8 ms·
Tesla ‘Easter Egg’ Makes the Fast-Accelerating Model S Even Faster
- Desustorm 10y agoNot sure I agree with the terminology of the article (fast rather than quickest accelerating), but I thought this quote was special: > Speeds like this offer more Gs than Earth, so the rate of acceleration is faster than falling. It can feel difficult to support your head and shoulders if you don’t lean back on the headrest.
- venomsnake 10y agoAt 2.6-sh second mark your car accelerates with more than 9.8m/s^2 to get to 60. But even lower accelerations will glue you to the seat because gravity acceleration affects every part of your body. Where as the car grabs you by the butt and yanks you forward. So - I think he has probably some vague idea of Newtonian physics but just didn't manage to produce coherent sentence.
- jonsen 10y agoHow is more than one g accelleration possible? There is one g making the friction between the tyre and the road.
- abstractbeliefs 10y agobut there is four tires!
- return0 10y agoand 4/4ths of a car
- mirimir 10y agoWith rear-wheel drive, acceleration transfers most of the vehicle weight to the rear wheels. That's why funny cars do wheelies. That doesn't work so well for front-wheel drive, so those vehicles can't accelerate as quickly as rear-wheel drive vehicles. With four-wheel drive, weight transfer cuts both ways, but more rubber on the road helps, for sure. Low center of gravity helps too, I think.
- jameshart 10y agoWith wheels on the bottom of the car acceleration transfers weight to the rear axle. The forward forces on the car body are below the CG so produce a net rearward tilting torque.
- mirimir 10y agoYes. But my point is that, with front-wheel drive, that transfers weight away from the driven axle.
- wtfishackernews 10y agoThe cars also gets pressed down by aerodynamics.
- tankenmate 10y agoBut downforce isn't appreciable until over 50mph (80kph), short of having stupidly oversized wings (which would drastically slow your acceleration) or active downforce (fans etc).
- ska 10y agoThis is actually why a lot of expensive sports cars have 0-60 times of 2.9 seconds. Unless you design specifically for it, it's difficult to generate much downforce at low speeds. Related: if you've ever wondered why some drag cars (e.g. Funny cars) have short exhaust pipes angled up and back, now you know.
- cjrp 10y agoSimilar to the Red Bull F1 car's exhaust-blown diffuser: http://jalopnik.com/5892403/the-exhaust-pipe-that-made-red-bull-a-success http://jalopnik.com/5892403/the-exhaust-pipe-that-made-red-b...
- ethbro 10y agoThere's only one answer to that: the Lotus 78. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_78 https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_78
- venomsnake 10y agoBecause the coefficient of friction could be greater than 1. And the "sticking" force is proportional to the tire area. And the air pushes you down while you move. As long as the torque is lower than friction you should be fine.
- morsch 10y agoI think this is intuitively wrong for a vehicle with a gear wheel locked to geared track: the gears push against each other and acceleration would be possible even in a zero g environment. Now, cars don't have gear wheels, but I assume the same principle applies. Edit - here's a more stringent discussion: http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/75032/maximum-acceleration-for-wheel-driven-vehicle-from-standstill http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/75032/maximum-acc...
- mnw21cam 10y agoIndeed. My weak Google-fu indicates that the coefficient of friction of tyres against a dry road surface is something like 0.9, so there must be some improvement in tyre technology here just to make the thing go without creating a thick black smelly line on the road.
- pbhjpbhj 10y agoA car doesn't drag along the road. The tyres are in relatively static contact (unless you're drifting etc.). Static and dynamic friction are quite different.
- tankenmate 10y agoAcceleration of more than 1g is probably not possible for 0-60; there isn't much of that speed range that would allow for downforce (downforce would only start have a tangible effect after approximately 50mph (80kph)), and there is no other appreciable way for the car to generate more friction with the road that doesn't scale with vehicle mass. I suspect what the OP was trying to get at is the vector addition of gravity plus the forward acceleration of the car means that the apparent scalar force feels substantially higher than normal (i.e. 1g downwards); it's just poorly worded.
- svantana 10y agoNo they actually mean what they write - 1g gives you 0-60 in 60*1609/3600/9.81 = 2.73 seconds. The way to get that friction is probably to use a particular combination of tires and road. It's equivalent to standing still on a 45 degree slope -- not impossible, but definitely a risk of slipping there.
