Dec 23, 2014
Aargau Software update to achieve max efficiency (going to full idle on 2nd motor) is not out yet. Range of P85D should then closely match P85+.
85D has higher range than 85 when using the same tires. Sport tires have better handling, but 3% to 5% range impact. Tradeoff is worth it
First:
Elon Musk on Twitter:
and second:
Elon Musk on Twitter:�
Dec 23, 2014
SBR How can they release EPA numbers and sell these cars without this software... This seems ridiculous that it was not clearly communicated�
Dec 23, 2014
randompersonx As long as the software is out soon it shouldn't really matter.
Tesla thinks of itself more as a Technology company than a Car company. It's completely normal for tech companies to ship out products with known buggy software when they plan to push out an update very shortly after release ... This allows product to hit the street fast, and developers a little bit of extra time to get things right. This happens with Apple iPhones, too.
Truth is, if this is the biggest problem, having reduced range for a couple of weeks is not the end of the world -- as long as Tesla pushes the update quickly.�
Dec 23, 2014
breser Because the software is not part of the vehicle configuration. The vehicle configuration that the EPA requires retesting for includes things like the motor, transmission, weight of the car, etc... None of the factors for the vehicle configuration have been updated to deal with battery electric vehicles. None of them talk about software at all, which isn't surprising since as far as I can tell Tesla is the only automaker that can update the software over-the-air that impacts driving functionality. So not only has the rules on mileage not caught up with Electric Vehicles completely, it certainly hasn't caught up with the software industry providing constant updates.
Another point that I'll make here is that Tesla does not have to even use a production vehicle as the test article. The test procedures allow them to use a prototype vehicle. As long as the prototype vehicle matches the production vehicle configuration that's fine. So I see no reason they can't use prototype software.�
Dec 23, 2014
Aargau BTW, I drove from Silicon Valley to the foothills of the Sierras in the P85D. It was damn fun zipping past all the other performance cars, even if the range wasn't as high as the prior versions of the Model S.�
Dec 23, 2014
jkliu47 Does this then mean that the same sw upgrade would 'increase' the range of an 85D over a standard 85?�
Dec 23, 2014
bluenation ...that still doesnt change the fact that tesla is selling an unfinished product (software wise).
imagine if another car company pulled this, many of you would rightly jeer that move...�
Dec 23, 2014
Krugerrand You mean like selling cars with known defective ignition switches?�
Dec 23, 2014
mspohr Software is never finished.
If you want predictable, buy a Buick.�
Dec 23, 2014
omarsultan +1
Other car companies will tell you to buy the new model which comes with bug fixes and new features.�
Dec 23, 2014
RyanT Yes, I'm sure. They mentioned the increased efficiency twice with the latest being in the last tweet. They've have to have been testing them with only motor actively driving the cars. It sounds like when it's just running one motor it's more efficient. On the order page it says it uses 2 smaller motors. It sounds like the software to manage the transitions between 2 to 4 wheel modes needs to be finished.
I'm interested to see the numbers for the s85d. It sounds like the p85d's sport and insane modes are using both motors all the time. When they give them the normal mode that's probably going to be more similar to the s85d's drive mode.�
Dec 23, 2014
tdiggity Do the EPA numbers that are out now not reflect what is in the software right now?
Or is Elon saying that a sw upgrade will increase the EPA numbers?�
Dec 24, 2014
Rheazombi I'm guessing because those other car companies don't have OTA updates.�
Dec 24, 2014
Firewired Isn't that one of the beauties of owning a Tesla. It is always unfinished. It is always being improved. No other car company does that. Took delivery yesterday. Loving the car. Will happily wait for potential mileage improvements, happy to wait until the seats are near perfect.�
Dec 24, 2014
SBR When I picked up my car the EPA on the sticker was advertised to be the same as the p85. Data clearly shows it isn't.
i personally don't cRe what car they used to get the EPA numbers but it's clear the EPA numbers don't match what is really happening.
This is fraud. It is also means I likely won't be able to make the 200 mile trip to Houston next week until the software release is made. No body should be putting up with this bull after paying so much for the car. They should be honest and forthcoming and not leave it to customers to guess. Their communication is extremely poor. This is no longer a start up company, or a small company. These sort of things are inexcusable...
�
Dec 24, 2014
randompersonx The smiley face is golden.
In any event, I agree that the communication is terrible and inexcusable, but as an computer engineer, I do think the concept of releasing hardware without finished software is completely normal elsewhere in the tech world, but it's obviously new to the car world. Tesla should have set expectations accordingly.�
Dec 24, 2014
scaesare Here's the mindset that I suggest folks need to get in with regard to a company like Tesla: They are releasing what they can, when they can. They do not artificially hold back features (software or hardware), for some specific model or milestone.
What makes this difficult for some people is that they are much more open and communicative than other car companies about what they are doing, or plan to do. You are, in effect, "seeing in to" their development timeline. Other companies face the very same issues, you just are in the dark and never hear about them while you wait longer.
Thus there's the tendency to set your own expectation, which may not match what they are able to accomplish.
Example: I takes 2 months each to complete the development, test, and implementation each of the three modes, and they only have the resources to do it serially.. The hardware becomes ready in month four of the development cycle. You have two choices:
1) Release the car with 2 of the three modes enabled, and update with the final mode 2 months later.
2) Hold the car back for 2 months until the final mode can be added.
In either case, you aren't going to get the final mode any sooner. But with option number one, you DO get your car and all the other completed goodies sooner.
You can have option #2 if you want: just hold off on buying your car... I'll take option number #1�
Dec 24, 2014
sandpiper Sure... but FFS, they should let us know what they're doing... in advance. I came close to cancelling my order because the range really matters quite a lot to me. A reduction of 15% from the P85 range was just not going to cut it. A simple post on their blog, a note to the DSs to pass along, or an individual email to all of the buyers would all have worked fine.
It's like the left hand didn't know what the right was doing. The engineering crews probably withheld the "normal mode" for very good reason, assuming that it was up to marketing to tell the customers. But the marketing group didn't even seem to know that it had happened. And maybe that is exactly how it came to pass. I can imagine EM's puzzled reaction after hearing about all of the gnashing on the internet from the first P85D recipients. And once he found out that "normal" was disabled but nobody mentioned it to the customer, I suspect that he went rather "Steve Jobs" on a few folks.
