15 Tesla Model S P100D does 0-60 in 2.28 seconds

Cover for Tesla Model S P100D does 0-60 in 2.28 seconds

Motortrend have published first drive review of the latest revision of Tesla Model S and, as usual, this includes a measured 0-60 time.

No car in Motortrend testing has ever reached 2.3 second threshold and Model S exceeds it with a 2.275 0-60 time.

It is worth noting that Car&Driver, another large American auto publication, has recorded even better, 2.2 second 0-60 time for the Porsche 918 Spyder.

Here is full review by Motortrend.

7m ago by tyler
User avatar

User avatar

saxy  7m ago

During the lightning lap at VIR you can see the car reducing power less than half way through the lap and then as you keep going the less power you can have


User avatar

FastestLaps  7m ago

Just replace Li-ion batteries with lots of supercapacitors and problem solved - no heat... and no range... But maybe enough for 1 lap of Laguna Seca. Probably.

But, of course, even if all heating was eliminated from power source, there would still be some kind of overheating bottleneck in power-electronics that drive the motors.


User avatar

manone  7m ago

Overheating? Battery capacity should be fine for Laguna Seca lap.

batteries can overheat both during fast charge and fast discharge.


User avatar

777Balt  7m ago

BR2+ perhaps time wise 0.5 seconds would be hard to notice, but the difference in G forces in this case would be huge and definitely noticable.


User avatar

FastestLaps  7m ago

Let alone a lap of the ring.... not even Laguna seca

Overheating? Battery capacity should be fine for Laguna Seca lap.


User avatar

BR2+  7m ago

I like the car, I think its fantastic, But im quite tired of hearing the same damn thing every time, 0-60 now 3.0, 0-60 now 2.8, 0-60 now 2.5, etc etc, THATS ALL.

2.3 vs 2.8...Really not huge, Its literally bam..bam, I doubt any of us could really even tell th difference, By the time on car hits 60mph in 2.2s, The other will be at 56mph, Thats not a big gap in any means, Either way, increasing the cars acceleration numbers is just plain stupid, Efficiency, Lighter, And more affordable is the way to go, Im tired of hearing this will do 60 in xxxx time, Thats ALL you hear, Nothing else.

And people are taking this car to the drag strips? Like really? How much fun is just putting your foot down and doing absolutely nothing?..And this car is supposed to b the future, Yet only the rich can afford it, What kind of future is that? And nobody, Weather its Tesla or the buyers, Gives a rats arse how fast this thing is around track, I dont even know why anybody would bring any kind of track into a conversation with this.


User avatar

saxy  7m ago

Let alone a lap of the ring.... not even Laguna seca


User avatar

manone  7m ago

2.28 seconds from 0 to 60, and yet can't do a single Ring lap without batteries overheating. More a dragster than a sport car.

lapping nurburgring with this car is a bit like racing paris-dakar with a laferrari. however, your point shows how much progress heavy electric cars need to have before having a consistent track performance.


User avatar

777Balt  7m ago

I agree with dddd, difference between 2.3 and 2.8 seconds is huge. Relatively it's the same difference as 2010 Audi RS5/2012 Aston-Martin DB9 5.9 V12 (4.6 seconds aka 2x2.3) vs 2004 Audi S4/Audi Q7 6.0 V12 (5.6 seconds aka 2x2.8). If you have driven those cars you will know it's a huge difference.


User avatar

Murmur  7m ago

2.28 seconds from 0 to 60, and yet can't do a single Ring lap without batteries overheating. More a dragster than a sport car.


User avatar

FastestLaps  7m ago

Not how fast its 0-60 should be, Its greatly impressive, But thats literally the only selling point this car has.

Fuel prices are going backup fast. I think soon the economy will make sense and actually make electric cars cheaper, factoring in both the purchase/resell price and total fuel cost.

Performance wise there is of course the instant throttle response and perfect torque curve of electric motors.


User avatar

saxy  7m ago

on a blindfold test... not likely. At least not me, unless you did the tests back to back.


User avatar

dddd  7m ago

I can guarantee that you would feel the difference between 2,3 and 2,8s. On this level its a massive difference when we talk about feelings.

Nevertheless i prefer petrol engines because they sound and "rev".


User avatar

saxy  7m ago

I do get why electric cars have fast accelerating times. Massive torque, Flat peak power and precise 4 wheel traction control. On the other hand, old school cars need to make sure the tires hook up, and if you look at a dyno graph, a combustion engine only gets max power at a very tiny spot on its rev range. All the other times its got less power.

But honestly for me, I couldn't care less about the 0-60 time. If you didn't have instrument testing I wouldn't be able to tell the difference between 2.3 or 2.8s. If I spent 100+K on this car and it said, are you sure you want to accelerate the wear and tear on your vehicle, id really think twice about launching it like that.
For a car like this under 4s would be well good enough.


User avatar

BR2+  7m ago

Its fast yeah, But stupid, This car should be about its technical innovations of the future, Not how fast its 0-60 should be, Its greatly impressive, But thats literally the only selling point this car has.

Timeline

Latest topics

The new Porsche 911 GT2 RS 49
10 hours ago by BR2-

First official look at a near-production ready Aston Martin Valkyrie 29
10 hours ago by BR2-

Which is faster - Le Mans LMP1 car or Formula 1 car? 75
10 hours ago by BR2-

Porsche are already tired of winning 19
11 hours ago by BR2-

Latest Spy Pics of Mid-Engined 2019 C8 Corvette: Best View Yet of Cabin and Overall Proportions 7
11 hours ago by BR2-

Formula 1 still slower than Le Mans LMP1 prototypes 51
3 days ago by corkscrew

Active users

DeDe, honzakoubek, fakekillerfour, Fastedee, saxy, beefy, BR2+, FastestLaps, tyler, Murmur, rhs1992, marktodd