TESLA high performance tuning discusion

[speedmd]

Here is the test on the 911 turbo S. It does wheelie using 305/30ZR20 103Y Pirelli P Zero N1! http://www.motortrend.com/news/2017-porsche-911-turbo-s-hardest-launching-car-ever-tested/

The consumer reports graph needs to be thrown away.

Agree. It looks to be a dyno chart to me. Note the smooth curves.

Not sure what motortrend uses, but remember years back reading about the R&T setup that always used onboard accelerometers which looks to explain the jumpiness of the curves here. They would show road variations and weight shifts that would be smoothed out when strapped down to a dyno.

 

[ecycler]

Here is the test on the 911 turbo S. It does wheelie using 305/30ZR20 103Y Pirelli P Zero N1! http://www.motortrend.com/news/2017-porsche-911-turbo-s-hardest-launching-car-ever-tested/

Thanks for sharing that.  I can't believe I missed that memo and that they did not get pictures or videos of it!  I knew it launched as hard as any factory offering ever has, but lofting the front of such a tightly sprung car is seriously cool.  :mrgreen:

The consumer reports graph needs to be thrown away.

Agree. It looks to be a dyno chart to me. Note the smooth curves.

Not sure what motortrend uses, but remember years back reading about the R&T setup that always used onboard accelerometers which looks to explain the jumpiness of the curves here. They would show road variations and weight shifts that would be smoothed out when strapped down to a dyno.

Yes, it appears that the roughness of the acceleration curves is proportional to the tightness of those three suspensions and the weight of the vehicles. Doesn't seem very scientific if their lateral measurements are being affected that much.

 

[Hillhater]

The turbo s and p100d are perfect to compare to approximate the p100d's torque and hp output. Both run a 10.8ish quarter mile time, the p100d traps around 125 and the Pcar closer to 130. Both are AWD. Both have a pretty sophisticated launch mode.

In stock form, the Turbo S is known to make 580hp and a bit over 500ftlbs of torque. Seeing as the 911 traps a bit higher and has a a slightly lower 60 foot and 1/8th mile times are similar enough it can be asserted fairly accurately how much hp/torque the Tesla is putting down by factoring in the extra weight it heaves around. !

whilst you may be able to estimate something for the power comparison, i dont think you can do the same for torque, as that is motor torque , and will not be representative of what is going to the track due to the different gearing ratios between the two.

]

.... it appears that the roughness of the acceleration curves is proportional to the tightness of those three suspensions and the weight of the vehicles. Doesn't seem very scientific if their lateral measurements are being affected that much.

My guess would be they used a higher sampling rate and/or no "smoothing/filtering" of the data set, so we just see more fine variation.
..and the Hellcat curve probably just shows how bad the traction/suspension is..unless they picked a particularly bad run to display ?

that Motortrend test revealed a few snippits of data..
P100D data
680 hp, 791 lbft Torque ( no rpm quoted) ..Tesla sales figures
9.73:1 rear drive ratio
9.34:1 front drive ratio
7007 rpm at 60 mph (96 kph) for the rear motor.
6856 rpm at 60 mph (96 kph) for the front motor.

 

[Arlo1]

The turbo s and p100d are perfect to compare to approximate the p100d's torque and hp output. Both run a 10.8ish quarter mile time, the p100d traps around 125 and the Pcar closer to 130. Both are AWD. Both have a pretty sophisticated launch mode.

In stock form, the Turbo S is known to make 580hp and a bit over 500ftlbs of torque. Seeing as the 911 traps a bit higher and has a a slightly lower 60 foot and 1/8th mile times are similar enough it can be asserted fairly accurately how much hp/torque the Tesla is putting down by factoring in the extra weight it heaves around. !

whilst you may be able to estimate something for the power comparison, i dont think you can do the same for torque, as that is motor torque , and will not be representative of what is going to the track due to the different gearing ratios between the two.

Agreed. Also what is the weigh comparison.

I bet the P100D is heavier. But it makes more torque at the wheels so it evens out.

 

[ecycler]

Turbo S is about 3,500lbs
P100D is about 5klbs!

That is a major reason why I am eager to compare the Mission E to both on a road course when it is ready.