If you ever read some of the "employee reviews" on the web from Tesla employees, it's clearly a chaotic company at the moment.�
Dec 24, 2014
jerry33 Why do you think you won't be able to go 200 miles?�
Dec 24, 2014
NOLA_Mike Plus, isn't it just about as easy to detour through Columbus and hit the supercharger?�
Dec 24, 2014
scaesare More communication & expectation never hurts.
But this is the point I had qouted and was responding to: "...that still doesnt change the fact that tesla is selling an unfinished product (software wise)."
My premise is that one needs to get in the mindset of iterative releases of functionality.�
Dec 24, 2014
dhanson865 If range is your primary concern you should have ordered a S85D instead of a P85D.
If you are going to tool around in the fastest production sedan on the planet don't complain about a couple of miles range lost.
You could save more than the few miles difference just pulling your foot up off that long skinny pedal on the right. :wink:�
Dec 24, 2014
dennis It is an engineering-driven company, with an engineer as CEO. In these companies, marketing always plays second fiddle. They know that if it comes down to a decision between engineering and marketing, engineering will win 90+% of the time.
Every company growing as fast as Tesla is chaotic inside. The average employee has probably been in their current job less than 6 months. But as one CEO I worked for said after the growth slowed and the company was dealing with reining in costs, "I've known high growth and low growth, and high growth is better."�
Dec 24, 2014
sandpiper I thought about that! But the S85D (supposedly) was only marginally better and so I succumbed to call of the 'P'. :biggrin: I'm quite happy as long as it does as well as the old P85.�
Dec 24, 2014
jcaspar Check out this 6 mo review on the i3 to see a car not ready for release. You can't even fast charge it yet!
And what about all the Honda Fits that had to be recalled TWICE due to spontaneous fires and as Honda did not have the parts to repair them, suggested you don't park them in your garage so when they caught on fire it wouldn't burn down your house!!�
Dec 24, 2014
DPDsModelS What is the range of the P85+ that the D is expected to match after the software update?�
Dec 24, 2014
403portside Wrong answer. Tesla marketed the P85D to have better range than the P85+. Every other excuse in their favor (well there are two motors, it does 0-60 in 3.2 secs, etc etc) isn't relevant here. Of course we are smart enough to be skeptical of a faster, heavier car with an extra motor being less efficient, but when Elon Musk stands up on stage and basically says they've accomplished a rare feat, opens the site up for people to plunk down their hard earned money, forgive us for believing him.�
Dec 24, 2014
commasign No one had it worse than the early owners of the RAV4 EV (current generation).�
Dec 24, 2014
SteveG3 First, if they marketed the P85D as better range than the P85+ you clearly have a valid point. Though I've not seen that from Tesla, I definitely could have missed something.
Even if they never made any explicit P85D to P85+ comments, I think you have a valid point to an extent (and, like yourself, I think telling someone "well, you should have ordered the 85D" is missing the point)... watching the video of Musk on the stage on 10/9 he said that the dual motor achieved better efficiency than the rear motor Model S. Given that the RWD Model S has 380 HP and the coming 85D has 376 HP but Tesla still says better range, essentially holding power constant, dual motor seems to be more efficient than RWD in the Model S. When you go from P85 to P85D you are changing more than rear wheel drive to dual motor, you are also very substantially changing performance. I don't remember what the HP of the P85 was, but I'm pretty sure the P85D has over 200 more horsepower. Executing this second objective clearly involved more changes than rear motor to dual motor... so with multiple substantial variables changed, apparently the net impact to efficiency and range is a wash for the P85D compared to the P85+.
That said, I think what was said at the "D" event left room for misleading implications, even if the statement was technically correct, and I think Tesla could have done better than that (which is why I'm with you re not telling the guy who ordered the P85D "you should have ordered an 85D). So I agree your point is valid to an extent. In my view, it would have been better to say right from first night something like... the 85D will have the best range and efficiency of any Tesla, and the P85D a big leap forward in performance (matching McClaren...), and what would have been lost efficiency for all that power is made up for by the added efficiency of the dual motor format. Like the rest of us Tesla always has room for improvement, and you've found one such area.
Tesla Unveils Dual Motor and Autopilot - YouTube�
Dec 24, 2014
AWDtsla But it will be fixed. If it was another car company it will always be broken. That's how software works.�
Dec 24, 2014
403portside Agreed. Well said.�
Dec 24, 2014
AWDtsla You guys have no idea what you're talking about. Wait for the the software updates and final EPA evaluations to be done.
If you don't like it, BMW has some software based on Windows 95 they'd like to sell you.�
Dec 24, 2014
SteveG3 AWDtsla,
fwiw, I've been repeatedly saying the past few weeks (including in that last comment) that there's every reason to believe Tesla has improved efficiency, and that the 85D will be the most efficient Model S (I've even suggested in the past couple of days that the EPA numbers might not be final pending the improvement Elon referred to in his tweet yesterday).
At the same time, I think what Tesla presented on stage in early October left room for misleading implications. As I wrote, Tesla can always improve as is the case for all of us (myself included). Pointing this out does not equal a lack of appreciation of Tesla, Musk, etc (or being undeserving of their products, as move on to BMW comment suggests). As it happens, when asked about success, consistently, Elon Musk mentions two things... one is honest feedback from people who have your well-being in mind. There have been at least three occasions since 2012 where Tesla basically got something wrong publicly AND fixed it, precisely because they are open to honest feedback.�
Dec 24, 2014
AWDtsla �A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds, adored by little statesmen and philosophers and divines. With consistency a great soul has simply nothing to do. He may as well concern himself with his shadow on the wall. Speak what you think now in hard words, and to-morrow speak what to-morrow thinks in hard words again, though it contradict every thing you said to-day. � 'Ah, so you shall be sure to be misunderstood.' � Is it so bad, then, to be misunderstood? Pythagoras was misunderstood, and Socrates, and Jesus, and Luther, and Copernicus, and Galileo, and Newton, and every pure and wise spirit that ever took flesh. To be great is to be misunderstood.�
? Ralph Waldo Emerson, Self-Reliance�
Dec 24, 2014
SteveG3 two people, two views, no worries�
Dec 24, 2014
qwk While Tesla's software is much better than MS, it still isn't going to magically fix hardware limitations. Anyone that thinks otherwise is only kidding themselves. Remember the vampire drain? Yep, my car still loses 7 miles overnight when it's cold. The software just reports it differently.�
Dec 24, 2014
3mp_kwh plus 1�
Dec 24, 2014
bluenation nah, i mean like selling a car without the promised boost in efficiency and range.
neither is the car.�
Dec 24, 2014
scottf200 So you expected this max range and have not factored in future battery degradation? Something is off in your complaining or thinking/expectations/understanding.�
Dec 24, 2014
AWDtsla New firmware on Christmas Eve? : teslamotors
go test it out...�
Dec 25, 2014
mspohr 20 hardware changes each week... Continuous improvement.�
Dec 25, 2014
sigurdi You can ask byers of E-Golf with heat pump what they prefere. VW hold back delivery of all the cars for the last 4 months, because possible problems with heat pump.