- jackmott 10y agoCars can do more than 1G even without downforce. Sports car street tires commonly ~1.2g, race tires commonly ~1.5g+ High school friction is wrong. Source: various of my cars (in the past, I just have lame hybrids now) and a g meter
- LeifCarrotson 10y ago> High school friction is wrong. No, it's at least mostly correct. High school friction says F = mu * W Where F is the output force, mu is the coefficient of friction, and W is the normal force (typically equal to the weight). If it's failed you, it's failed in failing to mention that the tire-road interface can have a coefficient of friction greater than one, and in failing to mention that the normal force can be increased with aerodynamic downforce.
- jackmott 10y agoHigh school physics tends to claim that the coefficient can't be greater than one. Source: note all the people here who thought it couldn't be greater than one.
- hx87 10y agoHow is that due to high school physics rather than naive intuition?
- Dylan16807 10y agoMine never implied that, and I could have easily disproved it with the grippy pads on my giant calculator.
- vacri 10y agoAs an aside: Spinning-rust hard drives are rated in the hundreds of Gs. While the earth only pulls with 1G, if you drop the drive onto a hard surface, the sudden stop is an acceleration of hundreds of Gs, due to the very short time frame.
- TeMPOraL 10y agoI don't understand the question. The car is accelerating horizontally, the gravity acts vertically.
- Strilanc 10y agoImagine the tires were velcro'd to the ground. Or that they had giant spikes stabbing down for traction. Clearly you could go over 1g with that, right? The same kind of thing (not literally, but analogously) is already happening at the atomic level, giving the tires a coefficient of friction of more than 1.
- Strilanc 10y ago> But even lower accelerations will glue you to the seat because gravity acceleration affects every part of your body. Where as the car grabs you by the butt and yanks you forward. The feeling of weight we associate with gravity is not distinguishable from elevator-style or car-style acceleration (not counting vibrations; or tiny gradients in the field). You don't feel gravity gluing you to the ground, you feel the ground continuously shoving you skyward to stop the free fall. See: equivalence principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivalence_principle
- d0mine 10y ago1 g is nothing. "A hard slap on the face may impose hundreds of g-s locally" "Early experiments showed that untrained humans were able to tolerate 17 g eyeballs-in (compared to 12 g eyeballs-out) for several minutes without loss of consciousness or apparent long-term harm" https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-G_training https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-G_training
- aecing 10y agofrom the paper(o) in citation 3 from the linked wiki article(i): > The terms "eyeballs in" "eyeballs out," and "eyeballs down" correspond to acceleration fields AX, -Ax, and AN, respectively, where AX, -Ax, and AN refer to the direction of acceleration forces measured in the conventional airplane body-axis coordinate system. > AN acceleration factor, ratio of acceleration force to weight, positive when directed upward along spinal axis (i.e., from seat to head ) > AX acceleration factor, ratio of acceleration force to weight_ positive when directed forward transverse to spinal axis (i.e., from back to chest) (o) https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19980223621.pdf https://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/199802... (i) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-G_training https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/High-G_training
- return0 10y agoright-left-brake-right-left-gas-left-gas-right-brake-right-left-gas-brake-brake-left
- venomsnake 10y agoYou need to tell "Power Overwhelming" to the car
- hellweaver666 10y agoIs it still called the "gas" pedal on an electric car?
- dest 10y agolike a konami code! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konami_Code https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konami_Code
- pc86 10y agoThat's the joke.
- TeMPOraL 10y agoYou mean "gas-gas-brake-brake-left-right-left-right-lights-radio-eject"?
- shuntress 10y ago"Gas, Brake, Honk. Gas, Brake, Honk. Honk, Honk, Punch."
- Shivetya 10y agoAt what battery percentage? Let alone, why? I want range, range, and more range. I could not give a damn about how fast I get to the next stop light or supercharger. Brag when you get 500 miles a charge, even fifty miles more range is more impressive than a tenth of a second off your acceleration "with a full charge"
- mikeash 10y agoYou know Tesla has non-performance models too?
- cynix 10y ago> I want range, range, and more range. I could not give a damn about how fast I get to the next stop light or supercharger. You're not the target audience for their top-of-the-line P100D. It's aimed at people who would otherwise buy Bugatti Veyrons, Ferraris, etc., and range probably doesn't even come up in their decision making process. The Veyron has a range of 50 miles at top speed, for example.
- josefresco 10y ago"aimed at people who would otherwise buy Bugatti Veyrons, Ferraris" More like Porsche 911 Turbo, Mercedes SLS, Audi R8 buyers.