 

[Hillhater]

The P100D is indeed heavier ..4891 lbs vs the 3550 lbs of the TurboS. Thats 1300+ lbs, a 38% difference.
But, after you take gearing into account the Tesla only has a slight maximum Torque advantage ,...less than 5% ! :?
However , the real difference is that the Tesla has all its torque from 0 all the way to 45-50 mph, whilst the Turbo has a typical ICE torque curve that means it only has that max figure for a very brief moment.

 

[Arlo1]

The P100D is indeed heavier ..4891 lbs vs the 3550 lbs of the TurboS. Thats 1300+ lbs, a 38% difference.
But, after you take gearing into account the Tesla only has a slight maximum Torque advantage ,...less than 5% ! :?
However , the real difference is that the Tesla has all its torque from 0 all the way to 45-50 mph, whilst the Turbo has a typical ICE torque curve that means it only has that max figure for a very brief moment.

Yup now imagine all that torque in a lighter car.

There is a few things at play
Flat torque curve
Smooth power
Induction motors can have quite a flat HP curve as well.
Its about the best traction control in the world
Low CG...

 

[Ianhill]

That is a major reason why I am eager to compare the Mission E to both on a road course when it is ready.

The mission E looks very promising with a 800v system there's gains with charging and discharging, I would like to see wide spread use of a quad motor setup with the torque vectoring done with the throttling like the Tajima Rimac e-Runner but thats a race car on the plus side rimac has the concept one road car but only 8 have been produced.

 

[liveforphysics]

That is a major reason why I am eager to compare the Mission E to both on a road course when it is ready.

The mission E looks very promising with a 800v system there's gains with charging and discharging, I would like to see wide spread use of a quad motor setup with the torque vectoring done with the throttling like the Tajima Rimac e-Runner but thats a race car on the plus side rimac has the concept one road car but only 8 have been produced.

800v has advantages beyond more flexible DC charger cable?

Do share more of your misconceptions as you imagine them.

 

[Punx0r]

Peak HP and torque aren't the whole story. Area-under-the-curve determines how fast a car is in everyday driving and distance between HP and torque peaks (apparently) is what counts when racing, including drag racing.

 

[speedmd]

Area-under-the-curve

+1 :wink:

 

[Ianhill]

[800v has advantages beyond more flexible DC charger cable?

Do share more of your misconceptions as you imagine them.

I don't just imagine things out of thin air I use science to get to my conclusions and I never fill my own ego at the expense of others.

Misconceptions I've not stated none in this thread my info has been spot on ?, It's basic knowledge that volts × amps= watts, so yes the same total energy pack if reconfigured to double the voltage will charge in the same time but use a smaller conductor being half the current required, this also knocks on to have smaller gauge cabling in the car too for discharging so its a few kilos lighter.

Tell me Im full of it and wrong but I thought clever people where nice and tolerant.

 

[Arlo1]

I'll tell you you are wrong no problem.

The problems with higher voltage are great but to name a few the challenge to keep things isolated increases drastically as you increase the voltage and you need more spacing between components and traces etc. This leads to a bigger less efficient and heavier controler and other parts of the vehicle.
On top of that the parts you need inside all the HV components like the inverter it self are less efficient once in use. You IGBTs for instance have a much higher heat loss due to higher voltage drop combined with less efficient switching. The wires in an EV make up less then .1% of the EV weight and people must consider the whole picture when looking at what voltage they will choose. There is a reason Tesla and Nissan and Kia and others choose 360v nominal as a point to operate at. It's a point where the inverter/motor combo has an efficiency sweet spot and when looking at the whole EV the as a package it's a efficiency sweet spot as well.

 

[Ianhill]

I'll tell you you are wrong no problem.

The problems with higher voltage are great but to name a few the challenge to keep things isolated increases drastically as you increase the voltage and you need more spacing between components and traces etc. This leads to a bigger less efficient and heavier controler and other parts of the vehicle.
On top of that the parts you need inside all the HV components like the inverter it self are less efficient once in use. You IGBTs for instance have a much higher heat loss due to higher voltage drop combined with less efficient switching. The wires in an EV make up less then .1% of the EV weight and people must consider the whole picture when looking at what voltage they will choose. There is a reason Tesla and Nissan and Kia and others choose 360v nominal as a point to operate at. It's a point where the inverter/motor combo has an efficiency sweet spot and when looking at the whole EV the as a package it's a efficiency sweet spot as well.