The final solution looks like a software utdate at the dealer before delivery.
This 4 months the byers could have used the car, instead of waiting with no information from VW. :-(�
Dec 25, 2014
Krugerrand So same thing. Just change a couple words in the sentence: Oh, you mean selling a car with a 'promised' working ignition switch?�
Dec 25, 2014
sandpiper Not sure how this is so complex. I considered the reduction in range expected from weather factors, degradation, speed and driving habits. Given all of that, I'm quite okay with the max new range that the P85 provides. I'm not okay with 10% less.
Given that Tesla promoted a slight increase in range through the awd gearing arrangement, I think my expectations are pretty reasonable. And I think a lot of others feel similarly.�
Dec 25, 2014
lolachampcar I'm simple and it seems rather obvious to me. I know what 40K miles of average W-Hr/mile looks like on my cars. I could easily drive the PD for two days and know exactly where I stand - city and highway. If I can do it, Tesla can.
We all know how special the PD is so there is no need to over hype it. In fact, there is every reason in the world to under hype it. Given that the car is revolutionary on performance alone Tesla only exposes itself to negative sentiment and press if it does not do exactly what they say it will do on day one with respect to range. Given what was advertised, I expect my PD to do slightly worse than my P+ in the city and slightly better on the highway. If this is not the case (highway), there really is no excuse given Tesla knew before they shipped. Not saying so opens the company up to a whole bunch of criticism significantly negating the positives of the PD and all the press that came with the car.�
Dec 25, 2014
dsm363 Agree. Tesla played up the fact that it is more efficient at highway speeds of 65mph so that part should be true. They didn't talk about EPA range.�
Dec 25, 2014
403portside Agree with all of this. So, has anyone contacted ownership or Jerome and are you getting any answers? I plan to ask them, simply -- "please explain how it is that a) the P85D can achieve 285 miles on a single charge and b) why is it not the case that the P85D is more efficient than the P85, as you and your sales team touted?"�
Dec 25, 2014
darthy001 Could not agree more. The added highway-range was the last selling point for me justifying for myself I could order this car instead of the normal D. I need at least the same range as the P85+, but the promise of more range sealed the deal for me personally.
In my mind there is _no_ doubt whatsoever that Elon was speaking about both the P85D and the standard D when the infamous rant about adding awd while getting more efficient at the same time was made at the D-event.
If Tesla/Elon now starts backtracking and playing wordgames I will end up feeling cheated and taken for a fool. We have even sold our family car in wait of the P85D so its not easy to just cancel or reorder a standard D either. Not to forget that who can now guarrantee that the standard D will even be more efficient!?
I'm clinging to a small hope that a magical normal-mode will appear, but that hope is getting slimmer by each hour and each report from new owners in US/Canada:crying:
Glad I'm not a stockholder when the press starts picking up on this soon.�
Dec 25, 2014
lolachampcar I've got a note into Tesla awaiting a reply.�
Dec 25, 2014
dennis I know it is a nit, but I don't remember Tesla saying the P85D would have more range. IIRC the numbers on the website (at a constant 65 mph) were:
S85D 295
S85 285
P85D 275
I've tried to use the Internet Archive to verify this but can only get the home page to display correctly and not the Model S Design Studio page that had these numbers.
OTOH, the Monroney sticker on the P85D says MPGe of 94 highway compared to 90 MPGe for the S85. That means Tesla did an EPA test using the same hardware that P85D owners have and some version of the software that achieves better highway MPGe. This is not a marketing number like the above ones but a test conducted under rigid rules, with the results submitted to the government.
I'm waiting to see what the P85D owner experience is with the version of the software that Elon promised to get a real world comparison of P85D efficiency. I hope the team that is working on that software is back to work tomorrow after getting Christmas Day off.�
Dec 25, 2014
darthy001 @dennis Norwegian design studio still shows 460km at 105kph which is indeed 1:1 with 285miles at 65mph. I am 90% sure the US design studio said the same until the epa-numbers popped up.
old 2013 P85-numbers whee originally 440 or 460km at 95kph in the Norwegian design studio. Only have my ipad now so finding the screenshots isnt easy, but they are somewhere on the norwegian forum I am certain.�
Dec 25, 2014
SFOTurtle You mean like every single version of operating software that Apple has ever released for its iPhones and MacBooks (of which I use both and have been very happy with in general despite known bugs)?�
Dec 25, 2014
Krugerrand The expectation of perfection from imperfect humans is always interesting to me.�
Dec 25, 2014
403portside You're saying that expecting to get what you thought you were paying for is a sign of imperfection? Sounds like a sign of rationalism to me.�
Dec 25, 2014
darthy001 @dennis http://www.teslamotors.com/no_NO/forum/forums/strange-mileage-65-mph-changes-order-form�
Dec 25, 2014
Jaff Interesting to a point...then it becomes annoying...(perhaps the whine coming from the front motor...) :wink:
�
Dec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor This appears to be extremely difficult for Tesla. I'm not sure why Tesla is constantly releasing products that are unfinished and incomplete. Yet it continues to claim that it is "production constrained". If you are production constrained and can sell all the cars that you make, would it have killed you to wait a couple of months on the D launch until it was truly ready? It seems like Elon's enthusiasm gets way ahead of reality and there is nobody at Tesla to tell him no, you need to wait.�
Dec 25, 2014
Electrometer After the latest software update my indicated full charge range increased from 242 miles to 251 miles. Today I will do a 100 mile round trip 90% highway, and will be able to compare the energy usage that I experieced in my first 300 miles. I will put the car in range mode, and the sport setting.�
Dec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor Elon said "approach", not match. You are setting the bar too high. P85+ had an EPA range of 265 miles.�
Dec 25, 2014
403portside Before he said 'approach' he said 'exceed'. That's the bar!�
Dec 25, 2014
dennis Thank you for the link. It looks like they have shown 275 and 285 miles as the 65 mph range for the P85D at various times.�
Dec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor I wouldn't email that to Jerome. Don't be accusatory and don't put him on defense. That doesn't seem very professional or courteous, just my opinion.�
Dec 25, 2014
403portside I'm confused. Everyone from Elon down to the multiple sales people I have been talking about 285 miles per charge, being more efficient than the P85, up until recently. On that basis, *many* owners took the incremental $40K hit to upgrade from a P85+.
