95 Tesla teasing with painfully fast Model S Plaid

Cover for Tesla teasing with painfully fast Model S Plaid

Today was big day for Tesla. The long awaited "battery day" presentation and quarterly shareholder meeting, all in one event, during which Tesla also released a video showcasing some other-worldly performance numbers for the upcoming Model S with "Plaid" drivetrain.

Along with the expected 0-60 mph and quarter mile times, Tesla also included Laguna Seca lap time - 1 minute and 30.3 seconds - faster than McLaren P1, Dodge Viper ACR, Corvette ZR1 and almost everything else under the sun.

The straight line acceleration figures were equally unbelievable - 0-60 mph in less than 2 seconds and quarter mile in less than 9. Talk about break-neck acceleration.

These headline figures are clearly intended to grab attention and cause waves in social media. I am sure there will be smallprint and strings attached to most of these claims, and there is no rush to get excited before we actually get concrete numbers and assurances that these can be reproduced with production car, on street tyres and on normal road surface.

This what Elon Musk himself had to say bout the Plaid:

We took the latest Plaid out to Laguna Seca on Sunday and we got a minute 30, we think probably there is another 3 seconds or more to take off that time, so we are confident that the Modal S Plaid will achieve the best track time of any prodution vehicle ever, of any kind - two door or otherwise.

Taking off 3 seconds would imply 1:27, which is in the ballpark with McLaren Senna and consistent with the promise of beating "any production car ever, 2-door or otherwise".

It is interesting that Tesla no longer seem to be gunning for Nürburgring lap record - understandable as longer tracks tend to suit combustion engine cars better.

The Plaid Model S is expected to arrive late next year, so no immediate danger for Porsche Taycan Turbo S which will remain the electric performance king for at least another year.

In my estimation it is highly unlikely that any development of Model S will be able to produce sustained track performance comparable to Taycan Turbo S, and I will be shocked if any customer Model S will be able to replicate the 1:30 Laguna Seca time.

10m ago by FastestLaps
User avatar
User avatar

Cocobe  2w ago

So Elon said the Plaid S is cancelled.

I know things change really fast in the car world. But cancelled before it’s even made into life? Yet the Tesla semi truck is still years behind schedule. Would that be cancelled too lol

User avatar

dr. cosimo  1m ago

well this is good news and it happened on german soil lol


User avatar

CarCritic  1m ago

Another version of the Model S.
What did Tesla do this time, attach a Spacex rocket to it?
Tesla should stick to producing luxury EV's and NOT try to compete with the older, and more mature sports car manufacturers and stop trying to prove that the Model S is better than all other cars.

User avatar

dr. cosimo  1m ago

so 3 weeks of silence about israel-gaza conflict with over 4,000 rockets fired, where are all the enviromental activists and ev fanboys ? were they on vacation ? or were they too busy concentrating on covid-19 death tolls and vaccine shots ?



User avatar

SpeedKing  1m ago

Rumour has it that the Plaid just went 9.23@152mph which means it's got at least 1200hp not the bullshit 1020hp they were spruiking on their website pfft...

User avatar

benedekpuskas  9m ago

Why the 4 dislike?

User avatar

Xbow1  10m ago

Mr. Musk needs to understand that his company Tesla already makes great cars. They are practical, fast and usable and there is no need for him to become all motor-mouthed and say that they can clock times equaling hypercars. Its like Mercedes-AMG Petronas saying "the W11 is as fast as than the Saturn V if it were to cover the distance of Earth's atmosphere". It's wrong and in complete disregard to what the machine stands for.

User avatar

dante  10m ago

and then this news is announced lol

'Tougher emission rules threaten internal combustion engine; investors flock to Tesla, electric-vehicle startups'

i wonder how many will stay and how many will leave that corrupt pelosi state :)



California Plans to Ban Sales of New Gas-Powered Cars in 15 Years

The proposal would speed up the state’s efforts to fight global warming at a time when California is being battered by wildfires, heat waves and other consequences of climate change.

California plans to ban the sale of new gasoline-powered cars statewide by 2035, Gov. Gavin Newsom said Wednesday, in a sweeping move aimed at accelerating the state’s efforts to combat global warming amid a deadly and record-breaking wildfire season.

In an executive order, Governor Newsom directed California’s regulators to develop a plan that would require automakers to sell steadily more zero-emissions passenger vehicles in the state, such as battery-powered or hydrogen-powered cars and pickup trucks, until they make up 100 percent of new auto sales in just 15 years.

