
New Tesla Model S Now the Quickest Production Car - obi1kenobi
https://www.tesla.com/blog/new-tesla-model-s-now-quickest-production-car-world
======
_rpd
> The Model S P100D with Ludicrous mode is the third fastest accelerating
> production car ever produced, with a 0-60 mph time of 2.5* seconds. However,
> both the LaFerrari and the Porsche 918 Spyder were limited run, million
> dollar vehicles and cannot be bought new.

~~~
Swannie
> * Expected value using max power mode and Motor Trend benchmark

Suggesting that this is expected value, and not observed performance?

Edit: Or they are suggesting that you could potentially reach that value in
"ideal" conditions, using the Motor Trend method to adjust some observed
values to this normalised time?

------
beamatronic
This last bit is an interesting statement,

"While the P100D Ludicrous is obviously an expensive vehicle, we want to
emphasize that every sale helps pay for the smaller and much more affordable
Tesla Model 3 that is in development. Without customers willing to buy the
expensive Model S and X, we would be unable to fund the smaller, more
affordable Model 3 development."

~~~
biot
I was about to quote that myself. While it's true that their luxury models
help fund newer models, it's rather odd to state that in a press release. It
comes across as: "Please pay too much for this vehicle and help subsidize
someone else's future purchase."

~~~
tbabb
It seems a strategic error from a sales perspective. Why call attention to the
fact that the car is expensive? They could have pointed out that the car funds
the Model 3 without highlighting the high price.

~~~
jsight
I get your point, but I think they are going for a slightly different strategy
here. This is the highest trim level for them, produced in limited quantities
and is being sold in part based upon its relatively exclusive nature.

Highlighting the price difference doesn't always hurt luxury products.

------
sandworm101
What matters to me, and some other car guys who don't own banks, is that the
Tesla is capable of doing this regularly and without breaking things. Most
don't realize how delicate supercars are in real life. The Ferarri Enzo
famously could only do full acceleration from a stop three or four times
before needing new clutch plates, even with launch control. Electric motors
are just better at the standing start. That isn't so much Tesla as the nature
of the technology.

But do the race in cold weather, or over any distance (it doesn't go 300+miles
while racing) and things would be very different. So too is the nature of the
tech.

------
cowardlydragon
I find the range improvement more significant.

Anyone have info as to if the power density was increased, or they just
crammed in more cells into the battery?

I'm hoping for a 400 mile range car in two years... for half the price.

Also, does this imply that the battery costs roughly 20,000? or that's with a
"rebate" for recycling your old one?

~~~
ChuckMcM
Better/more batteries, this is a 100kWh car, vs the P90 which is a 90kWh car.
Early battery packs had the cells spaced further apart (presumably to prevent
chain reaction fires) as they have gone along they have made denser battery
packs. I don't know if that is because they have better inter-cell insulation,
a better handle on battery discharge, or additional safety data which helps
them better estimate their margins for error.

------
kylec
I wonder where they're getting 315 miles of range from in the P100D. The P90D
has 270 miles of range, or 3 miles/kWh. For 100kWh it should be 300 miles of
range. At 315 miles of range the P100D is 5% more efficient than the P90D.

If the upcoming 100D is also 5% more efficient than the current 90D, that car
would get somewhere around 343 miles of range.

~~~
lscharen
Probably because the batteries are not discharged to zero, so there is a
"floor".

If the floor is X kWh, then we can solve for X based on these two ranges
assuming the kWh / mile consumed is the same ratio, r.

    
    
        r * (90 - X)  = 270
        r * (100 - X) = 315
    

Solving these two equations gives me X = 30 kWh as a fixed reserve in the
battery packs assuming r = 4.5 mi / kWh.

~~~
mikeash
4.5 miles/kWh is hugely optimistic, and a 30kWh reserve is highly unrealistic.
Tesla's range numbers are based on roughly 3.3 miles/kWh (which is reasonably
realistic) and the floor is maybe 5kWh.

I can't explain the discrepancy, but it's definitely not just the floor.
Either they've made some sort of efficiency improvement, or the difference
between the two battery packs is more than 10kWh and they've just rounded off
the figures.

------
guelo
Motortrend tested it at 2.6 secs which ties it with a few other production
cars in this wikipedia list
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_car...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars_by_acceleration#By_0.E2.80.93100.C2.A0km.2Fh_time_or_0.E2.80.9360_mph_.280.E2.80.9397.C2.A0km.2Fh.29_.283.0_seconds_or_less.29.5Bi.5D)

"Many elements change how fast the car can accelerate to 60 mph. Tires,
elevation above sea level, weight of the driver, equipment used for testing,
and surface of testing track all play a big part in these times."