And you think it's unprofessional to ask them why the discrepancy and lack of communication after thousands of orders and and many confused owners?
Please help me understand what I'm missing.�
Dec 25, 2014
bluenation thats great. i support that.
doesnt change the fact that the promise is yet fulfilled. therefore, unfinished product.
if you want to put tesla cars on the same reliability level as GM cars, thats your choice. As a tesla fan, i hesitate to do that, myself.
look guys, there's a reason people like me keep harping on about unfulfilled promises. If tesla pulls this again with the X, the average SUV buyer (a la soccer moms, and to a lesser extent, dads) is less forgiving than performance sedan enthusiasts.
and if tesla does this again with the 3, the average buyer will also be far less forgiving than even the X buyer.
?�
Dec 25, 2014
dennis The P85D was never claimed to be more efficient than the P85+. The website showed 285 miles range at 65mph for the S85 and 285 miles range (later 275 miles range) at 65mph for the P85D. There wasn't a comparable @65mph number for the P85+. Those who compared 285 @ 65mph to 265 EPA and thought it was a bigger number got confused.�
Dec 25, 2014
Andyw2100 I'm not the one writing to Jerome this time, but if I were, I think it would be possible to ask him in a completely courteous and professional way about the MPGe comparison figures, and whether or not we'll be seeing that increased highway range in the P85D, as we would expect to.�
Dec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor You speak only for yourself, not "many confused owners" and "thousands of orders". You only represent yourself, you do not represent the Tesla community. The "many" owners who took a $40k hit to buy the P85D presumably did so for the performance, not because the P85D offered greater range than the P85/+. I have yet to see a single person state that they purchased the P85D because of its greater range. If you did, ok then, just speak for yourself.
You attract more bees with honey than with vinegar. If you are looking for an answer to a question, I find that it's not usually a good approach to fly into the room with guns blazing and with the presumption that Tesla did something wrong. Just ask your question. Elon never said the P85D specifically would be more efficient or even as efficient as a P85. I don't know where you got that from. Elon said that dual drive is inherently more efficient and will result in comparable range when the motors are optimized, which is apparently what they are in the process of doing now via software. That's the take-away that I remember getting from his statements at the D launch.
I just don't think striking a negative tone is appropriate. That's all. I have had many great communications with Jerome. He is a friend and ally of the ownership community, not an enemy. He steps in to help when there are problems and always makes things right. You reap what you sow.�
Dec 25, 2014
dennis As @breser has pointed out, P85 (and P85+) numbers have never been submitted to the EPA. Since they make up less than 1/3 of the cars delivered, their Monroney stickers carry the numbers from the test conducted for the S85.�
Dec 25, 2014
SteveG3 I very much agree with lolachampcar. No reason to hype. The product is outstanding, so let it be what it is, hype sets you up for criticism and some disappointment with at least some consumers. (Of course, maybe the stress of wondering how a product will be received when you have responsibility for it's success makes this more difficult to see, and a bit of hype becomes tempting).
Just like the original ~lease program, it's turned out that hype is not helping here (with the lease they had an over-the-top savings calculator and presented their choice to peg the car's 3 year resale value to the Mercedes S class as a high standard when it was a low one). Elon repeatedly says one of the two keys he sees to business success is seeking honest feedback from people you trust have your best interests in mind (including what's not working well). Because of this, they dropped the hype from their presentation of the lease program and improved their buyback offer.
I don't think Tesla committed fraud by any means with the "D' announcement (and I don't know of any instance of them explicitly stating comparisons between the P85 and the P85D). In fact, I think it was less of a case of hype than the leasing announcement and in many respects they do a great job in being fair and transparent (i.e. breaking with the rest of the entire auto industry in their fair and transparent pricing of their vehicles in all countries). That said, I think they presented the "D" in a way that left room for misleading implications even as their statements very likely were all technically truthful (as I detailed earlier).�
Dec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor This is the first I've heard of this. I'm pretty sure the P85 EPA sticker reflects an actual EPA test done by Tesla. If not, can you point to a source for this information or an EPA guideline that would exempt the P85/+ from EPA testing based upon number of units delivered? I just don't believe this, sorry.�
Dec 25, 2014
Xenoilphobe if any of you don't like your P85D let me know and I will buy it for $40K Less.
We have some hyper OCD people that really don't understand the the EPA changes their rating criteria on a whim. If you are not comfortable being an early adopter - let other people who understand product development and incremental improvement be the beta testers and then wait to see if you are OK with reviews.
Frankly I dont trust any of the EPA ratings - none have every been anywhere near what the potential of the car could be if driven with care. For example EPA said my Diesel Golf would only get 40 MPG, I could easily get 52 MPG on the highway driving it like i stole it. On the other hand my Ford Fusion Hybrid was rated at over 41 MPG, and I can never get it over 36 unless I drove it to be rear ended. (suspect EPA doesn't want us driving diesels so their test procedures were tweaked to benefit the hybrid).
I'm not confused. 2 motors, more weight, more moving parts, 70% more horsepower and you expect it to be more efficient than the S/P85. I'm not an engineer, but this makes no sense to me...�
Dec 25, 2014
403portside Would highly recommend you spend some time in this thread and others and you will find that MANY owners also expected greater range than their P85, based on what was marketed by Tesla at the time. I agree that performance is likely the primary consideration for most buyers but at the time but that doesn't give Tesla carte blanche to change something fundamental to the value prop of the P85D without engaging in a conversation with owners. Again, spend some time across a few threads in this forum and you'll find owners who are very surprised that range is actually less than their P85. Of course many of these owners still love the car and appreciate the outstanding performance.
