DragTimes Straps Tesla Model S P100D With Ludicrous + To Dyno – Video

4 months ago by Eric Loveday 27

Tesla Model S P100D On Dyno

DragTimes just strapped a Tesla Model S P100D with Ludicrous + to the dyno. The results are shocking!

Once on the dyno and strapped down, the Model S P100D was spun up, but the car starting reducing power and throwing some error codes (most modern-day vehicles have various sensors that aren’t happy when the wheels are spinnin’, but no forward motion is occurring).

After sorting those issues out, an all-out run was put down and the results were nothing short of amazing.

The P100D with Ludicrous + mode enabled cranked out 920.37 pound-feet of torque and 588.79 horsepower.

Results

DragTimes notes that state of charge for the Tesla was 88% during the recorded run, which could’ve resulted in slightly lower output figures than if the car was fully charged. Furthermore, no matter how hard they tried, wheel spin was inescapable when torque hit its peak. Therefore, DragTimes estimates that actual torque figures are likely to be a bit higher. Say 950 pound-feet or so!

Video description:

“We dyno test the Tesla Model S P100D with Ludicrous Plus on an AWD Mustang Dyno and the torque numbers it put down are huge!”

Torque and HP Graph

Source: DragTimes

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

27 responses to "DragTimes Straps Tesla Model S P100D With Ludicrous + To Dyno – Video"

  1. SparkEV says:

    920 ftlb is impressive, but considering 2014 SparkEV that cost 1/10 ($15K post subsidy) pumps out 400 ftlbs, it’s not so much. I wish they removed the tires from the picture by directly bolting dyno to the car. That way, we’d know if the figure is traction limited or true power out of the motor.

    1. Nick says:

      If the wheel slipped everytime, it had some traction limit.

      Here’s a list of cars by torque:
      http://www.autosnout.com/Car-Torque-List.php

      As you might expect, is among the most ridiculously expensive super cars in the world.

      Also, we need to tell these petrol heads to include more EVs on this list!

      1. SparkEV says:

        If FWD SparkEV can be measured to 400 ftlb, AWD should be able to measure to 1000 ftlb. (see Engineering explained video on FWD traction limit of 0.4g). The fact that it showed what looks like wheel slip at 45 MPH and way low torque at 30 MPH, I don’t think this dyno run represents the actual.

        It’s too bad they didn’t run it from 0 MPH. Then I can do the analysis like I did with SparkEV to see if that result in 0-60 time of 2.4 sec to see if the run is representative of actual performance.

        http://sparkev.blogspot.com/2016/06/sparkev-performance-analysis.html

        1. Nick says:

          Does the dyno measure the FWD traction limit? I thought the cars were simply strapped down hard? (Would be one more delta between testing and real world)

          Also, Google thinks the Spark EV only puts 327 lb-fts of torque on the road.

          1. SparkEV says:

            If there’s anomaly in measurement, like the dip shown, you can guess it could be due to traction, especially at such high torque.

            As I mentioned earlier, 400 ftlb is for 2014 SparkEV.

            1. Nick says:

              Do you happen to know why the torque number dropped so much on the 2015 Spark EV?

              Also, can you tell the difference between torque at the motor vs torque via gear reduction for a motor with the same HP and low inertia? That’s not intuitive to me.

              1. SparkEV says:

                2014 had 21 kWh of A123 battery. 2015+ has 18.4 kWh of LGChem battery. That’s probably only part of the explanation for reduced motor torque for 2015+ since power is the same for all. Maybe they wanted to play safe with drive shaft?

                You can’t tell lower motor torque geared for same torque at wheels. Only thing that matters is wheel torque after gears.

                For max RPM that’s almost at the top speed, it would have lower top speed for higher gear ratio number. I cover this in my blog post as to what could happen if gear is changed for better acceleration. But SparkEV gearing is so low ratio number that top speed still result in less than half the motor RPM as most other EV, and same top speed is kept the same for all models.

    2. protomech says:

      1. 2014 compliance car not terribly relevant. Why bring it up?
      2. Motor output torque is only part of the picture. BMW i3 is quicker than SparkEV with “only” 184 ft-lb. If you’re going to compare, you need to look at gearing too.

      1. SparkEV says:

        1. It’s even worse that Tesla only pumps out 980 compared to a mere “compliance car”. In fact, it is much more relevant if SparkEV was true compliance only car.

        2. This article is only about dyno measurement of motor, not acceleration. You need to look at horsepower to gauge acceleration.

    3. R.S says:

      Torque on an EV is pretty much pointless. Torque can be geared, power can’t. So one could build a motor that puts out the same power, but halve the torque. It is always RPM*torque (times 2 pi divided by 60..).

      Torque comparisons made sense with petrol engines, which are made to run at low RPM for efficiency. For an electric motor it is relatively pointless.