Ok you know better than the Germans engineering it

Tesla kia and Nissan run simular voltage because all the components are first gen engineering, it's cost effective to use as a group it's not new for cars to share components and engineering concepts.
But u think that's the future 400v there about forever ?
We move on in every front you mention so I don't think your correct by there at all just look at moore's law.

 

[Arlo1]

I'll tell you you are wrong no problem.

The problems with higher voltage are great but to name a few the challenge to keep things isolated increases drastically as you increase the voltage and you need more spacing between components and traces etc. This leads to a bigger less efficient and heavier controler and other parts of the vehicle.
On top of that the parts you need inside all the HV components like the inverter it self are less efficient once in use. You IGBTs for instance have a much higher heat loss due to higher voltage drop combined with less efficient switching. The wires in an EV make up less then .1% of the EV weight and people must consider the whole picture when looking at what voltage they will choose. There is a reason Tesla and Nissan and Kia and others choose 360v nominal as a point to operate at. It's a point where the inverter/motor combo has an efficiency sweet spot and when looking at the whole EV the as a package it's a efficiency sweet spot as well.

Ok you know better than the Germans engineering it

Tesla kia and Nissan run simular voltage because all the components are first gen engineering, it's cost effective to use as a group it's not new for cars to share components and engineering concepts.
But u think that's the future 400v there about forever ?
We move on in every front you mention so I don't think your correct by there at all just look at moore's law.

Tesla is the world leader in EVs Many of the Germans use Tesla re-branded parts. 800v is a joke and there is no reason for it. Life safety is the #1 reason we will stay away from such stupid voltages. Its very likely they read some BS somewhere and just tried to copy some old Toyota design or something. I have been in meetings where that was exactly the case they said well we read Toyota was using this voltage so it seemed to make sense.
There is no advantage to running 800v over 360v other then thinking magically it will make you some more power or efficiency which it doesn't.
A lot of the time things like this are just based on off the shelf parts and Companies like this will not develop things in house. For instance our friend Chris in Australia used a HV battery only because the motor and controller options available off the shelf would work out to enough power and RPM with that setup. He would have been happy to keep it in the 300-400v range if a controller was available that was able to push the same power as the high voltage controller.

Its very Merican of you to think more is better. Tesla has proven you can make mad power with 360v systems and the funny thing is your magic 800v German car will be slower then the heavier Tesla in the 1/4

 

[Ianhill]

What I'm saying is material development is a never ending thing, both systems are dangerous enough to cause death equally so that does not make sence saying never increase the voltage as we want more overall power it makes sence to up the volts to keep the amps managable, ever heard of a Faraday cage I don't think the battery can match a lightning strike without triggering a contactor to shut the system down ?

By the way it's not my german car, or am I American, your attacking me when I talk sence, the tesla may win a 0-60mph but will have its arse handed to it in a 1/4 mile time will tell.

 

[Arlo1]

Yeah material development is never ending allowing more amps at lower voltages. In time you will see voltages lower not higher..

Yes 360v can be lethal but you can survive it 800v is only lethal there is not a chance to survive 800v.

I have grabbed 410v positive in 1 hand and the other brushsed the negative it hurt but I lived. If that was 800v I would not be typing this now.

I am not saying all cars will stay below 500v but The average car will be with a 360v rated battery. This means all the charging systems and stitching components will be easier to build and design.

The challenge of designing things for higher voltage increases at the cube of the voltage increase!

If you search for off the shelf DC/DC supplies for instance its easy to find something that accepts 410v but when I needed something for 470 nothing existed so I had to use 2 running each on 1/2 the battery. That added great complexity in it self and that's just one example.

 

[Punx0r]

Moore's observation has nothing to do with EV battery voltages, nor do Faraday cages... 400 & 800V are not equally dangerous...

Domestic electricity isn't 1000V to save on copper cost.

Reductio Ad absurdum: If your reasoning holds that higher voltage = better for an EV, why not put the 8265 cells in a Tesla P100D in series for a 35kV system and reap the benefits of a 14 awg wiring harness?

 

[Ianhill]

Yeah material development is never ending allowing more amps at lower voltages. In time you will see voltages lower not higher..
*It works both ways yes 360v can be lethal but you can survive it 800v is only lethal there is not a chance to survive 800v.

*I can survive 1000vdc across my toe nail yet 100vdc across my heart and I'm brown bread, Ac is even worse http://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/JackHsu.shtml

I have grabbed 410v positive in 1 hand and the other brushsed the negative it hurt but I lived. If that was 800v I would not be typing this now.

