

I am sorry that some people are in such situation. Your question is an interesting one. If you could turn back time, and have the knowledge and experience of the car that you have now, I am curious if you would have bought the car anyway. Perhaps some people would have bought, some not, but both categories feel the grief because they feel misled into a purchase decision, rightly or wrongly.

 

[stopcrazypp]

My interpretation of the bold section is that FR is quite efficient in its approach. My interpretation is also that Tesla chose a complaint that was most representative and inclusive of all other complaints. Have they done otherwise, chosen more focused complaint, they would have run the risk of not addressing all concerns. My interpretation could be wrong, I was wrong more often than not.

I missed that comment earlier, but I have some doubt about the interpretation. Would the FR truly allow Tesla freely to pick just one complaint to respond to that isn't comprehensive of all the concerns raised? Then Tesla can just pick the one that had the weakest argument and have a minimal response to that one.

Reading the article posted so far about it, the Council only requires Tesla to meet a minimal evidential burden, so wouldn't it benefit Tesla to pick only one complaint and be short in response about it? I would imagine the FR would require each individual complaint to be addressed with sufficient evidence and Tesla have appeared to have done so (and they didn't conflate the arguments; I was able to follow even not understanding a bit of Norwegian).

 

[rns-e]

They directly compared it only with McLAren F1, and it was totally legitimate and accurate comparison, as I pointed out to you personally about three months ago.

This is not an accurate statement. As was mentioned about three months ago, Ford Mustang is also being advertised in Europe using rollout.

What I pointed out is that your statement about comparison by Tesla was not accurate. The only comparison Tesla did was to that of The McLaren F1.

Ford Mustang sells thousands of Mustangs in Europe, and they do advertise their 0-62mph acceleration time with roll out without mentioning it.

I did not mention the F1, it was clearly between Teslas own models, which you chose to interpret otherwise.

Thousands of Mustangs in Europe? If you took a road trip in Europe I will be impressed if you saw 5 Mustangs and more than 2 of them where new. But still it does not matter, as 1 foot rollout is not used in Europe

- - - Updated - - -

It did.

Rns-e was talking about Tesla directly comparing the performance of the cars. I took it as him saying that they used it as a talking points in their presentations and pointed out that the only comparison they were talking about was to McLaren F1.

I never mentioned the F1. I said direct comparison to other models not using 1-foot rollout, which are the 85D, Teslas own model.

You are unbelievable. People have even shown you the screen shoots and you still keep making things up.

Let me carve it out for you

P85D secretly using 1-foot rollout
85D not using 1-foot rollout

Tesla makes a direct comparison between the models when presenting hp and 0-60 times.

- - - Updated - - -

Your occupation must have something to do with programming - the questions read as a flow chart. Also, the tone and form of your post does not clear the rules of posting that you repeatedly and selectively trying to enforce on this Forum. Now, that you crossed over to the dark side, one would think that there might be less lecturing coming from you on the subject of posting etiquette.

As far as the clarification you requested in your original post, I explained exactly what I meant, and I'll just leave it at that.

ha ha ha - look a kitten

Why not just admit that you thought that I (RNS-E) meant something else, but now that it has been spelled out by several posters what was the meaning you agree.

 

[stopcrazypp]

I did not mention the F1, it was clearly between Teslas own models, which you chose to interpret otherwise.

Thousands of Mustangs in Europe? If you took a road trip in Europe I will be impressed if you saw 5 Mustangs and more than 2 of them where new. But still it does not matter, as 1 foot rollout is not used in Europe

Ford only started officially introducing the Mustang into Europe starting this year, but it had almost 10000 orders in Europe for the latest version as of October.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/bu...5/10/07/ford-september-europe-sales/73535916/

You may be able to make a claim that 1 foot rollout is not commonly used in Europe, but not a claim that it is not used in Europe at all given the Mustang example. There may be others.

 

[rns-e]

My interpretation of the bold section is that FR is quite efficient in its approach. My interpretation is also that Tesla chose a complaint that was most representative and inclusive of all other complaints. Have they done otherwise, chosen more focused complaint, they would have run the risk of not addressing all concerns. My interpretation could be wrong, I was wrong more often than not.

I think it would be fair to assume that Tesla chose a weak formulated and not very documented complaint, which everybody would do given such a choice, still making sure that the complaint covers the majority of the topics in all the complaints.

