RE: Tesla launches 691hp Model S P85D

RE: Tesla launches 691hp Model S P85D

Friday 10th October 2014

Tesla launches 691hp Model S P85D

Latest EV supersaloon hits 60mph as fast as a McLaren F1 with new dual-motor tech and 4WD



An all-electric saloon that can match a McLaren F1 to 60mph for less than £100K has been announced by Tesla. Elon Musk revealed the new Model S P85D at an event in the USA. 'D' stands for 'Dual Motor' and signifies that there's an extra electric motor in the front, driving the front wheels, in addition to the rear motor.

P85+ was hardly slow for most!
P85+ was hardly slow for most!
The new front engine adds 221hp to the 470hp rear motor, making a total of 691hp. The P85D's peak torque figure is equally devastating - no less than 687lb ft, split 244lb ft front, 443lb ft rear.

Tesla is claiming a 0-60mph time of 3.2 seconds for the P85D - succeeding in its target of equalling the McLaren F1 in the 0-60 dash. It's also a full second faster than the P85+, which it now replaces. The instantaneous availability of torque means the P85D can pull acceleration of 1g from standstill, says Tesla.

The top speed is also significantly better at 155mph, up from 130mph for the P85. And although overall weight is up by 132kg to a whopping 2,239kg, that weight is perfectly distributed 50/50 front/rear. The car's overall range suffers slightly, dropping to 275 miles from the current 285 miles.

Range only slightly affected by added performance
Range only slightly affected by added performance
Four by phwoar
Just as significant as the power boost is the news that all four wheels are driven, using a set-up claimed to be a world first. Onboard computers can switch the torque between the front and rear axles, and between the left and right wheels, in milliseconds. As much as 100 per cent of the torque can go to either axle (and obviously as little as zero), depending on grip levels. The loss of boot space up front is described as "minimal."

Four-wheel drive versions of the 60 and regular 85 Model S versions will also be available, offering increased performance and range over their rear-drive counterparts (which remain on sale). Both the 60D and 85D feature smaller electric motors than the P85D front and rear. With 188hp each they make a total of 376hp and torque of 362lb ft.

The new 60D does 0-60 in 5.7 seconds (versus 5.9 in the RWD 60), has a slightly higher top speed of 125mph and a range of 225 miles at a constant 65mph (up from 215 miles). The 85D, meanwhile, sprints to 60mph in 5.2 seconds (compared to 5.4), maxes out some 30mph higher at 155mph and has a range of 295 miles (10 miles more than the 2WD Model S 85).

D replaces P85+; other 4WD models added too
D replaces P85+; other 4WD models added too
How much and when?
You can place your order for the P85D in the UK today. The new model immediately supplants the existing P85+, with existing orders of the P85+ being honoured (although owners will be offered the chance to upgrade to P85D spec if they wish).

Official prices haven't been released for the UK yet. However, in the USA, the premium over the existing P85+ is $14,000 (£8,700), making the likely entry price for a P85D in the UK around the £93,000 mark. The price premium for Dual Motor versions of the 60 and 85 is $4,000 (£2,500). Deliveries will start in North America in December 2014, with UK right-hand drive examples following in spring 2015.

And in other Tesla news...
In the last two weeks, Tesla has been fitting every new car coming out of the factory with 'Autopilot' hardware - including a long-range camera, ultrasonic sensors and GPS - which opens up the prospect of self-driving features for the Model S.

While completely autonomous driving isn't in the plan (yet), currently there's software for speed limit recognition and lane assist. A self-parking function, where you get out of the car and let it park itself in your garage, is a feature that will be added soon.

Tesla has also revealed it's on target to exceed 35,000 sales of the Model S in 2014, with factory capacity now upped to 1,000 per week. And its SUV, the Model X (due in spring 2015), is set to use the same Dual Motor technology as the Model S.

Author
Discussion

GGX

Original Poster:

4 posts

113 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Not sure ranges that you give in the article are correct.

If you look on Tesla's US website, seems that range on 80 has improved from 265 miles to 295 miles on 80D.

On P85 range has also improved by 10 miles to 275 miles on P85D from 265 miles.

Seems a win/win with improved performance and better range. Just the small matter of cost to consider...

TWPC

838 posts

160 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
WOW!

Sounds amazing and a great example of something that I won't be able to buy but am very glad exists.

vtecyo

2,122 posts

128 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Looks nice. Like a Maserati Granturismo and a Jaguar XF have melted together.

kambites

67,461 posts

220 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
I wonder if there's space in there to fit two more motors for another £16k. 1382bhp sounds like enough.

gigglebug

2,611 posts

121 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
GGX - Seems a win/win with improved performance and better range. Just the small matter of cost to consider...

I wouldn't have thought an extra 9 grand or so would make a difference to a potential customer, that sort of money would be spent on options anyway? Where else could you get that much of a performance gain for such little outlay especially on the lower models? 2.5K for an extra 190 odd bhp and four wheel drive - bargain!! The price of an upgraded stereo in a lot of cars now-a-days!!

thelawnet

1,539 posts

154 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
It's nice, though of course the real CO2/km is actually about the same as a BMW X5 4.4l v8 petrol, given the UK's 459 g CO2/kWh mix http://www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime And higher than pretty much any diesel vehicle on the market.

But yeah rich people can buy these to drive round a track I guess. Although I don't think the lap times will reflect the headline 0-60 figure.

Aeroresh

1,429 posts

231 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Thats finally swung it for me. Im in, now where's my cheque book smile

Hurricane52

279 posts

122 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
I can't get my head round this. My late mum used to say it costs 10p in electricity every time I opened the fridge door and that was back in the seventies when things were cheap and crap. Now things are expensive and crap, electricity is still at the heart of Western civilisation. Surely these great big brains like Microsoft's media savvy CEO who buy these kind of cars don't own power stations as well? Perhaps they have discovered generator bushes and have planted them across the US?

