
Tesla’s Model S P85D Scores 103 Out of 100 on Consumer Reports’ Ratings System - chriskanan
http://techcrunch.com/2015/08/27/teslas-model-s-p85d-just-broke-consumer-reports-ratings-system-scoring-103-out-of-100/?ncid=rss
======
dmix
This is offtopic but the video of peoples reaction using the 'insane' button
in the Model S P85D was some really great marketing for Tesla:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpaLgF1uLB8](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LpaLgF1uLB8)

The feature is a novelty but it makes for great social media bait. I never
share links about cars with family/friends but I felt compelled to this time.
It's entertaining because the car is completely silent while it pins them back
in the seat - and people are having very honest reactions to the experience.

~~~
pimlottc
One thing that bugs me about that video - are they really going 60-70 mph on
normal city streets?

~~~
JshWright
Also, that kid in the back seat should at least be in a booster seat. The seat
belt is way too high on him.

~~~
Someone1234
He is fine.

It is identically positioned on both him and the teenage girl sitting next to
him. Which should hint that it is correctly positioned.

But to get specific, a seatbelt is incorrectly positioned when the lap strap
goes across a child's belly OR the shoulder strap doesn't cross their collar
bone. Like this:
[http://i.imgur.com/Zu9pmBv.jpg](http://i.imgur.com/Zu9pmBv.jpg)

In this video the boy (or girl) didn't violate either of those guidelines,
therefore he does not require a booster seat.

I wouldn't go much smaller than he is without one however.

------
rsync
""They have an interesting rating system. It ends up representing the fact
that all this performance and fuel efficiency comes out of a car that can seat
7 people. The variant that does 0-60 quicker and gives you AWD gives you
better energy consumption. Things like these are what blew up their scale.""

A few weeks ago (a month ago ?) BMW released the spec sheet / announcement for
the new 7 series. And it's just sad.

I'm not even sure who it is for ... people who don't use the Internet ? People
who don't read news ? You've got a car that is substantially better in almost
every conceivable category (it generates all wheel drive with two different
motors, for instance) ... and the press release for the 7 series is going on
and on about how advanced their new engine is and bragging about their
(laughable, in light of the model S) 0-60 time.

Basically it's 20 pages of "blah blah not electric blah blah". It's painful to
look at.

OBLIGATORY: Not a huge Model S fan, at least in terms of size (not really a
full sized four door) and interior appointment (which is amazingly sparse and
devoid of options compared to 7/A8/S) ... and further, would much prefer a 7
series or Panamera on a fully-electric platform. But we don't have that, so I
guess we have to settle for "the best car we've ever tested".[1]

[1] [http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/27/teslas-p85d-is-the-best-
car-c...](http://www.cnbc.com/2015/08/27/teslas-p85d-is-the-best-car-consumer-
reports-has-ever-tested.html)

~~~
zippergz
Having driven both a 7 Series and a Model S, I'll take the BMW any day. More
comfortable, better handling, looks better, doesn't have a huge iPad in the
dashboard, and allows road trips with far less planning needed. It's nice that
the tesla has insane acceleration, but in practice that's not super useful.
And gas is a small enough part of my budget that it's not material so that
isn't really a factor.

~~~
eclipxe
"doesn't have a huge iPad in the dashboard"

Why is this a bad thing?

~~~
kylec
When it comes to in-car controls, you want to be able to use them without
taking your eyes off the road. To this end, knobs that you can grasp for and
feel the current setting are great. Knobs without a tactile indication of the
current setting are OK, as you can find them without looking and only glance
down to see that you are selecting the appropriate setting. Buttons are worse
because you have to glance down to find them, but once you do you should be
able to use them and know that the input was registered through the tactile
feedback.

Touchscreens, on the other hand, are just bad for this. You have to look at
them the entire time you're operating them, or else your hand might change
position and not press what you intended to press. You also need to look at
the screen to see that your press registered what you wanted to do. All of
this looking at the screen means your eyes aren't on the road where they
belong.

~~~
Someone1234
I have to say I agree.

We have a car made in 2000, it has knobs and dials for everything, you can
configure the AC/heat completely without looking at it after some familiarity
with the controls. The radio you can configure the station and volume without
looking.

We also own a Prius made in 2014. They've either turned everything into a flat
button, or worse it requires the touch screen to configure. And while the
Prius does many more things than the 2000 car, the 2000 remains more
configurable while driving by a mile.

The Prius largely tries to not have you configure the AC/heat at all while
driving by having an automatic mode and you can set the target temp', but this
completely ignores other scenarios where people want to be hit with hot/cold
and don't care what the actual temp is, or that the temp doesn't measure the
sun hitting you on your bare arm constantly making you feel hotter than you
actually are.

Ultimately cars were better ergonomically designed pre-touchscreen, when they
did less. Maybe in a few years I'll be able to voice control the AC/heat, but
until then it is a step backwards.