      1. SparkEV says:

        You have it backwards. Torque is far more relevant metric for EV than gas cars. Most EVs have single speed gear, which translate linearly to horsepower. There’s no clutch or flywheel to store energy, either, which makes torque (aka, horsepower) a single most important metric.

        In gas cars, lack of torque can be made up by revving the engine and letting the flywheel do the “torquing”. I describe such method in my blog post “can-stock-corvette-beat-tesla-p90dl”, not sure if the link will show.

        http://sparkev.blogspot.com/2015/11/can-stock-corvette-beat-tesla-p90dl-in.html

        1. R.S says:

          Torque is not horsepower! Power is torque times 2pi revelations per second. And since no electric motor has a flat torque curve to infinity, torque doesn’t matter at all. Most of the rev band isn’t flat. At some point you reach the maximum voltage the inverter can supply and after that, torque goes down.

          The flat torque curve just happens at the first 3rd, or 4th of the rev band and is only flat, because there is a hard amperage level. If you had some sort of super-super conductor and an super conducting inverter. The torque curve would never be flat.

          1. SparkEV says:

            Point I’m making is HP is linearly related to torque via RPM. With single speed gearbox, that holds true for rear wheel torque and HP, which makes torque very relevant for EV. This is why I was able to do SparkEV performance analysis from torque curve.

            For gas cars, rear wheel torque is related to engine + gearbox as well as how you play the clutch. That makes engine torque practically irrelevant for gas cars.

            This is why it’s impossible to do performance analysis on a gas car. Sure, peak performance using ideal shifting (zero nanosecond) and infinitely reliable clutch can be done, but that doesn’t reflect the real world.

    4. Empire State says:

      The torque measurement is more impressive than both your cost-benefit analysis and your 400/920 ballpark comparison. Have you got a dyno chart based on actual measurement for a Spark EV?

      1. SparkEV says:

        There’s SparkEV torque curve at rear wheels not corrected for gear, unlike this measurement which seem to scale for gear. But I’m not sure where it came from, maybe Chevy? See my blog “sparkev-performance-analysis”, link above.

        I didn’t believe such high motor torque, so that’s why I went through the analysis. If gear ratio is to be believed (3.17), SparkEV motor must produce 400 ftlb (for 2014) to have under 8 second 0-60 MPH acceleration. I describe how I did that in my blog post.

    5. Koenigsegg says:

      Too bad the Spark is atrociously butt ugly!

      1. SparkEV says:

        Ugly or not, you can no longer buy a new one. Hmm. Maybe it’s getting time to write the obit…

  2. 588 hp is 438 kW which cannot be right. Especially since Dragtimes recorded 567 kW of power earlier

    1. ShaunK says:

      Its wheel horsepower, which is inherently lower than the flywheel horsepower estimated by the Vbox. This is also a Mustang chassis dyno, which are notorious for reading lower than other chassis dynos.

    2. R.S says:

      This is how much power makes it to the wheels, the first performance test’S power readings where battery power. So there are the motor and transmission losses amounting to 150kW combined. The dyno might also have a share in it.

  3. R.S says:

    Just for good measure a Hellcat makes about 555hp on a Mustang dyno. So this 588.9 is really impressive!

    1. SparkEV says:

      Perhaps so, but I was hoping to see bigger number, over 1000 ft-lb. That’s why I think traction should be removed from the picture. Being second fiddle to Bugatti feels kind of icky.

  4. unlucky says:

    Comparing torque figures between gas and electric drive is pretty useless. Where do you measure it? A Bolt has a 7:1 reduction gear, that means the motor actually produces very little torque, it just appears at the gearbox. Add in that ICE cars usually have multiple gearings selectable in the gearbox and you find you have completely useless figures for comparison. And different wheel diameters and final drives was already confounding things before.

    We should switch to thrust at the wheels as the new comparison figure.

    1. SparkEV says:

      Bolt’s 266 ft-lb at motor is not little torque. If you sit on a foot long torque wrench at the motor shaft, you’d have to weigh 266 lb to stop it from rotating. Combined with gear ratio of 7, it would have 1860 ft-lb at the wheel.

      Of course, such high torque figures are from GM (7 for Bolt, 3 for SparkEV) and Tesla (about 7). Many other EV have gear ratio of about 9, which would make for less torque. Still, they are no slouch.

  5. speculawyer says:

    I’d be REAL CAREFUL strapping that thing to a dyno. That could be really dangerous if not done properly and/or if the dyno was unable to handle the massive output of the Tesla.

    1. Koenigsegg says:

      Judging by the video, i’m pretty sure they were car-ful, considering it didn’t go flying off

  6. floydboy says:

    They were smart not to punch it from zero!

Leave a Reply