*Again it's all down to conditions, where and how your zapped.

I am not saying all cars will stay below 500v but The average car will be with a 360v rated battery. This means all the charging systems and stitching components will be easier to build and design.

* I agree as improvements occur we will have to change our approach it's not a one size fits all same as car engines have many ways to skin a cat.

The challenge of designing things for higher voltage increases at the cube of the voltage increase!

* Thls makes no sence to me or is it applyable to anything please explain ?

If you search for off the shelf DC/DC supplies for instance its easy to find something that accepts 410v but when I needed something for 470 nothing existed so I had to use 2 running each on 1/2 the battery. That added great complexity in it self and that's just one example.

*True but yet again those parts didn't exist 30 years ago so it's an evolving thing that will be forever be changing.

I'm not trying to be an arse but what evwr i seem to say im wrong ? Things move on when the need becomes greater for more. Be it in the form of same volts higher amps or same amps higher volts or lower volts even higher amps its is down to the designer to take full advantage of new technologys on offer and come up with a good overall package.

 

[Ianhill]

Moore's observation has nothing to do with EV battery voltages, nor do Faraday cages... 400 & 800V are not equally dangerous...

I was Pointing out how things become better over time have you noticed ? Where's lead acid now ?

Domestic electricity isn't 1000V to save on copper cost.

Double facepalm we don't touch the motor or go near its controls to get a shock how about a 1000v kettle in the kitchen.

Reductio Ad absurdum: If your reasoning holds that higher voltage = better for an EV, why not put the 8265 cells in a Tesla P100D in series for a 35kV system and reap the benefits of a 14 awg wiring harness?

Because 35kv will need insane insulation or leak like a sive I'm not stupid as your replies your all so crazy to attack me you talk such stupidity doing it and not even see the point I'm making that a improbable task today is tomorrow's norm.

 

[Hillhater]

.........the tesla may win a 0-60mph but will have its arse handed to it in a 1/4 mile time will tell.

Ian, sure , the Tesla is not the king of the 1/4 mile, infact ater 60mph or so, it becomes a bit of a slug compared to the competition with a host of other production cars beating it to the 1/4 mile .....by almost a second !
But... any metric could be selected to show one vehicle is superior to another, its just that the 0-60 time is recognised as a universal benchmark that street folk can relate to.
..Having said that , another common benchmark is selling price where the Tesla (though not cheap) , is a bargain compared to most of the others in the 1/4 sprint , and its certainly the only one with 5 doors and 7 seats , that you could sensibly do the school run in !
Add to that, it is a volume production car with more sold every month than most of the competition will produce in total.
..so , whilst i despise the cult like worship that some gush over everything Tesla,...i can respect what they have produced and recognise it as a game changer in many ways (not just performance) , and a real shake up for an otherwise blindfolded auto industry.

 

[Ianhill]

.........the tesla may win a 0-60mph but will have its arse handed to it in a 1/4 mile time will tell.

Ian, sure , the Tesla is not the king of the 1/4 mile, infact ater 60mph or so, it becomes a bit of a slug compared to the competition with a host of other production cars beating it to the 1/4 mile .....by almost a second !
But... any metric could be selected to show one vehicle is superior to another, its just that the 0-60 time is recognised as a universal benchmark that street folk can relate to.
..Having said that , another common benchmark is selling price where the Tesla (though not cheap) , is a bargain compared to most of the others in the 1/4 sprint , and its certainly the only one with 5 doors and 7 seats , that you could sensibly do the school run in !
Add to that, it is a volume production car with more sold every month than most of the competition will produce in total.
..so , whilst i despise the cult like worship that some gush over everything Tesla,...i can respect what they have produced and recognise it as a game changer in many ways (not just performance) , and a real shake up for an otherwise blindfolded auto industry.

Amen for Common sence, totally agree the tesla is by far the largest change we have seen in cars history and as a yard stick that will take some serious beating it's a massive jump over the competition and performs extremely well with high level comfort alongside next gen interior tech its ground breaking in so many ways it's become the darling of the EV world and has every right to be to.

 

[liveforphysics]

I'll tell you you are wrong no problem.

