Faraday Future FF91 Claims New “Production” Electric Vehicle Record At Pikes Peak

5 months ago by Eric Loveday 22

Faraday Future 91 PPIHC

Faraday Future 91 PPIHC

With a time that was 23 seconds less than it took a Tesla Model S to finish at Pikes Peak last year, Faraday Future says its FF91 now holds the record for a production electric car at Pikes Peak.

Faraday Future landed in 40th place overall in its pre-production FF91, which completed the course in 11:25.082.

Although that’s slow compared to the race winner (Romain Dumas with a time of 9:05.332 in a revised version of the Norma MXX RD Limited) it’s actually 23 seconds less than a slightly modified Tesla Model S P90D managed last year.

Production is a bit of a gray area here. The FF91 isn’t being produced yet and there’s a chance that it will never reach production, so how it claims a record in this category is a bit of a mystery to us. We should further note that the FF91 was backed and supported by Faraday, whereas the Tesla that competed last year had zero support from the automaker.

More background on Faraday’s preparations for Pike Peak here

Below are a few videos of the FF91 at Pikes Peak. We don’t have full video of the complete run just yet though.

The Faraday Future 91 made its debut this past January from CES in Las Vegas.  And on paper, the EV has the right stuff to make a strong run at the course, with 783 kW/1,050 hp on tap, good for a 0-60 mph run in 2.39 seconds.  The FF91 is equipped with a 130 kWh battery, good for 378 miles of EPA-estimated range…so it certainly won’t run out of juice before the top.

Provided it can puts its financial woes behind it, Faraday Future hopes to start deliveries of the FF 91 in late 2018.

Source: PPIHC

Tags: , , , ,

22 responses to "Faraday Future FF91 Claims New “Production” Electric Vehicle Record At Pikes Peak"

  1. John says:

    It’s not a production car unless it was built on a production line. Not a handmade one off…

    This is pure BS.

    1. Brian says:

      I agree with John; hand built low volume is not production. What VIN # car was this?

      Why do green EV cars have to be so damn ugly? I assume the designs need to be flamboyant so other people know they are EVs.

  2. leafowner says:

    Next story please. Until you can buy one – it should net be eligible.

  3. Eric Farrell says:

    I’m curious why so many EV car makers seem to concentrate on “performance”, 0-60 times and other supercar baiting BS.

    Shouldn’t they be focused on the customer who drives an everyday car like a Camry or something instead of a sports car?

    1. John says:

      To an extent they need to counter the decades of the “golf-cart” stereotype. I still get comments when I give people a ride in my Volt like “oh…wow…I thought it would be slower” or “are you sure you can drive this thing on the highway?”

      Tesla is changing that perception…but old opinions die hard.

  4. willzyx says:

    Not production unless it has full, production AND sales ready interior, wiring and exterior. All that stuff puts additional weight, without it, it’s a one-off shell.

  5. William says:

    The Proper term might be better described as “production intent”. This might smooth out the “grey area”, where one would think that a tidy sum of cash, would make this fictitious consumer car available, for an actual person to purchase someday.

  6. AlphaEdge says:

    Anyone beating a Tesla Model S is impressive, regardless if the car is in production or not. This is their car designed for mass production.

    1. Terawatt says:

      Bah. Pikes has corners! The Model S is a very impressive car in several ways, but it’s not a very agile one.

      1. JakeY says:

        Plus the Model S cooling system is not designed for track use.

        The earlier P85+ had better handling due to suspension changes (although disadvantaged by lack of AWD). The later P90D/P100Ds actually are worse in handling because they share the same suspension components as the other Teslas.

        I don’t think Tesla will build a car that is more track worthy until the next Roadster.

    2. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

      “This is their car designed for mass production.”

      No. Just no. It’s a concept car, and nothing more.

      And no car from FF is ever going to be more than that. Every press release from FF makes it painfully obvious that they don’t have the slightest concept of what it takes to actually mass produce a car.

      Here is a reminder of the very real difference between a production-intent concept car and an actual production car (the Chevy Volt):

      1. AlphaEdge says:

        In the end, they designed and built a car that beat Tesla, and that’s impressive.

        1. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

          What’s to be impressed with? The White Zombie EV drag racer has a 0-60 time of 1.8 seconds, and the guy who built it said the original (lead-acid battery) version of the car could be reproduced for less than $19,000. FF spent millions of dollars doing the same. So again, what’s to be impressed with?

          Tesla could easily hand-build a one-off prototype that has more powerful motors and no interior installed to save weight, to beat the Model S’s 0-60 time. So could quite a few other auto makers, large and small. But if Tesla did that, they wouldn’t pretend it’s a “production” car!

          Tesla will be building an actual production car which will beat the Model S’s 0-60 time: The next-gen Roadster. And unlike FF’s stripped-down prototype, it will have an actual interior installed. Also unlike FF, Tesla has an auto assembly plant which can, and does, actually produce cars.

          1. AlphaEdge says:

            Too funny. The Tesla used had a stripped down interior.

            FF followed the rules for the course, and beat Tesla.

  7. unlucky says:

    There’s no real Pikes Peak race anymore now that the entire track is paved.

    1. DJ says:

      Ya, I was wondering that. When did that happen??? I used to like seeing those 4×4’s flying around the corners with dirt flying off over the cliffs but now it’s all paved?

      Hmm, Google said 2011 they were done paving. Man that’s just sad 🙁

  8. James says:

    What a cruel joke, calling Faraday Future a “production car”. Don’t you need a factory to produce cars???

  9. floydboy says:

    Geez, are they doing the ‘production’ vehicle thing again! Dudes, PRODUCE a few!

  10. wavelet says:

    IMO it’s a disservice to the entire EV sector to publish (or repeat others’) obviously false claims. Since the FF91 isn’t a production car (leaving aside the discussion whether it’ll ever be one), INsideEVs shouldn’t be repeating the story.

  11. Pushmi-Pullyu says:

    WTF? Faraday Failure Future is claiming its uncompleted concept car, the one with no interior installed, is a “production car”?

    Well, I can claim to be the one true Galactic Overlord, too. That would be every bit as true! 😀

    Just when you think FF’s claims can’t get any more over then top than they have been in the past… they go and top their own record for dishonesty!

    “Production is a bit of a gray area here. The FF91 isn’t being produced yet…”

    So where’s the gray area? It’s not being produced, period. Furthermore, FF’s concept cars are not even pre-production cars. FF doesn’t have any factory or any production, and it’s pretty clear that it never will. There is no logical way to stretch the term “production car” to include an incomplete concept car.

    That’s a binary, either/or, black-and-white difference. No shades of gray at all.

  12. Murrysville EV says:

    There isn’t the smallest chance this car will reach production in late 2018, or ever.

  13. DL says:

    FF ran in the “Exhibition” class, which is meant for prototype or “pre-production” vehicles.

    Last year the Tesla ran in the “Electric Production” class. The was no such class this year because no one offered such an entry.

Leave a Reply