- semi-extrinsic 10y agoNo, I think more like Dodge Charger Hellcat buyers. Those who pony up for a 911, SLS or R8 want a car that'll go faster around the Nürburgring than a Honda Civic Type R. Which I think even the P100D won't be able to (too heavy, brakes and motors overheat). Edit: why the downvotes? It's well documented that the P90D is no quicker than a Civic Type R around a proper racetrack.
- tracker1 10y agoI think the P90D/P100D buyers are not the types to necessarily by a Charger or Challenger. They're fun cars but a bit louder... just got a 2016 392 Scat Pack Shaker Challenger a few months ago, very fun car... but not in any way similar to any Tesla. It's just a different feel. That said, most aren't in a position to really push their cars, and they don't... It's mostly bragging and any car with a 0-60 under 5 seconds will give a lot of that fun.
- antirez 10y agoIs Tesla so fast compared to the price because is an electric car or this is totally unrelated and was just designed to have such an acceleration, without help from the fact it's an electric car? Thanks. EDIT: Thank you for the replies!
- PietdeVries 10y agoTo my knowledge the essence of an electric engine is that is has max traction almost independent of the rpm. Where a petrol engine has an optimal rpm (4000 for instance) where it provides most power, the electric car does not. Consequence is that a petrol car needs a gearbox to keep the engine around this optimal RPM (and thus most power) while the electric engine does not need one - it accelerates and keeps on accelerating... So the Tesla is so fast because it is electric, not because it has other features.
- jackmott 10y agoMax torque, not traction. That, and being able to do all wheel drive efficiently and with less weight penalty and with less risk to drivetrain parts helps the quick acceleration. But you still have to make tons of power and not be too heavy of course.
- usrusr 10y agoYes and no. While the grandparent post was clearly confusing traction and torque quite a bit, the answer is still mostly about traction. At the supercar level, you can basically assume infinite power when looking at acceleration in the lower speed ranges. The limit is traction, not torque. A sufficiently strong EEV can continuously max out traction. An ICE supercar does the same, but with a few tiny gaps for shifting that add to the total time. The ICE supercars do not need a stronger engine to come closer to the Tesla, they need faster transmissions to minimize shifting gaps. I think that this is also the prime reason why manual transmissions are disappearing/have disappeared from supercar territory, dual clutch automatics provide shorter gaps.
- PinguTS 10y ago
- jaimex2 10y agoCalling it now, to unlock the easter egg you have to set your volume to 11.
- WordyMcWordface 10y agoIt also depends on how you define "Worlds fastest car" While there is no doubt this is a fast car and that time is a stonking 0-60 time. I am lead to believe it can't complete a full flat out lap of the Nurburgring as constant high speed/full throttle use heats up the battery to the point where performance has to be limited. So while it will be great to "hoon about" in and should be a win at the traffic light gran prix there are probably much better track day cars.
- Viper007Bond 10y agoAcceleration is also relatively poor above about 100 MPH. It's an amazing beast, but yes certainly a traffic light car no sports car.
- semi-extrinsic 10y ago> It also depends on how you define "Worlds fastest car" ... and here they defined it so the P100D is the fastest. Welcome to the tautology club. Meanwhile, Wikipedia has three cars above the P100D on its quickest 0-60 list: the Porsche 918, the LaFerrari, and the Bugatti Veyron. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_cars_by_acceleration https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fastest_production_car... Note also that Tesla has also been called a bit "optimistic" with their 0-60 times as compared to other manufacturers (e.g. by Top Gear when testing P90D against Audi RS6 this year).
- nickpinkston 10y agoThe first rule of Tautology Club is the first rule of Tautology Club
- mikeash 10y agoWikipedia still shows the old 0-60 time for the P100D. At 2.4 seconds, it will be ahead of the Veyron, even with the LaFerrari, and behind the 918. And Tesla only compares with cars currently in production. The LaFerrari and 918 are not. Definitely some definitional tweaking to get the "right answer," but not quite a tautology.
- ralfd 10y agoI guess the title is right if you don't have access to the German Autobahn... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF36JhHRm4I https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nF36JhHRm4I
- simon_acca 10y agoDoes anyone have an idea of what they did/could have done in terms of software to allow a performance improvement?