The problems with higher voltage are great but to name a few the challenge to keep things isolated increases drastically as you increase the voltage and you need more spacing between components and traces etc. This leads to a bigger less efficient and heavier controler and other parts of the vehicle.
On top of that the parts you need inside all the HV components like the inverter it self are less efficient once in use. You IGBTs for instance have a much higher heat loss due to higher voltage drop combined with less efficient switching. The wires in an EV make up less then .1% of the EV weight and people must consider the whole picture when looking at what voltage they will choose. There is a reason Tesla and Nissan and Kia and others choose 360v nominal as a point to operate at. It's a point where the inverter/motor combo has an efficiency sweet spot and when looking at the whole EV the as a package it's a efficiency sweet spot as well.

Ok you know better than the Germans engineering it

Yes actually. I've met with a handful of German Teir1's about EV system design. Much like Detroit (keep in mind GM bolt is all LG Chem battery/drivetrain) clueless and panicking head-less chickens running is a fair description, Arlo has 10's of thousands of hours more real-world EV hands on experience and useful self-education.

You may also leave this thread with a bit more useful education yourself, but it's optional as all education inherently must be self-taught, some people require a paid clown in a suit to scratch a soft white rock against dark slate rocks to decide what they should learn for them.

I am not against you, or anyone on ES who I feel are all like family I love and respect. Despite this, no matter who's sharing poor quality info, I will call them out and I appreciate others do the same for me when I'm off-base. My first few years on ES I was wrong every damn day and it was through awesome folks calling me out (and 8 years now of pro EV building) that helped me progress to a more whole perspective of EV systems.

 

[Ianhill]

No hard feelings to anyone when i feel i have something valid to add then I'm of the type to share thoughts not trying to be an ass I have learnt from it and I do expect we will see lower voltage more compact electronics

I have sat on the fence and had a think about it and as regards to the components then yes I think as IGBTs improve their main improvement will be current handling and a larger package would be needed to insulate the gates for higher voltages using todays materials, so there's going to be room with material development for a higher voltage igbt in the same footprint but not by much the insulation makes less difference than the actual current carrying material itself which will go through the graphine craze soon and flow more electrons at higher frequencys for the same area conductor so i think that's what was meant by >

The challenge of designing things for higher voltage increases at the cube of the voltage .

I can see these Improvments will lead to higher voltage IGBTs for super heavy duty and those who wish to hear a sonic Boom come off the bumper, and like mentioned a lower voltage more compact package that runs higher current both will have better switching.

As for the rest of it though I only thought that going to 800v in the long run would be a good thing not bad, I know it's not easy and there are many challenges in doing it but with time and production improvements I can't see why not my local tram is three phase and runs 550vdc and the heavy haulage industry will need big power it's not like I'm suggesting 35kv .

I'm not going to spout my job title because I'm a small fish in a big pond I've got no bragging rights other than i work to the best of my ability, I'm in the industry and have served my time to so I'm not trying to distort the truth or spout nonsense I try stay within the realms of reality :lol:

I got to add that when I joined here I had no clue what a igbt was or how a switch mode psu works my qualifications are more about SI units theory's rules and laws. I've learnt loads on top of my qualifications and will stay an open book till the day I die, 15 years ago I was trying to power a 12v 80a 1000w car amplifier in my home and the transformer needed would have been a monster so i had no joy but now a small switch mode psu does it with ease and I'm only 31 what happens 20 years from now mind poof.

 

[Arlo1]

The BMS becomes much more complicated
You start to find things that were ok at 100 or 400v or what ever start corroding for reasons you never thought of. The B feilds becomeand much harder to deal with.

Voltage at those levels becomes very sneaky and will find its way to the persons in or around the chassis. The elements that you were able to mitigate at 100 or 400v now wont work anymore. The IGBTs in the inverter will need to be rated for 1600-2000v as well the cap will need to be rated for 1200v+ at temp... Which means its rated for more voltage at lower temp. The size of the cap grows as you increase the voltage.

With the distance of the parts needed to be increased and the increase in the size of the cap you now have a larger controller then you figured you would but because of the distances needed the inductance in the internal circuits in the controller are increased so now it becomes impossible to switch clean fast.

This LIST IS VERY LONG.

I am running 4x the voltage I feel safe with and every time I turn the key on my car I grind my teeth waiting for the explosion.....

Remember these cars are sold to the public and they will be parking them wet in their garages and in time taking them apart on their own..

Crashing them....
Flooding them in lakes and rivers and oceans....
Then trying to repair them after....
Not a good path the HV stuff....

You will see HV in some racing but thats a different animal.....