I agree that you attract more bees with honey than vinegar. I've helped build/sell two tech companies for over $1.5B combined so I know a thing or two about how to conduct business and influence others
And in that context, I don't think there is anything accusatory in my tone. I'm simply asking questions. I've also had many exchanges with Jerome and have found him to be pleasant and very responsive. But that doesn't mean I won't hold him and Tesla accountable when I'm committing to $250K of Tesla product in a period of 12 months. Tesla reaps the rewards from many owners who made a very fast decision to place an order the night of the announcement because they love the product and brand so much, so I think it's fair they bear responsibility when things go different than expected.�
Dec 25, 2014
dhanson865 You somehow gave the S85 20 extra miles range. The old numbers were
S60 208 miles range 5.9 sec 0-60 120 mph
S85 265 miles range 5.4 sec 0-60 125 mph
S85D 295 miles range 5.2 sec 0-60 155 mph
P85D 275 miles range 3.2 sec 0-60 155 mph�
Dec 25, 2014
AWDtsla
Ahh the difference between people who get how reality works, and a litigious minded "consumer"
i.e.
"Why didn't I get what I paid for, the world owes me something since I have all these dollars, and you better give it to me now"
vs
"We know how the forces of nature work, we're doing everything we can to make something that exploits it, and it is an inherently iterative process"
The latter statement should make everyone hate standard car companies. Because you get this complicated thing with software on it, and you know how terribly they did something and it can be better, but it never ever will be, because they suck. i.e. why is my almost new BMW so stupid? Why does it need a software tool based on windows 95 that barely works to tell it has a new 12V battery in it otherwise it will explode? Why doesn't it ****ing know by itself? It will never ever change, even though it's a few lines of code to make it work *right*. But I'm going to hate on Tesla because software version 5.8.5.4.9 was imperfect, and I just don't want to wait for it to be fixed.�
Dec 25, 2014
gg_got_a_tesla As Lola/Bill was hinting at, what really matters is the effective range for a given real world driving pattern. Not sure I recall any P85/P85+ folks reporting less than about 320 Wh/mile over on the "Lifetime Average Wh/mi" thread over several thousand miles of mixed driving. That converted to range based on a roughly 80 kWh usable capacity on a full charge would amount to no more than 250 miles of range. Now, we didn't drive our PD much before going on vacation, but, are folks doing far worse than 320 Wh/mile with their PDs?!�
Dec 25, 2014
David_Cary If the P85 was tested or the P85+, it would have shown a lower range than the S85 just for the tires. Tesla lumped them all together (as I'm sure they are allowed to) even when the + came out.
So the P models were probably never tested - due to the 1/3 rule.
That is educated conjecture but I fail to see an explanation of how the P's were tested. Since Ps were mostly 21's, there clearly would be a difference. Unless you believe that the initial range was an average of S85 and P85.�
Dec 25, 2014
darthy001 as shown in my link a few posts ago P85D was indeed listed as 285 after a few weeks up from the initial 275.�
Dec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor Okay. I was just making a suggestion. You clearly feel wronged and that's your right. You've built and sold two tech companies worth over $1.5B, congratulations on that. Taking a $40k loss on the purchase of a P85D would surely represent nothing more than a rounding error in your checking account. I'm trying to focus on the positive.
- - - Updated - - -
Lifetime average of my P85 = 295 Wh/mi. It was 292 Wh/mi a month ago before I drove spiritedly during a 1,500 mile road trip.�
Dec 25, 2014
403portside 'Helped build'�
Dec 25, 2014
darthy001 I think wk057 and others are seeing numbers around 380. So a significant decrease in range.�
Dec 25, 2014
dhanson865 It's not the P85D number I was pointing out. Some poeple are claiming the old S85 single motor was listed as 285 and I've never seen that. I saw
S60 208 miles range 5.9 sec 0-60 120 mph
S85 265 miles range 5.4 sec 0-60 125 mph
S85D 295 miles range 5.2 sec 0-60 155 mph
P85D 275 miles range 3.2 sec 0-60 155 mph
I've never seen the single motor S85 with a higher range than the P85D before they took these 65mph numbers down and went with EPA.�
Dec 25, 2014
SteveG3 let's not forget Elon's tweet a couple of days ago that led to this thread being created... whatever efficiency anyone is seeing in the P85D now will be improved later.
Software update to achieve max efficiency (going to full idle on 2nd motor) is not out yet. Range of P85D should then closely match P85+.�
![[?IMG]](https://pbs.twimg.com/profile_images/420314816444502016/xj5TnUsx_bigger.jpeg)
Elon MuskDec 25, 2014
AmpedRealtor New Footnote on P85D Order Page!
Check out this new footnote spotted at the bottom of the Tesla order page... VERY interesting!
�
Dec 25, 2014
PokerBroker Oh boo hoo hoo... Why doesn't my Aventador get 40mpg?�
Dec 25, 2014
AWDtsla Same here. If anyone hates their P85D, I will take it of you hands for you.
This is not a joke, PM me.�
Dec 25, 2014
Johan OK everyone, I've been reading this and all the other P85D threads with a lot of interest.
Here's some lines of thought that I hope all you brilliant minds have some good input on:
1. The Normal mode coming in a software update will give the P85D the same range as a P85+, right? Elon also talks about "idling the other motor". The 85D will have two of the front (small) motors and mainly due to this (+lower weight, however weight is mostly negligible) better highway range. Hence the front motor due to size, gearing or a combination thereof is more efficient at highway speeds, right? So what I don't get is that in the current Sport and Insane modes, where the rear motor isn't "idling" how come range isn't on par with a P85+??? I mean just idling the front motor would mean the car should drive like an RWD P85+, right???
2. Seeing the range people have been getting I think assigning an average of 350 Wh/mile to a P85D is kind and 300 Wh/mile to a P85+ reasonable. So that's 50 Wh/mile more. Going 65 mph for one hours means an additional 3250 Wh = 3,25 kWh gone to something else than propelling the car. It must have been converted to heat right? Likely in the motors right? So are the front and rear motors somehow ina way "working against each other" in Sport and Insane modes???
3. Perhaps idling a motor means supplying it with just enough power to spin without really contributing to going forward where as now the motors are somehow "braking" against each other???
4. Has anyone with a P85D seen any sign of heat build up? (Though 3 kWh in one hour should be no problem to dissipate)?�
Dec 25, 2014
bluenation happy to see that they understand customers are disappointed. great to see this.
for a couple more months, then, the car remains an unfinished product. after that, it becomes what was promised.
i agree, esp. since that time the lambo CEO got on stage and promised fuel economy rivalling the prius�
Dec 25, 2014
breser The numbers have changed several times and I wish I'd saved screenshots of them. What you're posting above was certainly the situation at one point. Way back then I pointed out the the S60 and S85 were EPA numbers and the others didn't say what test methodology was used. Later Tesla updated the page to say at a steady 65 mph to the D numbers and added new numbers for the S60 and S85 at a steady 65 mph. Now those numbers are gone and all the models list EPA numbers.