~~~
cc438
"this completely ignores other scenarios where people want to be hit with
hot/cold and don't care what the actual temp is, or that the temp doesn't
measure the sun hitting you on your bare arm constantly making you feel hotter
than you actually are."

Exactly! I hate the ubiquity of automatic climate control systems these days.
Everyone that has a car equipped with one just uses the "set point" knob like
regular manual controls. It's full cold, full hot, or off with "in-between"
settings managed via fan speed. They don't work for the reason you've stated
even when used "properly".

I've also noticed that most systems refuse to switch off the A/C compressor
unless you choose a set point several degrees above ambient. It's a waste of
gas, especially when it's 68-70F with low humidity outside.

------
chabby
Just my 2 cents: I've driven both a P85D and a 2014 Porsche 911 4S cabriolet
fairly extensively. Guess which one I decided to buy?

The Porsche. These might not be two cars that are commonly cross-shopped, and
the Tesla does beat the Porsche to 60 mph. Still, the Porsche was clearly the
winner in just about every other way in my estimation. Anyone else have a
similar experience?

~~~
toephu2
Not sure how the Porsche was the winner in every way? Going from point A->B
(work commute), is your foot hard on the pedal every day? Can you even have
your foot all the way down (traffic)? Tesla wins by far in terms of energy-
efficiency, luxury, capacity, and just overall being more useful than the
Porsche (and still being fun to drive). The only minus is the price tag. But
Porsches aren't cheap either. But yeah I understand, any true racing
enthusiast would probably choose a Porsche over a Tesla.

~~~
redthrowaway
>Tesla wins by far in terms of...luxury

Except it doesn't. One of the biggest complaints about the Model S is that its
interior belongs in a specced-up Accord, not an S-class competitor.

------
mschuster91
What I'd really like to see, and Tesla is already beginning to do it, is
modular, upgrade-able cars.

Like, a new engine, better in-car entertainment, better sound system, seat-
heating, cruise control, distance control, semi/full automatic driving... if I
could e.g. buy a stripped down Tesla as a student which I can then (given, of
course, I don't crash it) upgrade over its lifetime as I put some money aside,
instead of having to buy an entirely new car when the old one is still
perfectly functioning.

~~~
dragontamer
This is actually a clever marketing trick by Elon Musk. You cannot upgrade a
Roadster, and you cannot upgrade the P70 models either.

Tesla has been pretty unclear about their modularity and upgrades. Be careful
when reading marketing material: these marketing slides open your imagination
but aren't necessarily filled with the truth. They've kept things vague to
help stir our imaginations... but don't go dropping $70,000 on vague promises.

When Tesla starts actually making modular cars, we'll know the details. Until
then, treat these promises as marketing and/or vaporware. I'm sure Elon Musk
is going to push his company to actually deliver on his promises, but
sometimes engineers can only do so much.

~~~
greglindahl
Actually, Tesla does plan on shipping an upgrade to existing Roadsters. It'll
be expensive and probably later than claimed, but there you have it:

[http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/roadster-30](http://www.teslamotors.com/blog/roadster-30)

[http://gas2.org/2015/05/05/340-mile-tesla-roadster-
upgrade-d...](http://gas2.org/2015/05/05/340-mile-tesla-roadster-upgrade-due-
out-in-august/)

I agree with your comment that it's easy to fantasize about upgrades that will
never happen. Early Model S cars lack the hardware for driving assistance, and
my friends who think they know about such things predict that additional
computer power will be needed to achieve all that Elon is predicting for self-
driving.