If it creates jobs I guess it's defensible, but let's be honest, it's greenwash.

It won't save the planet. The planet will recover. If we are honest, it's humans we're trying to save.

I'd rather cycle or walk into town all week so I can use my petrol allocation to drive my Maserati at the weekend. I can use my electricity allocation to charge my iPad and I can keep my house warm by maintaining it properly.

I do miss my mum, she used to knit us Balaclavas to sleep in so she could afford to drive funky sports-cars.

GGX

Original Poster:

4 posts

113 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
thelawnet said:
It's nice, though of course the real CO2/km is actually about the same as a BMW X5 4.4l v8 petrol, given the UK's 459 g CO2/kWh mix http://www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime And higher than pretty much any diesel vehicle on the market.

But yeah rich people can buy these to drive round a track I guess. Although I don't think the lap times will reflect the headline 0-60 figure.
But the CO2 number you give above is effectively a wheel to well calculation, taking into account the CO2 output from producing the electricity.

If you are going to compare the Tesla to ICE, you need to take into consideration the CO2 produced in extracting the oil, followed by refining and distribution, do you not?


type111

10 posts

174 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
thelawnet said:
It's nice, though of course the real CO2/km is actually about the same as a BMW X5 4.4l v8 petrol, given the UK's 459 g CO2/kWh mix http://www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime And higher than pretty much any diesel vehicle on the market.
Is it? I'm rubbish at maths, but...
85kWh battery x 459 g/kWh - 39015g CO2 for a charge
Range of 275 miles from a charge: 442 km
39015g/442 km = 88g/km

But I don't think CO2 is really the point!

bencollins

3,486 posts

204 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
cool Im in

big_rob_sydney

3,394 posts

193 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Platform is getting comparable results, putting aside cost for the minute.

Wonder how things will look when battery tech improves. Seems like the start of a very promising direction, although for now, I'm not that interested.

Make it half the weight, and half the price, and I'd be tempted.

FlossyThePig

4,083 posts

242 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Chatting to my wealthy brother last week. He said he had taken his name off the Tesla waiting list because "Why pay so much money for a car that can be mistaken for a Mondeo?"

He also rejected the BMW i8 because he could't face the embarrassment of being seen trying to get out of a low car with high sills (apparently he was unimpressed by the sills on the McLaren as well).

Oh to have those problems.

dvs_dave

8,581 posts

224 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Wow! Incredible. Almost 700hp is simply insane. Having given a P85+ a good blast and being thoroughly impressed by its performance, this must be insane. 1g of forward acceleration is brutal and physically unpleasant....but very very cool!

Putting my sensible hat on though, I think their efforts would have been better spent adding greater battery capacity instead of even more power. An ability to give a 500 mile range on a full charge would put the whole range argument to bed.

AnotherClarkey

3,589 posts

188 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
thelawnet said:
It's nice, though of course the real CO2/km is actually about the same as a BMW X5 4.4l v8 petrol, given the UK's 459 g CO2/kWh mix http://www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime And higher than pretty much any diesel vehicle on the market.

But yeah rich people can buy these to drive round a track I guess. Although I don't think the lap times will reflect the headline 0-60 figure.
How do you work that out?

thejpster

227 posts

161 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Better yet, the electricity used in oil refining is all from coal fired power plants because they use too much to be connected to the grid.

Last I checked you needed to add about 52% to a car's nominal CO2 figure to account for refining. And that's still ignoring extraction and transportation.

But even if it ran on baby seals, I'd have one in a heartbeat if I could. It's just brilliant.

Shoshi

29 posts

132 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
thelawnet said:
It's nice, though of course the real CO2/km is actually about the same as a BMW X5 4.4l v8 petrol, given the UK's 459 g CO2/kWh mix http://www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime And higher than pretty much any diesel vehicle on the market.

But yeah rich people can buy these to drive round a track I guess. Although I don't think the lap times will reflect the headline 0-60 figure.
You are taking the slightest bit of information and applying it incorrectly to come up with this figure. Do more research and you will see that it is not at all correct. Also the Model S is not a track car. It is a Performance luxury sedan like an AMG Mercedes. I mean you can track it, but that is not the point.

underphil

1,245 posts

209 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
thelawnet said:
It's nice, though of course the real CO2/km is actually about the same as a BMW X5 4.4l v8 petrol, given the UK's 459 g CO2/kWh mix http://www.ukenergywatch.org/Electricity/Realtime And higher than pretty much any diesel vehicle on the market.

But yeah rich people can buy these to drive round a track I guess. Although I don't think the lap times will reflect the headline 0-60 figure.
It uses 238 W/h per km, then that's 104 g co2 / km ?



Edited by underphil on Friday 10th October 19:31

humblesabot

55 posts

126 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
FlossyThePig said:
Chatting to my wealthy brother last week. He said he had taken his name off the Tesla waiting list because "Why pay so much money for a car that can be mistaken for a Mondeo?"

He also rejected the BMW i8 because he could't face the embarrassment of being seen trying to get out of a low car with high sills (apparently he was unimpressed by the sills on the McLaren as well).

Oh to have those problems.
Complaining about sills? Clearly not up to performance car ownership!
Also, he must never have seen a Model S in person. They look quite striking actually. You'd never confuse one with a Mondeo.

MikeGalos

261 posts

283 months

Friday 10th October 2014
quotequote all
Sounds like all the people complaining about "real CO2 emissions" should actually be complaining not about the Tesla but about the lack of upgrading the UK's power grid to less damaging electric production. Where I live over 90% of our electricity is from hydroelectric with no CO2 emissions and the rest have been modernized to drop CO2 until they're phased out.