- - - Updated - - -
The EPA does not change their criteria on a whim. This idea has been perpetuated around this and other forums as though it is a fact. The last significant changes to the mileage/range test procedures happened mid 2011 when the changes for the 2013 model year were adopted and published in final form in the Federal Register. At a minimum a change in the regulations requires following a long procedure that includes public comment and publication in the Federal Register. What does happen is that there are ambiguities in the standards. Technology changes and the standards can not anticipate every change.
It's important to remember that these are laboratory tests. They are designed to be repeatable and consistent tests that can be done across a wide variety of cars. The numbers are there to be compared with other vehicles that you might buy. They are not there to guarantee you a certain efficiency. It is impossible to model each persons driving behavior in an accurate way.
With respect to your Golf and Ford Fusion, you may be unaware but the standards for the EPA tests changed dramatically starting with the 2008 model year. You don't say what year these vehicles were but I wouldn't be surprised if the Golf wasn't from before that. In 2008 they added 3 more drive cycles (cold with the heater, hot with the air conditioner and high speed driving) in an attempt to more accurately model real world experiences. One of the driving reasons for this is that hybrid cars were showing significantly higher mileage than they would get in real world scenarios. Largely because the test was tilted towards low speed city and rural driving and not interestate driving. Hybrids excelled in those conditions, but did worse in the interestate driving that many people actually do now.
With respect to your Ford, that car many have been one of the cars that Ford got in trouble with the EPA for overstating the mileage on. They had multiple vehicles built on the same platform, but with different bodies. The rules as currently written do not consider the body and important factor and as such they can test one body style of a given platform. This meant that some of the vehicles got considerably less mileage because their body style was less aerodynamic. The EPA is currently considering updating what constitutes a required vehicle configuration. Ford made payments to impacted owners (several hundred dollars).
There will never be a perfect rating system.�
Dec 25, 2014
dennis Here are the posts I was referring to:
Range Reduced on Dual Motor Configs? - Page 21
Range Reduced on Dual Motor Configs? - Page 16
Since @breser did this research and not me, I can't cite the original source. But since what is stated is based on thorough research rather than speculation, I believe it.�
Dec 25, 2014
breser I read the Code of Federal Regulations that documents what is required. I was looking to try and understand when Tesla would have to retest, at the time I believed they'd have to re-test every model year. What I found was far different than this. They only have to test a given vehicle configuration once. A vehicle configuration is made up of certain parts such as the engine, transmission, and so on. Any vehicle that shares the same components that make up the vehicle configuration is the same vehicle as far as the EPA is concerned. Those components that make up a vehicle configuration is not in the window sticker requirements (which have been updated for Electric Vehicles). Instead it points at the definitions used in the emission standards, which of course are not oriented toward an electric vehicle whatsoever. In fact the only pieces of a vehicle component that apply to a Model S is the engine (if you presume that is the motor) and the weight. As such from a vehicle configuration standpoint the S85, P85 and P85+ are all the same vehicle. They only differ by an inverter, suspension and wheels (none of which are part of the vehicle configuration as defined by the law). As far as the EPA is concerned these are merely options on the same vehicle. Tesla actually treats this the same way with respect to the resale value guarantee (though going one step further since the S85 is just an option of an S60). The S60 is separate here due to the weight differences and probably Tesla needing to explain the differences between an S60 and S85.
The question then becomes what option have to be on the test vehicle. Again the emission standards determine this. They list some options as being required on the test vehicle if they are offered all (e.g. Air conditioning). But most options are only required if they are expected to be equipped on more than 33% of the vehicles. As long as fewer than 33% of the vehicles have a given option they are not obligated to include it in the test vehicle. Since the P85 and P85+ are just options, as long as the percentage of those vehicles against the whole of S85, P85 and P85+ vehicles doesn't reach 33% then they aren't included on the test vehicle. However, if they would reach those numbers you shouldn't see a separate rating for them, rather you should see the S85 rating lower.
The P85D and the 85D however, each have a different motor configuration, thus (if assuming an engine is equivalent to the motor) each are to be treated as independent vehicle configurations. This explains why Tesla is quoting the test results for the 21" wheel configuration. It's probably safe to assume that more than 33% of the P85D vehicles shipped with 21" wheels. Thus the window sticker shows the results with the 21" wheels, even on cars with 19" wheels. Tesla however, initially published both on their website and has since updated it to show the 250 number with an asterisk saying 21" wheels decrease the range by 3%. My guess would be they got approval from the EPA to do this because it made the comparison on the website misleading since all the other vehicles had 19" wheels. But they still have to use the 21" wheel numbers on the window sticker.
I haven't bothered to cite the links to the CFR sections that define all this. Mostly because it's Christmas afternoon and I don't really want to spend Christmas digging through the CFR to find the proper cites. If you really want them I'll dig them up for you later, but I can assure you this is there. If you want to find it yourself, start with CFR Title 40, Part 600 and follow the references to the other parts of the regulations:
eCFR Code of Federal Regulations�
Dec 25, 2014
jerry33 I never had any trouble making the original hybrid numbers. The real problem was that people focus on the city number (60 mpg) as being what they should get, instead of the combined number (55 mph). Also the Prius was likely the first car that they [meaning purchasers] drove which actually told them what they were getting (whether they wanted to know or not--it shows up in several places). I noticed a big difference in the attitudes of those who had kept logbooks in their previous cars and those who hadn't. Some people were even shocked that they got less mpg in the winter--they really had never paid any attention to it before, even though it happens in every car. Of course, 2% (or 5% or 10%) of 60 looks a lot bigger than 2% of 20.�
Dec 25, 2014
dennis You are mixing EPA numbers (208 and 265) with constant 65 mph numbers (275 and 295). The comparable constant 65mph number for the S85, published previously on the Tesla website, was 285 miles.