A better battery pack for all Model S cars, on the other hand, is likely to
eventually show up. All existing cars can be upgraded to the 90 KWh battery,
but Tesla is suggesting that everyone is better off waiting for a more
significant upgrade later in your battery's life.

~~~
dragontamer
Thanks for the information.

When specifics come out, I think its sane to trust them. The political fall
out if Roadsters upgrades aren't delivered is too great.

> Early Model S cars lack the hardware for driving assistance, and my friends
> who think they know about such things predict that additional computer power
> will be needed to achieve all that Elon is predicting for self-driving.

Yeah, this is the danger I'm trying to warn against. It isn't necessarily that
Elon Musk or Tesla is "lying" to people, they're just vague about upgrade
packages. So dreamers begin to dream and some misunderstandings may occur.

Its best to wait for specifics, like that Roadster info you've linked.

------
drzaiusapelord
How can you exceed your max value? This has always bothered me, its pretty
much admitting "We kinda pull numbers out of our butts." When I see this in
other media, like movies or games, it seems to be a direct response to hype or
personal politics. Maybe CR is overly green and wants to promote EV's? Reminds
me of when Obama got a Nobel Peace prize for things he will do in the future.

Also, the Simpsons did it first:

Tralawney: Listen, we've been meaning to have a talk with you about your
reviews. Everything's a rave! Nine thumbs up, what the hell is that?

Homer: I've given out my share of bad reviews

Beaumont: Oh, the only bad review you gave was to a slice of pizza you found
under the couch.

Homer: It lost some points because it had a Hot Wheel on it.

~~~
mikeash
I think people are making too big of a deal about scoring greater than the
"maximum."

It's pretty clear that they came up with some arbitrary scoring system where
each aspect of the car gets some number of points. There's nothing wrong with
that, any rating is going to be arbitrary to some degree. They then arranged
the scales such that whatever they saw as a good car would come close to 100,
because 100 seems like a nice number.

Then they test a car with a combination of attributes they never expected, and
it exceeds 100. 100 isn't the _actual_ maximum, it's just what they thought
would be the top score from their system. Turns out that if you throw a car at
their system that is extremely efficient _and_ powerful _and_ seats lots of
people, the numbers go higher.

~~~
SilasX
Similar issue with the "Coefficient of Performance" in heating and cooling[1],
which is the ratio of "energy extracted" to "energy consumed". Since you're
just moving energy around, this value can easily be greater than 100% -- no
violation of the laws of thermodynamics! 100% is just as arbitrary a value on
this scale. .

However, there's still always a relevant maximum that you should measure
relative to, and refrigerators have a theoretical maximum. The maximum
("Carnot") efficiency is the ratio of the higher (absolute) temperature to the
temperature difference. For room temperature to freezing, that would be
~300/27 = 11.1 = 1100%.

[1]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coefficient_of_performance)

------
tw04
I get that the Tesla is awesome, but it seems pretty frigging ridiculous that
to give a car 103 out of 100 when it only has a range of 200 miles.

~~~
sahaskatta
How ridiculous would it be for a car company to give you a lifetime unlimited
supply of gasoline along with the purchase of your car? Absolutely ridiculous.
Guess what? That's exactly what Tesla does.
[http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger](http://www.teslamotors.com/supercharger)

Unlike gas cars, you start off with 200 miles of range EVERY MORNING since you
charge overnight. Most Americans also only drive an average of 40 miles a day.
And for those long trips, you have Superchargers.

~~~
tw04
How ridiculous would it be for a car company to give you a lifetime unlimited
supply of gasoline - but you have to wait in line 30 minutes for it every
time. And oh by the way, it's an hour from your house, and you'll use a third
of a tank getting there and back. And there's only like 200 stations total
worldwide. So... awesome, right? Oh, and we built the cost of those stations
into the car, so it's not _REALLY_ free.

 _yawn_

~~~
greglindahl
You don't have to "wait in line 30 minutes for it every time". Please: make
your point without exaggerating.

~~~
tw04
The recharge takes 30 minutes...

>What should I do if all Supercharger stalls are occupied when I arrive? Check
to see if current users have left contact information on their dashboard and
give them a call. Most customers charge for 20 to 40 minutes.

[http://www.teslamotors.com/support/supercharging](http://www.teslamotors.com/support/supercharging)

~~~
greglindahl
It is not the case that you have to "wait in line 30 minutes for it every
time". I've waited in line for 5 minutes, twice, out of the couple of dozen
times I've supercharged. The other times there was a free charger when I
arrived.

~~~
tw04
If you waited 5 minutes, you were at 3/4 of a charge. Physics dictate how fast
you can charge a battery, and it isn't faster than 30 minutes if you're at 1/4
or less.

I can only ask: why would you bother recharging at 3/4 of a charge? I've
literally never in my life stopped to top off my tank at 3/4 of a tank of
gasoline.