- stevendhansen 10y agoI have a guess: the limit in these designs isn't typically the motor, but instead the power semiconductors in the inverter (the motor has a much longer thermal time constant than the power devices). Therefore the limit is the junction temperature of the power devices. Most high performance drives have some kind of junction temperature estimation algorithm (it is difficult or impossible to put a sensor right at the junction without changing the electrical properties of the semiconductor). When the estimated temperature gets too high, they will start pulling back the current to protect the power devices from overheating. The more accurate the model, the closer they can push the devices to the limit without failure. I'd bet they have been slowly improving their junction temp. estimation model and are now able to push the power semiconductors a little bit closer to their temperature limit, allowing them to produce more current (or the same current for a longer duration) before pulling back.
- ada1981 10y agoI've imagined Elon, still connected to childhood sci-fi dystopian futures, would most certainly include some secret "God Mode" backdoor that only he knows... So, in a future where Tesla's are all over the roadways,and the earth falls under alien attack or some other crisis -- he could easily escape by speaking to any nearby Tesla, which would give him full access (maybe even unlocking faster speeds ;). Perhaps even having some sort of transponder to send the nearest Tesla's to his rescue, should that be required.
- TeMPOraL 10y agoIn the future where aliens land on Earth and start a ground assault[0], Elon can take all the Teslas left by fleeing civilians and use them as remotely controlled (soon to be autonomous) weapons to fight the invasion, all from the safety of his volcano lair. ;). -- [0] - Why ground assault instead of orbital bombardment? Well, there aren't many alien vessels left in orbit after a massive onslaught of Falcon 9s and BFRs ;).
- jonkiddy 10y agoIf I remember correctly, there is a scene in the book Daemon by Daniel Suarez where autonomous cars are used similarly.
- Someone1234 10y agoIt wouldn't surprise me if they legislate maximum acceleration in the next ten years. Zero to sixty in 2.5 seconds is fun, no doubt about it, but it is fun on a racetrack. You can go on YouTube right now and find dozens of people utilising Tesla's existing "ludicrous mode" on public streets. And here's the thing, if people want to endanger their own lives that's fine. But they aren't just endangering their own lives, they're also endangering both other road users and pedestrians (when they eventually lose control). I don't think anything has been done about this yet because Teslas are still pretty uncommon, and the features which unlock "ludicrous mode" are even more uncommon (like 1% of 1%). But once electric vehicles are the norm and the body count racks up, we'll see legislative action. As an aside you could tie maximum acceleration into road conditions, including lowing it if the road is icy or wet, or increasing it on surfaces that provide superior grip (like freeways).
- jackmott 10y agoCars that can go this fast or close enough have been around for decades.
- Someone1234 10y agoIndeed. But people who own supercars and other kit cars capable of such feats were rare and expensive. Electric vehicles are going to take something, once rare, and make it common. Once it becomes common, the accident incidents will be more than just statistical noise, and legislative action may follow. The NHTSA and FMCSA are currently working on a proposal for large commercial vehicles that would artificially limit their maximum speed to 68 mph. So it isn't unheard of for legislation to be created to target new vehicles which aims to improve public safety.
- jfitbsidbfb 10y agoThe point is not that they're more common. Anyone that has wanted a fast car in the last 60 years could either buy or build one. Even a regular old car is plenty enough to kill yourself and plenty of other people if you're reckless enough. Besides that, it's much easier to create a stupidly dangerous car through sheer neglect of tires/brakes than to actually buy one that way. Your argument is comparable to banning sharp knives because someone started selling them cheaper than butter knives. Both types have always been sufficiently available and dangerous that making one more common than the other isn't going to change anything
- wavefunction 10y agoMy brother was killed by a careless driver. When I read your post I want to reach through the internet and strangle you.
- jstanley 10y agoI'm sorry to hear that, but your brother was killed by a careless driver, not by a powerful car. Drivers can be careless regardless of what their equipment is capable of.
- zo1 10y agoIs he now in jail?
- Dylan16807 10y agoYou can be just as careless in a car that takes 10 seconds to accelerate to 60. Your anger is misdirected. There might be some merit to removing a "launch mode", but the specific amount of torque is not particularly important. Anything fast enough to merge onto a highway is fast enough to seriously hurt people.
- dang 10y agoI'm sorry about your brother. Please don't post uncivil comments here, though. We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12978582 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12978582 and marked it off-topic.
- obi1kenobi 10y agodupe of: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12973264 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=12973264
- pascalxus 10y agoThat's incredible. I don't think anyone will say electric cars are slow again!