That would be the flaw in the Norwegian system, that just forwarding 197 more or less well written complaints and asking a company if they agree that something is wrong that is never going to produce a positive result for the complainers. Especially when taking into consideration that Tesla has not been willing to enter into any form of dialog with their customers on this topic.

- - - Updated - - -

Ford only started officially introducing the Mustang into Europe starting this year, but it had almost 10000 orders in Europe for the latest version as of October.
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/bu...5/10/07/ford-september-europe-sales/73535916/

You may be able to make a claim that 1 foot rollout is not commonly used in Europe, but not a claim that it is not used in Europe at all given the Mustang example. There may be others.

So Tesla started using 1-foot rollout in Europe in late 2014 and Ford in 2015 and they have sold a total of maybe 10.000 (as it is only on their performance models they use rollout) compared to all the performance models sold by European manufactures. So this is all very new and in very low numbers

I would still say 1-foot rollout is not used in Europe in de facto, but yes, not literally, as two American manufactures have decided to introduce it within the last 12 months and without telling anybody.

 

[Kalllagtunet]

Maybe take a look at the brocure?

http://www.ford.co.uk/cs/BlobServer...cation/pdf&blobwhere=1214523012143&blobkey=id


Ford

http://www.ford.de/cs/BlobServer?blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobcol=urldata&blobheadervalue1=attachment%3Bfilename%3D%22Ford+Mustang+-+Broschuere.pdf%22&blobheadervalue2=abinary%3Bcharset%3DUTF-8&blobheadername1=Content-Disposition&blobheadername2=MDT-Type&blobheader=application%2Fpdf&blobwhere=1214486919743&blobkey=id

 

[rns-e]

Maybe take a look at the brocure?

http://www.ford.co.uk/cs/BlobServer...cation/pdf&blobwhere=1214523012143&blobkey=id


Ford

page 29 - says nothing about roll out, so where do you actually see that Mustang has carried over the using rollout in Europe?

 

[Kalllagtunet]

View attachment 103395

page 29 - says nothing about roll out, so where do you actually see that Mustang has carried over the using rollout in Europe?

I don't and that was exactly my point... Ford have not yet given much data on acceleration time at all.... Maby they do not have to misslead their european costomers to sell the car?

 

[rns-e]

I don't and that was exactly my point... Ford have not yet given much data on acceleation time at all.... Maby they do not have to misslead their european costomers to sell the car?

 

[Auzie]

I think it would be fair to assume that Tesla chose a weak formulated and not very documented complaint, which everybody would do given such a choice, still making sure that the complaint covers the majority of the topics in all the complaints.
.

mindsweeper claims that Tesla is free to choose which claimant to respond to. Stopcrazypp doubts that, and there is validity to doubt, as it doesn't make sense to give that much freedom to the defendant. I am inclined to believe that Norweigan court system is based on logic and makes sense, hence Tesla was most likely required to respond to the comprehensive inclusive complaint.

That would be the flaw in the Norwegian system, that just forwarding 197 more or less well written complaints and asking a company if they agree that something is wrong that is never going to produce a positive result for the complainers. Especially when taking into consideration that Tesla has not been willing to enter into any form of dialog with their customers on this topic.
.

I actually like that aspect of Norweigan court system, deal with a representative complaint and apply the findings to all, seems very efficient to me.


I am curious about Danish consumer protection system, is it much different to Norweigan system?

 

[Soolim]

I see. You won't buy another Tesla product like a Tesla Energy item, but that's different than buying a $25k battery from Tesla. Yes, that makes complete sense to me. I don't know why you needed all that extra explaining in your post. When you said "absolutely not" to ever buying another "Tesla product", of course you didn't mean "absolutely not" to ever buying another Tesla product. Right, got it now.

Oh, and when you buy another vehicle from them, years down the line, and I can almost guarantee you will, I hope my words, and this exchange, comes to mind. Regardless of putting me on your ignore list (as if I care -- but nice of you to mention what you think of me), you probably won't be able to ignore that thought from popping up. Something tells me, however, that you'll explain that away too.




Yes, me too, but sarcasm doesn't always come across well in print. I don't think it's fair to say that Tesla is the only party to this dispute who is "acting bold".