~~~
greglindahl
"Wait in line" means I'm unable to get to a charger because they're all
occupied by other cars. That explains why your comments are so confusing.

~~~
tw04
Filling up my gas tank takes roughly 90 seconds. The only equivalent is
"waiting in line". There wouldn't ever be a circumstance in which it would
take 30 minutes to fill my tank.

~~~
greglindahl
The words "wait in line" mean something particular, and it isn't how you're
using them. I agree that people charging Teslas at SuperChargers often spend
30 minutes charging. They do not "wait in line" to do so, unless all the
chargers are full when they arrive.

------
dragontamer
That is frankly ridiculous.

Tesla's previous car getting 99/100 (which never happened before) wasn't
enough, so now they push 103/100?

I understand that its a great car, but if the consumer report scale is out of
100, then it should stay out of 100. Pushing their scale beyond the boundary
causes a "Spinal tap" situation and I fail to take the review seriously
anymore.

It goes up to 11 belongs in comedy movies, not serious reviews.

~~~
darkerside
Blame TechCrunch for the blogspammy headline. The original Consumer Reports
review states clearly that it scored a 103 based on their existing framework,
which they adjusted in lieu of that fact.

| In rating it, however, we faced a quandary: The Tesla initially scored 103
in the Consumer Reports' Ratings system, which by definition doesn’t go past
100. The car set a new benchmark, so we had to make changes to our scoring to
account for it. Those changes didn’t affect the scores of other cars.

[http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/tesla-model-
s-p85d-b...](http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/tesla-model-
s-p85d-breaks-consumer-reports-ratings-system.htm)

~~~
sgustard
They might think about future-proofing their rating system while they're
tweaking it. By scoring it 100 they have calibrated the P85D as the new
"perfect", even while admitting "it has imperfections." What will its score be
when future, better cars come along and they have to recalibrate those to 100?

------
3327
what a bullshit report. I mean I like tesla but this report starts with
bullshit and ends with bullshit.

103/100 ? 200 mile range?

~~~
loceng
In highschool, grade 11 computer science I got 101% end of year grade; the
average of the class was 100%: the person who got 99% was barely in class
however completed their assignments, and I got 101% because I would quickly
finish my assignments and then was happy and excited to help others if they
were running into trouble. I quite wish my other classes were scored that way
as well... TL;DR There's nothing wrong giving credit where credit is due.

~~~
punee
/r/iamverysmart

~~~
loceng
Had nothing to do with smarts, I just had been using computers and started to
teach myself programming at 11 years old.

------
thecolorblue
Did consumer reports review a Model S 70D? I would think that would be a more
practical car for consumer reports to review.

~~~
jusben1369
I guess. I mean they're both incredibly small niche vehicle volumes that it
seems a bit strange to split hairs on which model.

~~~
ryanmonroe
Well the P85D costs $30k (over 50%) more so for your average wealthy person
the P70D looks much more reasonable.

~~~
mikeash
Don't forget that they now offer a plain 70 in rear wheel drive configuration,
which knocks off another $5,000.

Teslas aren't cheap by any means, but there are a lot of people who could
afford something in the 70-85D range but not a P85D.

On the other hand, the only real difference between a P85D and an 85D is
acceleration, so I don't think there's much need to do a separate review just
for the lower-end cars.

------
amalag
So did they take affordability into account?

~~~
dragontamer
They took neither affordability nor reliability into account. Details here:
[http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/tesla-model-
s-p85d-b...](http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/cars/tesla-model-
s-p85d-breaks-consumer-reports-ratings-system.htm)

~~~
matheweis
... which are the two most important things that I care about. I which there
was a rating system that looked at these - especially over the long term.

------
lloydde
Looks like all the news has overloaded consumerreports.org. And I need a new
clothing dryer!

[http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/consumerreports.org.html](http://www.isitdownrightnow.com/consumerreports.org.html)

------
buckbova
Does this Tesla S still overheat on a lap of Nürburgring?

~~~
toephu2
yes probably, but how often are you taking your family sedan for a lap around
the Nürburgring?