~~~
nategri
True, however I would point out that elevation should have absolutely no
impact on the performance of electric vehicles.

~~~
etendue
Air density and temperature should both have an influence on the performance
of electric vehicles, and both change with elevation.

~~~
thescriptkiddie
Maybe on a very hot day cooling would become a factor on the track, but for a
single 0-100 run air temperature should be irrelevant. Electric cars don't
need to ingest hundreds of grams per second of air to make high power outputs.
Unless you're referring to the impact of air density on aerodynamic drag,
which should be negligible at such low speeds.

~~~
function_seven
Home runs travel further at Coors Field. Field goals are longer at Mile High.
Sprinters turn in faster times at higher altitudes. You can bet that the air
density will affect vehicle acceleration tests significantly.

~~~
thescriptkiddie
Drag scales with the square of velocity. A 110 mph home run experiences vastly
more drag than a car traveling 30 mph on its way to 60 mph. The ball might fly
18% faster in Denver than it will at sea level, but the car isn't going to
accelerate 18% faster.

~~~
NamTaf
There's a whole raft of other aspects. Temperature will affect traction, for
example. Similarly, the pressure differential between the tyres and the
atmosphere will change their performance similarly to pressurising tyres to a
different pressure at sea level.

There's a whole raft of influences that altitude may have that aren't
immediately apparent. To say it has 'absolutely no impact' is simply wrong.

------
stcredzero
I wonder how well a special version of the Tesla Model S would do on the Top
Gear track, if it reduced its battery weight to the point where it could just
barely complete the course? The battery weight is its biggest problem as a
track car.

~~~
netsharc
Interesting idea, why not make the battery in segments and removable. Weight
affects range too, so why not make the battery as 4 segments, and if you're
just going to have a 30 minute daily commute, you could take out 3 segments
and have enough range while saving weight, and the environment. If you want to
go for a weekend trip you'd plug in the other segments.

Obviously it'd be a bit of a nuisance and probably the segment that is always
in the car will die first, because it'll have the most cycles. Unless the
software controls which segments you can remove and do some wear-levelling.

~~~
stcredzero
The battery is already removable. I could see a Tesla battery swap machine at
a track with lightweight "track batteries."

------
Zikes
I like this commercial for an electric smart car which demonstrates the
importance of acceleration vs top speed:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1iJJZfB7i0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1iJJZfB7i0)

------
infinotize
Well, really, who cares how quick it is? For the average Tesla buyer the speed
upgrade is mostly a novelty. Just because it can accelerate doesn't make it a
hypercar, sportscar, or even sports sedan alternative. What really makes this
option is the range, which is really outstanding.

~~~
njharman
The average Tesla buyer does not pay for ludicris mode, or probably even the
'D' submodel.

~~~
zwily
I think you mean 'P', but yeah. The non-P models are most popular.

------
gordon_freeman
This line interests me here:

>"While the P100D Ludicrous is obviously an expensive vehicle, we want to
emphasize that every sale helps pay for the smaller and much more affordable
Tesla Model 3 that is in development. Without customers willing to buy the
expensive Model S and X, we would be unable to fund the smaller, more
affordable Model 3 development."

IN other words: Hey! they are expensive but please help other people buy
inexpensive cars by buying this expensive one yourself. Bit wierd!

~~~
nickparker
I don't get why everyone is reading this line negatively.

When I read the headline my first thought was "Oh, that'll help with the
cashflow problems for Model 3's ramp up."

Tesla buyers make their choice on strong feature differences. The company puts
very little effort into telling people what to think of their product with
traditional advertising or messaging.