I get lots of entertainment reading Wk and Tesla marketing explaining themselves what they really mean by "not buying another product" versus "691 hp." :biggrin:

 

[rns-e]

mindsweeper claims that Tesla is free to choose which claimant to respond to. Stopcrazypp doubts that, and there is validity to doubt, as it doesn't make sense to give that much freedom to the defendant. I am inclined to believe that Norweigan court system is based on logic and makes sense, hence Tesla was most likely required to respond to the comprehensive inclusive complaint.

You have to remember this is not the Norwegian court system, it is pre court. It is a setup to help cases be solved before they escalade, but it requires both parties to be willing to want to meet and talk about it. I want to believe what you are saying about which one they have to pick, but how would you decide that? Do you give them a limited bunch to choose from, which you think represent the claims or? In this case all claims adresses the same topics, so I think (and read on the norwegian forum) that the one Tesla has chosen is one of the weaker ones. Which would be the same I would do if I was Tesla.

I actually like that aspect of Norweigan court system, deal with a representative complaint and apply the findings to all, seems very efficient to me.


I am curious about Danish consumer protection system, is it much different to Norweigan system?

On my way out, will sit down later and give you the run down of the Danish system

 

[Auzie]

You have to remember this is not the Norwegian court system, it is pre court. It is a setup to help cases be solved before they escalade, but it requires both parties to be willing to want to meet and talk about it. I want to believe what you are saying about which one they have to pick, but how would you decide that? Do you give them a limited bunch to choose from, which you think represent the claims or? In this case all claims adresses the same topics, so I think (and read on the norwegian forum) that the one Tesla has chosen is one of the weaker ones. Which would be the same I would do if I was Tesla.


On my way out, will sit down later and give you the run down of the Danish system

Thanks, on my way to sleep, will read in the morning.

I thought that Danish and Norweigan were different languages but googled it after seeing your remark (my bold). Google says the languages are mutually intelligible. My expectation is that people speaking the similar language are likely to have the similar court system.

 

[Wattup]

Note that Ford are quoting a lower power for the same engine in Europe compared to the USA cars. 306kW in Europe versus 324 kW in the USA.

View attachment 103395

page 29 - says nothing about roll out, so where do you actually see that Mustang has carried over the using rollout in Europe?

 

[lolachampcar]

I miss the old days when everything for me was black and white. Law school really polluted the engineering degree

I came to this thread thinking my European friends were nuts. How could you possibly complain about the performance of the P85D being sub-par? My car, as delivered, beat the advertised 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. You people are just nuts.

Then I listened.

I came to appreciate relying on Tesla's representations when buying the car for the first time. I came to believe that the roll out concept may not exist on the other side of the pond. Most importantly, I came to respect and trust the honesty exuded by some of those European posters. I have been equally embarrassed by other posters from the US that use intellect in an attempt to chase away opposing positions.

It is also clear to me that intelligence has nothing to do with empathy given some of the well thought out and well written arguments in this thread that completely ignore the concept that others do not see things through one set of eyes.

Lastly, it is more than clear that Tesla did one of their pricing slight of hands on the performance specs of the P85D. Point to all the justifications in the world but it is what it is. There is no way to see this from another angle like there is the roll out issue. Tesla simply played fast and loose with the facts to achieve a goal.

What this means to me is I have a little less trust for management which continues a slow erosion process (details on request). Tesla, in total, is still much better than any other car company IMO. Their overall approach to sales and customer service more than makes up for shenanigans in marketing and business. I just can not make it to WK's position just yet and still enjoy my interactions with the company and especially the local personnel.

Yep, gone are the days of black and white for me.

 

[MikeBur]

I miss the old days when everything for me was black and white. Law school really polluted the engineering degree

I came to this thread thinking my European friends were nuts. How could you possibly complain about the performance of the P85D was sub-par? My car, as delivered, beat the advertised 0-60 and 1/4 mile times. You people are just nuts.

Then I listened.

I came to appreciate relying on Tesla's representations when buying the car for the first time. I came to believe that the roll out concept may not exist on the other side of the pond. Most importantly, I came to respect and trust the honesty exuded by some of those European posters. I have been equally embarrassed by other posters from the US that use intellect in an attempt to chase away opposing positions.