Here is a screen shot from when those numbers were still on the Tesla site (thanks @darthy001 for the link):
- - - Updated - - -
Thank you for taking the time to do all of this research. It allows us to deal with facts rather than speculation.�
Dec 25, 2014
Johan Well done breser in bringing clarity to how the EPA tests and what is required from Tesla! I too believe that the 265 EPA number is for an S85 with 19" Continental tires and air suspension.�
Dec 25, 2014
Krugerrand Certainly that's out of context and not the point, but if you like I can pick any car brand and find a model (or 2, or 3) that fits the same scenario some people want to get all up in arms about and pretend it's wholly a Tesla thing.�
Dec 25, 2014
ItsNotAboutTheMoney Not killed, but it would have looked bad. The production issues have held back earnings, so releasing the D and getting some high ASP sales and upgrades is going to keep cash flow under control. Share price isn't such a big deal, but Tesla still needs to get all the cell component manufacturers on board for the Gigafactory. And if you want to sell AWD, the best time is winter.�
Dec 25, 2014
jkliu47 +1!�
Dec 25, 2014
Xenoilphobe Thanks for the clarification. Didn't the EPA just publish numbers for the Tesla at only 90% of the battery potential? My reference to making changes really deals with that specifically. I don't find that to be a fair assessment of long range travel in the Tesla - my numbers are far better (in good weather) and far worse in extreme cold weather.
The Golf did far better than the Fusion on all fronts and if I didn't have HOV benefits - I would have dumped the Fusion. Even with the draconian pollution controls (Tier 2 BIN 5) I would take the Diesel Golf over that Fusion.
If they made a hybrid Diesel, I probably wouldn't own a Tesla today - the Hybrid diesel would be great in the city and great on the highway.
�
Dec 26, 2014
David_Cary No, the 90% rating was a theory as to why the range dropped so much for the P85D. Now that we have some real world numbers, I think the 90% theory is out the window. 90% happened to the 2013 Leaf because it was an average of 80% and 100% charge modes.�
Dec 26, 2014
Johan So anyone care to guess where those extra 50-100 Wh/mile (compared to a RWD Model S) are going (3,25 to 6,5 kWh per hour of going 65 mph)??? We know they're not going towards propelling the car. Also, we know the added weight creates only slightly increased friction, nothing near 50-100 Wh/mile.�
Dec 26, 2014
lolachampcar The question that has me scratching my head is, if Tesla knows the PD has better Wh-Hr/mile efficiency on the highway then they have, and have tested, firmware that drives both motors such that they can achieve that efficiency. If they have it, why not ship it on the first product and avoid this discussion in the first place? If they have based their public statements on modeling and not end configuration testing they would be leaving themselves open to not meeting target. That would seem to be a very high risk path for little to no gain.
BTW Johan, my focus goes where your's does. I really do not care about EPA range and battery charge mile/hour performance. There is no indication that Tesla has changed the battery or the on board chargers. All I really want to see is how the PD performs in the exact same driving regime as my previous P+ and, more specifically, that the PD matches or uses less Wh-Hr/mile on the highway.�
Dec 26, 2014
randompersonx I would guess heat in the inverters and motors. If it is entirely that, the best case scenario is that we see a slight improvement after they figure out how to idle a motor.
The worst case scenario is that the reduced efficiency is due to increased unsprung weight, which may be impossible to fix with software. Does anyone know what a tesla's rotor weighs?�
Dec 26, 2014
sandpiper +1
I find that Tesla's action here borders on incomprehensible, in communications. I'm perhaps more sympathetic on the technical side. I suspect that the Normal mode has not been released because they are having a hard time making it work well. I can imagine that completely cutting out one motor, and then re-activivating it instantly might not function smoothly without a lot of tweaking. They have a lot of operating scenarios to play with. Which motor runs when, based on present speeds, commanded speed change? it may be difficult optimize for efficiency while still providing responsive behaviour that you'd expect from the car. It supposed to be Normal mode, not DOg mode.
I suspect that Elon's comments about efficiency were based on early testing where they discovered that if you run the car at constant speed on the front motor, that it was more efficient than the RWD car. But the real world implementation required to get that theoretical benefit has been tougher than expected.
On the communications side, I wonder if they just don't know what to say. I can imagine them all sitting around the boardroom table. One of the more ballsy folks looks at Elon and say "Well, you told them that range was going up. It's not happening - so what are you going to tell them?" Silence falls across the room.�
Dec 26, 2014
RyanT The tweets on the subject cleared it up for me. It was saying that the P85D is currently running both motors all the time(that's why there's the extra 50-100 Wh/mile). Once they enable switching off one motor it's going to have the same P85+ range, and this makes sense beacuse the p85+ is running one motor. There is nothing inherently less efficient about the P85+ except for when it's running on two motors all the time.
As a software engineer I can see why they took the safe approach with having both motors enabled all the time initially. I'm sure there is some balancing that they need to do when engaging an idle motor i.e. cut 20% power to one smoothly and route 30% to the other for example. They need the correct tune for this so the car doesn't lurch forward.
I expect they will have normal mode available before February and the launch of the 85D as normal mode is probably the only mode the 85D is going to have.�
Dec 26, 2014
lolachampcar Can you imagine what it would have been like to launch the PD saying range is down from the P+ in proportion to performance being up. Six months later, a firmware update comes out and, wham, highway performance is equal to the P+. They would get two rounds of hero time (positive press for the company) for the price of one configuration release.
All the hype at the launch came from raw speed and autopilot with the caviot that the AP functionality would not be available on day one. Spreading the release out across initial, AP and then efficiency would be a triple hit.�
Dec 26, 2014
jerry33 Like many of the complaints that have been on TMC, in six to eight months this will be another non-issue. A few examples of things you no longer hear about, or hear about far less often:
Hill hold (The hill assist is apparently enough to keep most folks happy.)
Windshield fogging
Badly aligned panels
Non-ANSI characters not displaying
Vampire drain (Still not zero, but far reduced from the 14 miles a day.)
Burning
Price of cargo shelf
Weak rear cover
Pano roof rattles and squeaks
HVAC temperature
Upgrade rollouts
Of course there will always be plenty of things to discuss because the Model S is just a car, albeit a great car, and no car is perfect. And yes, Elon gets excited, heck, if I was Elon, I'd be excited too. So far he's (eventually) delivered almost everything he's promised with the exception of lighted visor mirrors.�
Dec 26, 2014
lolachampcar jerry,
I do not think it is a matter of if Tesla will do what they say they will for those of us that have been around for a few rounds. For me, it is the wholly unnecessary self inflicted wound of not making range on day one.
I remember picking up my very first Zero. I scheduled a buddy to drive his truck up the turnpike to pick me up at a toll plaza that was well within the promised range of the bike. I ended up having to stop early and have my bud come get me on the side of the road. None of that affected my use profile for the bike so I was ok but my very first impression of Zero was they did not tell me the truth about range.