IMO, the primary audience of press releases like this (from Tesla, not
generally) are investors. Consumers will get this news two or three levels of
indirection later ie some journalist compressing and regurgitating this
release, or word of mouth.

~~~
gordon_freeman
Well I can understand your view but looking objectively this message does not
align the price a customer pays with the product itself (Model S P100D in this
case) but rather aligns the value to a different product's prospective
benefits. (Model 3 in this case which would change the world by creating a
sustainable transportation.)

I think a customer naturally would try to align the value of a product to the
product itself. Just think: would anyone pay expensive price for an Honda
Accord if Honda tells:"Buying an expensive Accord would help us fund a new
version of Civic."

~~~
andygates
It aligns to the _brand_ , not the product. And "buying a Tesla" has become a
consumer aspiration, so they're wise to keep milking it.

------
tomcam
_Model S P100D has four doors, seats up to 5 adults plus 2 children_

Could not verify this. Looks like it seats 5, 2 in the front and 3 in the
back. What am I missing?

~~~
goshx
It has the option to add two seats in the "trunk" space. Like so:
[https://s-media-cache-
ak0.pinimg.com/564x/6f/bc/08/6fbc08280...](https://s-media-cache-
ak0.pinimg.com/564x/6f/bc/08/6fbc082806e8c94aaddeac06ae46ffae.jpg)

~~~
exclusiv
That looks like a big liability.

Imagine dad hammers it with the kids belted in a little loose. Their heads
look like they could smash the rear window.

~~~
mikeash
There are a ton of ways to badly injure your kids by being irresponsible in
any car. This doesn't really add anything new there, and the fact that they're
rear-facing and permanently installed in the car should make them a fair bit
safer than typical add-on child seats.

~~~
exclusiv
2.5 seconds 0-60 with the kids in the trunk doesn't add anything new?

Tesla already has liability with the push of "auto-pilot" as a marketing term.
Boats have auto-pilot. Tesla's do not.

~~~
mikeash
Any car that's safe for the road can already maneuver hard enough to injure
unsecured passengers in at least three directions. The rear seats and high
acceleration add one more direction, but also largely subtract the opposing
direction, so it's a wash. You have to accommodate your passengers with how
you drive in any car.

------
spectrum1234
I was hoping this was in regards to speed of production. Especially given
Musk's comments recently about factory output.

------
mrfusion
I wonder how much time they're saving by simply not having to shift gears?
That could be a second right there.

~~~
Godel_unicode
The cars they're competing against largely have two clutch packs, allowing the
shift to take milliseconds.

[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shift_time](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shift_time)

------
mrfusion
I wonder how they can get that much power out of the battery. I'd think they'd
need to use capacitors?

~~~
TheSpiceIsLife
It's possible to draw a _lot_ of current from a lithium battery for very short
periods, as well have pull a lot of current through a conductor for short
periods.

I remember doing the calculations for some of the batteries I used in RC
planes and being surprised the battery was capable of delivering 4kW
continuously for minutes.

~~~
Phlarp
Multi-rotor enthusiast here-- I can confirm this statement! My 5" crafts pull
up to 80 amps at full throttle and a mere 1.3ah 4 cell battery pack can
generally keep up, albeit with some localized heating and voltage sag.

------
frandroid
I want to know what's its range when driven at maximum speed...

~~~
mikeash
You'll achieve the official numbers at around 70MPH in mild weather. The top
speed is a bit over 2x that speed, so you'd use something like 4x more energy
per mile. You'd expect the range at top seed to be _roughly_ 80 miles.

------
philipov
You have got to be kidding me. Tesla seriously just named their car in homage
to Spaceballs? How silly!

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygE01sOhzz0](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygE01sOhzz0)

~~~
spullara
Originally the vehicle models were going to be S, E, X. They changed them to
S, 3, X...

~~~
ctdonath
And the current stylized "E" and "3" are the same symbol.

Seems Ford owns the trademark "Model E", hence the "3".
[http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/03/18/tesla-
motor...](http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/03/18/tesla-motors-incs-
model-3-logo-revealed.aspx)

------
nickpsecurity
A McLaren F1 w/ 2.2 second acceleration isn't considered a production car? Or
the other one that replaced it in Guiness?

~~~
qbrass
Where did you find the McLaren F1 had a 2.2 second acceleration time? Most
citations I could find were in the mid 3 second range.

~~~
nickpsecurity
I know I read it back in 2000. It must have been a misprint given the sources
I'm seeing are saying something different. Thanks for catching that! :)

Btw, as a thanks, here's you one that's still pretty amazing but not
production:

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CtHpt05gLc](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0CtHpt05gLc)

------
dublinben
The original title says "quickest" not "fastest." They're two very different
claims, and only one of them is remotely true here.