It is also clear to me that intelligence has nothing to do with empathy given some of the well thought out and well written arguments in this thread that completely ignore the concept that others do not see things through one set of eyes.

Lastly, it is more than clear that Tesla did one of their pricing slight of hands on the performance specs of the P85D. Point to all the justifications in the world but it is what it is. There is no way to see this from another angle like there is the roll out issue. Tesla simply played fast and loose with the facts to achieve a goal.

What this means to me is I have a little less trust for management which continues a slow erosion process (details on request). Tesla, in total, is still much better than any other car company IMO. Their overall approach to sales and customer service more than makes up for shenanigans in marketing and business. I just can not make it to WK's position just yet and still enjoy my interactions with the company and especially the local personnel.

Yep, gone are the days of black and white for me.

Very well said, thank you. No company is perfect. I started this whole debate a lot less educated on AC motors. This forum is a great resource for me, and I appreciate the viewpoints of all. I do feel "fooled" on performance and range details and unreservedly believing statistics based on previous model track records.

I'm still passionate about TM and the mission, though I will no longer be promoting their statistics unreservedly, i.e. Moving to more reserved statements like "Tesla continue to think differently about how to make, sell and continually refine their product with performance and range that increases over time. Want a ride in one?"; removing all details on performance, range, better than all other manufacturers, etc.

I still love my car, though there is zero chance I'm confirming my ModelX order without it being tried and tested. No fool me twice here!

 

[Canuck]

You have to remember this is not the Norwegian court system, it is pre court. It is a setup to help cases be solved before they escalade, but it requires both parties to be willing to want to meet and talk about it.

Where are you getting this information?

I'm still trying to understand the process in Norway but from what I have gathered is that the process is required by legislation in Norway. It is not a voluntary mediation process as you make it out to be. Tesla was required by law to participate -- and it did participate -- just like Apple did in their dispute in the same forum. That forum allows the government regulator (Consumer Ombudsman) to take different courses depending on where the evidence directs him but ultimately if either party disputes the "ruling" then they can still resort to the Courts. Apple was ruled against -- it "lost" in that process based on the evidence submitted by the parties. Then Apple fought it in Court but ultimately dropped the disputed terms (Apple discontinued its FairPlay DRM scheme worldwide) that Norway took issue with. Unlike Apple, Tesla "won" in the first instance. It was determined, based on the submissions, that the Consumer Ombudsman did not find any breach of Norway's consumer laws (which are very strict and consumer orientated by all accounts). So now, unlike Apple, the ball is in the owners' court to sue. In fact, it was much worse with Apple because there was a "ruling" (or perhaps "finding" is a better term) against them by the Consumer Ombudsman, Bjørn Erik Thon, that Apple needed the Courts to set aside. The owners don't even have that so that doesn't bode well for any potential lawsuits in Norway, or even in other jurisdictions if we are to take anything from this process. Of course, it's not binding on any judicial bodies but it is certainly persuasive.

If I'm wrong, I'm certain our Norway friends will step in and set me straight. I look forward to that so we can learn more about this process and where my comments are in error.

Here's where I am getting some of my assumptions:

Norwegian Consumer Council[edit]

In June 2006, the Consumer Ombudsmen in Norway, Sweden and Denmark challenged Apple's iTunes end user license agreement (EULA) through the Norwegian Consumer Ombudsman Bjørn Erik Thon, who claimed that Apple was violating contract and copyright laws in their countries. Thon stated that Apple's "being an international company does not entitle [it] to disregard the laws of the countries in which it operates. The company's standard customer contract violates Norwegian law".[SUP][236][/SUP] An official complaint[SUP][237][/SUP] was filed by the Norwegian Consumer Council in January 2006,[SUP][238][/SUP] after which German and French consumer groups joined the Nordic-led drive to force Apple to make its iTunes online store compatible with digital music players made by rival companies.[SUP][239][/SUP] A French law allows regulators to force Apple to make its player and store compatible with rival offerings.[SUP][239][/SUP] The consumer protection regulators of Norway, Sweden, and Finland met with Apple in September 2006 in hopes of resolving the issues without litigation,[SUP][240][/SUP] but the matter was only resolved after Apple discontinued its FairPlay digital rights management (DRM) scheme.[SUP][241][/SUP]