Conversely, I did a 220 mile round trip shortly after getting my first P85 which was 80% highway at 70 mph in traffic and 20% stop and go in South Beach. I beat rated range (and the speedometer was dead on - yet another way other EV providers cheat) which impressed me as this was the very first EV provider I have bought from that actually did exactly what they said they would do.
We ole farts know Tesla will get it right but new customers attracted to the brand for performance or AWD reasons start off with a bad taste in their mouths. It is just a shame; that's all.�
Dec 26, 2014
darthy001 That would be so easy to pull off and yet so far of from what they have done now. Now they face lacking range, lacking top speed, lacking autopilot and missing nextgen seats(partially not their fault) instead. At least they got the 0-60times correct:biggrin:
@jerry33 dont really feel most of the items in your list is really relevant here. Current p85Ds are delivered without promised features/speed and range. Your list is mostly of design flaws or convenient unsold features. I honestly dont understand some peoples need to excuse a potential loss of range of 25% as some is seeing.
Tesla messed up. Its as easy as that. No amout of old feelgood stories etc can change that. Personally I could care less about potential new firmware and old history if I'm not able to complete trips that would be possible with the promised range.
Of course Teala can fix this in 1-2-6 or even 18months, but fact remains they have messed up iwith initial cars here. And as lolachampcar wrote it could so easily been avoided.�
Dec 26, 2014
jerry33 At the time the posts were just as adamant as they are with this topic. Yes, I agree Tesla could have handled it better, but they way they've handled it is consistent with how they've handled everything--only now there is no George Blankenship to smooth the process. When I purchased mine I thought I would be getting a car that would normally go 300 miles and than I could go a bit further with careful driving. What I received was a car that normally can go 250 miles and do 300 with careful driving. That's about 25% reduction as well.�
Dec 26, 2014
Johan But this is what I don't get: if say 100Wh each mile is fed in to the "inefficient" motor, how is that not contributing to propelling the car, thereby decreasing the power having to be fed to the "efficient" motor? It's not like either motor is going to be wildly inefficient at any speed/RPM. I stand by my theory that somehow the motors are "working against each other" or at least decreasing each other's efficiency in Sport/Insane mode (without decrease in performance).�
Dec 26, 2014
darthy001 Well, right now it seems like the numbers for the P85D isnt even remotely possible to reach in perfect conditions. So I would say this is far worse. Numbers are way off and more close to 200miles than 285 when doing 65mph. At least judging by wk057 and his numbers so far given his long experience coming directly from a P85.
But even worse, how can "they have done this before" be used as an explanation/excuse? To me it just shows a company with no internal control of communications towards customers, and a company that takes no note of past lessons learned at all.
Right now I am still hopefull they will pull a range-rabbit out of their hats with the magical normal-mode. But if they dont I am afraid its final curtain call for them in Norway at least. Public image here is already very badly scarred after many many cars breaking down with drive unit issues lately.
- - - Updated - - -
very good points, all I can think of is the remote chance that the motors are actually doing some minimal "braking" by having their magnetics fields out of sync constantly front to rear motor. Would be much easier to map with the identical motors for the stamdard D.�
Dec 26, 2014
dennis We do know that Tesla conducted the EPA testing for the PD and achieved 94 MPGe highway and an overall range of 242 miles with 21" wheels, down 6% from an S85 with 21" wheels. That has to be an actual test and not based on modeling.
I believe those figures are the best we can hope to achieve with the revised software when it comes. The current owner experience with the PD indicates that it is not running the same software used in the EPA testing because everyone's highway wh/mi is considerably worse than their S85/P85/P85+.�
Dec 26, 2014
randompersonx This actually sounds like a very reasonable theory on what's going wrong. If you are correct, and the problem can be resolved, not only will range increase, but performance will increase as well.
This would also translate to the motors heating up considerably more than they would otherwise, but as far as I know it's not possible for end users to see the temperatures on the motors.
- - - Updated - - -
It is supposed to be done with an actual car in a lab test -- but given the recent headlines from other automakers posting fake MPG numbers on their Monroney stickers, it is certainly possible that modeling is used to generate these numbers.�
Dec 26, 2014
AmpedRealtor Thank you! That is fantastic information.�
Dec 26, 2014
403portside It's so disappointing that Tesla would market range based on modeling vs anything close to real world range. I would expect better of them. Or at least put in an asterisk so we know. Feels deceptive.�
Dec 26, 2014
dennis That is an absurd accusation. The Kia and Ford misrepresentations were based on how they conducted the tests, not some theoretical numbers obtained through modeling. For example, Ford used only one body style (the most efficient one) in the Cmax case.
Submitting numbers to the EPA that were not based on an actual test would be defrauding the government, and would put Tesla out of business. So some version of the software achieved those numbers. Translating that into a version that meets NVH goals, handles all of the edge cases, etc. is the challenge.�
Dec 26, 2014
randompersonx I did/do not mean to imply fraud., and was unaware of the specifics of how the Ford/Kia misrepresentations happened. But nonetheless, mistakes can happen.�
Dec 26, 2014
403portside A Tesla employee told me that the 285 number was based on modeling. This was a few days ago at the Burlingame center. It should be obvious to everyone, given how real world results are not even in the ballpark of 285, that modeling might have been where the first number came from. Don't see what's absurd about that.�
Dec 26, 2014
dennis @randompersonx's comment was about the EPA test numbers that are on the P85D's Monroney sticker. That is the accusation that I was responding to. Submitting those numbers based on modeling rather than strictly following the EPA test procedures would be fraud.
We don't know if the constant 65 mph numbers were based on modeling or not. Just because some random Tesla employee at an SC says it doesn't make it so, as we have seen many times in the past.�
Dec 26, 2014
403portside True, but given no one is getting in the same ballpark at that 285 number, it doesn't seem steeped in much reality at the moment. Time will tell.�
Dec 26, 2014
wk057 I agree. And currently, after about 800 miles of driving the P85D, I can say that as of right now the P85 is substantially more efficient in all scenarios.
Hopefully this changes if/when this update Elon speaks of actually happens. You know, the update that should have shipped with the car? *sigh*
- - - Updated - - -
btw, for those interested, I posted the data from my 572 mile drive in the P85D here: P85D First long trip, range data, etc... - Page 6�
Không có nhận xét nào:
Đăng nhận xét