~~~
nibs
0-60 is what matters. Top speed is not a bottleneck anymore unless you are
track racing. It has a 0-60 that is comparable to a Bugatti Veyron.

~~~
untog
Eh. What "matters" is pretty debatable when it comes to cars. I very rarely
accelerate from 0-60mph in one single acceleration, same as I rarely reach top
speed.

~~~
jonknee
Most people accelerate a lot more than they take a few laps on a track
though...

~~~
forgetsusername
> _Most people accelerate a lot more than they take a few laps on a track
> though..._

Lap times give a better "all-around" indication of performance: speed,
handling, acceleration.

~~~
jonknee
For production cars top speed doesn't matter, after you get past highway
speeds it is meaningless. Maybe it's me, but I'd rather a car that goes 0-60
really fast and can only go 100MPH than one that goes 0-60 slower but can go
200MPH.

~~~
forgetsusername
And I'd like one that can corner on rails, which is arguably more valuable
than both speed _and_ acceleration (after all, acceleration, after a certain
point, is also useless).

Hence why lap times are an interesting metric.

------
truckle
According to
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_car...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars_by_acceleration)
this puts the Model S on par with the Bugatti Veyron and Porsche 991 Turbo S

------
andys627
While impressive - it would be more impressive in my mind to see the USA
embrace walking, biking, and public transit in a meaningful way - rather than
fetishize the wasteful consumerism that is "ludicrous mode".

------
gist
Owning a new 911 and even paying extra for the sport exhaust noting that there
are people who actually like the sound of the engine as adding to the
experience of speed. (Also the torque curve which I assume with tesla is
somewhat constant). Not to mention the manual transmission which obviously
doesn't exist in an electric car. Driving even a 911 with the PDK isn't the
same experience although performance wise it is better than the manual.

~~~
spullara
You realize that the Tesla is a manual right? There is only 1 gear :)

------
6stringmerc
Wait, whenever I see a performance claim with an asterisk, it kind of makes me
want to read the footnote:

> _" \- Expected value using max power mode and Motor Trend benchmark"_

Oh, expected value? Hm, that's a new one. And for what, a 0-60 time?

I think of quickness a lot differently than a simple drag race. If a Tesla can
can consistently out drag race 0-60 in _actual value_ and then, for grins, lap
the 'Ring faster than a Skyline GT-R, that's dang quick! But expected? Sorry,
I want to groan at that.

~~~
Permit
What do you mean by actual value? There's going to be variance in each run so
I'm assuming they mean expected value as in "average" time.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expected_value)

~~~
FireBeyond
The expected value in this sense means "it's not been verified, this is our
projection".

------
mikehines
Wake me up when I can charge the battery to 100% in 2.5 seconds anywhere.

~~~
ryguytilidie
"I'm not interested unless this is the most innovative thing to ever happen by
an order of magnitude". Okay good luck with life mate.

------
merb
Actually this is no suprise since a electric car doesn't need to convert
mechanical energy back and forth. It only needs to convert the electricity to
mechanical energy once, so that means that the power is near instant (way
higher startup turning moment), while on a gazoline motor it needs to "warm
up". Also some vehicles have multiple motors peer wheel, that is not possible
with a non electric car.

------
Yabood
As far as I know the Nissan GTR is the fastest production car in the world
with 0 to 60 in 2.7s. Tesla with the ludicrous is only 3.0s. I could be wrong.

~~~
kylec
You are wrong
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_car...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars_by_acceleration)

~~~
serge2k
> Tesla Model Truck P100D w/Ludicrous Speed Upgrade

Someone was too eager to edit the wiki page.

oh look, the model is better than a second slower on the 1/4 mile than the
Ferrari/Porsche. Slower than the Audi R8 V10 too.

~~~
ryguytilidie
Just to be clear, its 2016 and you're snarkily attempting to put down an
electric car that costs ~100k and does 0-60 in 2.5 seconds because its a
second slower on the quarter mile than a Ferrari that costs >10x as much and
isn't electric?

sigh.