The plan would also set a goal for all heavy-duty trucks on the road in California to be zero emissions by 2045 where possible. And the order directs the state’s transportation agencies to look for near-term actions to reduce Californian’s reliance on driving by, for example, expanding access to mass transit and biking.

“This is the next big global industry,” Governor Newsom said at a news conference on Wednesday, referring to clean-energy technologies such as electric vehicles. “And California wants to dominate it.”

California has long cast itself as a global leader on climate-change policy, having already passed a law to get 100 percent of its electricity from wind, solar and other sources that don’t produce carbon dioxide by 2045. But in recent weeks, as the state has been scorched by record wildfires partly driven by rising temperatures, Governor Newsom has found himself pressured to act even faster.

Ramping up sales of emissions-free vehicles in California will be an enormous challenge over a relatively short period of time, experts said. Last year, only 8 percent of the nearly two million passenger vehicles sold statewide were battery-electric or plug-in hybrid vehicles. Transportation remains California’s largest source of planet-warming emissions, accounting for roughly 40 percent of the state’s greenhouse gases from human activity.

“We have a strategy to be as bold as the problem is big, to recognize that we have agency,” Governor Newsom said at the news conference, where he stood before a glittering half circle of electric cars. “We’re not just victims of fate.”

In addition to setting new standards for automakers in the state, California will also likely need to increase financial incentives for people to afford electric vehicles and significantly expand its charging infrastructure, said Don Anair, deputy director of the clean vehicles program at the Union of Concerned Scientists, an advocacy group.
Editors’ Picks
This Is the Casual Racism That I Face at My Elite High School
A Longtime Renter Tested His $650,000 Budget on the Manhattan Market. Here’s What He Found.
The War Crime No One Wants to Talk About

“It’s feasible, but it’s going to take California pulling all the levers at its disposal,” Mr. Anair said.

The order would affect only new-vehicle sales, the governor’s office said. It would not prevent Californians from owning cars with internal combustion engines past 2035 or selling them on the used-vehicle market.

The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, a trade group that represents most of the nation’s automakers, said it welcomed efforts to expand the electric-vehicle market in California, but questioned whether a ban on internal combustion engines was the best way to achieve that goal.

“Neither mandates nor bans build successful markets,” said John Bozzella, the alliance’s chief executive, in a statement. “Much more needs to be done to increase consumer demand for Zero Emission Vehicles in order for California to reach its goals. It will require increased infrastructure, incentives, fleet requirements, building codes, and much more.”

The new executive order would build on California’s existing vehicle policies. State regulators have already set a goal of putting five million zero-emissions vehicles on the road by 2030. In June, the state adopted a major rule requiring more than half of all trucks sold in the state to be zero-emissions by 2035. And regulators are currently working on a rule that could require ride-hailing companies like Lyft and Uber to shift to electric vehicles.

Today’s step would go much further. Although 15 countries have already announced plans to phase out sales of vehicles with internal combustion engines in the coming decades — including Britain, Denmark and Norway — California would be the first jurisdiction in the United States to do so.

Environmental groups had mixed reactions to Governor Newsom’s announcement. While they applauded the new goal for zero-emission vehicles, they noted that California remained one of the country’s largest oil and gas producers, particularly as energy companies have used hydraulic fracturing to unlock new fossil-fuel reserves in recent years.

“Setting a timeline to eliminate petroleum vehicles is a big step, but Newsom’s announcement provided rhetoric rather than real action on the other critical half of the climate problem — California’s dirty oil production,” said Kassie Siegel, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Climate Law Institute.

“Newsom can’t claim climate leadership while handing out permits to oil companies to drill and frack,” Ms. Siegel said.

In his news conference, Governor Newsom said he lacked the authority to ban oil and gas drilling in the state on his own. His executive order sets a goal of ending new permits for hydraulic fracturing by 2024, and he said he would work with California’s legislature to set rules that would better protect vulnerable communities from nearby fossil-fuel extraction and help the state’s energy industry transition away from oil and gas.

“None of us are naïve. California is a fossil fuel state,” he said. “We need to focus on a just transition.”

The oil and gas industry reacted sharply to the order.

“Let’s be clear: Today’s announcement to curb in-state production of energy will put thousands of workers in the Central Valley, Los Angeles basin, and Central Coast on the state’s overloaded unemployment program, drive up energy costs when consumers can least afford it, and hurt California’s fight to lower global greenhouse gas emissions,” said Rock Zierman, chief executive of the California Independent Petroleum Association.

Asked why he was moving forward with the electric car mandate by executive order rather than asking the legislature to approve it, Governor Newsom cited the example of the state’s new rule requiring all trucks sold in California to be zero-emissions by 2045, which was rolled out by the state’s clean air regulator, the California Air Resources Board.

“This moment demands leadership, it demands movement,” Governor Newsom said, adding that the truck rule is now being replicated in other states.

In theory, a future California governor could try to undo Mr. Newsom’s rules, though legal experts said it would be difficult. “Executive orders can always be undone by future governors,” said Cara Horowitz, co-director of the Emmett Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at U.C.L.A. Law School. “But once this reaches the regulatory stage, it’s a lot stickier.”

There is one key complication in California’s move: The Trump administration has challenged the state’s authority to set its own pollution standards for cars and trucks as part of its rollback of Obama-era vehicle efficiency rules. California has defended its authority to set its own stricter rules under the 1970 Clean Air Act, but that dispute has yet to be settled by the courts.

Mary Nichols, the chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board, said on Wednesday that she expected the state to be taken to court over the regulations. “We’ll get there eventually,” she said.

User avatar

SpeedKing  10m ago

Way too much hype with Musk's new 4680 batteries. It has 5X the energy and 6X the power but only offers 16% more range so there's only a small improvement in overall energy density.

User avatar

Cauf40f50  10m ago

''taking off 3 seconds' LOL No no road car can challenge the senna in the racetrack maybe a jesko or a 765LT but thats it
a sedan cant beat a hypercar dont mather the tires or the weight
Iooks like elon is STILL smoking weed from the podcast episode

User avatar

dante  10m ago

meh...another shitty pre-production car with god knows how much weight was taken off and unknown spec


User avatar

Paul  10m ago

I think when the C8 ZO6 and ZR1 come out, they will shock the world.

User avatar

Cocobe  10m ago

To be fair, the Huracan performante did a quicker lap and it didn’t reach a faster top speed than the Tesla, and also much slower than the 918, and P1 into the first corner.

Fun fact, the Huayra B.C. reached 160mph into the first hairpin. But that’s according to speedo

User avatar

Paul  10m ago

Not a fan of Tesla and EV's but the number one thing that helps the Tesla on such good lap times besides the obvious like really sticky tires and great suspension geometry and low CG and weight distribution is the AWD traction and the off the corner bite of the AWD and instant torque of an E. motor.

User avatar

Xbow1  10m ago

Maybe Musk pulled a Clarkson move and sped up the footage to look like it was going faster.

User avatar

SpeedKing  10m ago

The acceleration figures from the Laguna Seca Plaid lap from 60-145 mph is approx 8.9 sec so if it does 0-60 mph in say 1.9 sec that equates to 10.8 sec@145 mph which means the car they used will never run a sub 9 1/4 mile. More bullshit from Musk, typical...

User avatar

Tommi95  10m ago

First of all... The 1/4 mile in less than 9s seems unlikely to me. The Chiron with 1500 hp can't do it, so I am skeptical.
The 1.30 laptime could be feasible if tested on cup2R or slick tyres, but I don't know if it would be able to replicate it multiple times. Besides, 1.30s would mean being as fast as a Lamborghini Huracan Performante, and considering that the current Model S with more than 700hp is considerably slower than a Taycan Turbo S on a track,I doubt that even 400 hp more could make it as fast a Huracan Performante. So far the Model S Raven Cheetah (whatever the name of the latest version is) couldn't even beat the Taycan Turbo S on a straight line, let alone on a track. The only Tesla with an actually good handling is the Model 3 performance, although it's still not as consistent as a Taycan Turbo S in replicating the performances lap after lap. Its laps are as good as those of a bmw m4/Giulia Quadrifoglio, nowhere near a Lamborghini Huracan Performante. I don't see how Tesla is gonna make such a huge progress in handling in just a year...
The 1.27 claim seems ridiculous to me. The Senna would crash the Model S on a track any day. Power/weight ratio, suspensions and aerodynamics matter. It seems as though Musk thinks he can defy the laws of physics by making a heavy sedan with no aereo as fast a Mclaren Senna.
Most people love his strategy of marketing, but for me he is way too arrogant anx cocky. Anyway, when it's released we're gonna see the real numbers.

User avatar

benedekpuskas  10m ago

What if this is actually the Roadster haha

User avatar

Hoppelmoppel123  10m ago



User avatar

FastestLaps  10m ago

If a customer takes delivery of Model S Plaid in 2021 and goes to Laguna Seca all stock, with stock tyres, and beats Senna time, all top engineers in McLaren should collectively resign and management should downsize the company to concentrate on their bicycle business instead.