Tesla's Model S P85D hits the road for some drag racing, shames the competition

[captaincranky]

at least we're done arguing about the speed....

Are we really? I think not.

The Aventador is geared to a top speed of in excess of 200mph!

Now that means, it's just starting to catch its breath, when slogging along the Autobahn at about a buck fifty.

So, that means with a quick gear change to a ratio more suitable for quarter mile theatrics, it would leave Elon's Christmas Hess truck in disguise, in the dust.

Besides, I don't think Lamborghini would have tolerated the yahoos at some road & track magazine, sending their loaned $400.000 car back, swinging from the back of a hook.. So as all out hole shots go ,"discretion is the better part of valor" should attach when driving a loaner vehicle.

Now let's get serious. Most of Europe thinks Americans are crass, obnoxious, belligerent and stupid. The reason for that is, for all intents and purposes, we are.

When the "goats" (Pontiac GTO) (*) were released, a few of the car mags were blabbering how the "the little Pontiac that could", would "take the measure of any Ferrari, blah, blah, blah". Some cooler heads prevailed and countered with, "what does take the measure of, even mean". Does it mean for a 1/4 mile, or the 24 hours of Le Mans?

In Europe, they believe that open wheeled racing on a road course, for hours upon hours, is an actual race. I think they call it, "Formula One". Will the Tesla in question, "take the measure of any Lamborghini or Ferrari, and for how long"? Again, I think not. Musk doesn't have an extension cord long enough to even think about entering Le Mans, and that nasty a** family sedan would likely wipe out in the first turn....

So, by all means, buy yourself one o' them thar Teslas. The first time you punch it in traffic with the kids on board, could net you a reckless driving ticket, and the missus will be out putting riders on your life insurance policy behind your back.

Yeah, but how far away do you think the kids' school could possibly be? And anyway, you'll get there so fast, you won't mind waiting for the tow truck.

Aw, you're just saying that. Nobody likes to wait for a tow truck. When a man's ride quits under him, the let down is equivalent to erectile dysfunction.

(*) "GTO" = "Gran Turismo Omologato". Even the name was stolen from Ferrari.

 

[davislane1]

(*) "GTO" = "Gran Turismo Omologato". Even the name was stolen from Ferrari.

Not exactly. GTO is simply Italian for grand touring spec, IIRC. Ferrari no more owns association with that acronym than Fiat owns the expression 'service engine soon'.

That said, it is a tragedy they didn't continue the GTO further into the 70s and cite the 308 GTB as the over-priced Italian competition. Missed an opportunity with that decade.

 

[captaincranky]

Not exactly. GTO is simply Italian for grand touring spec, IIRC. Ferrari no more owns association with that acronym than Fiat owns the expression 'service engine soon'.
.

I think Ferrari named one of their models "GTO", before Pontiac came up with the cheap American imitation.

And since Ferrari in an Italian manufacturer, what other language would it be in? Mandarin, possibly?(y)

In any event, whether or not the name is generic, or a spec, or a model name, I doubt the Pontiac GTO actually met it. Especially if it was manufactured on a Friday or a Monday.

The following image is ostensibly of a 1962 Ferrari GTO:

You might want to hash out the whole syntax/ nomenclature thing with the proud owner. Jus' sayin'

Here's the blurb on the car: http://motorn.com/news_full.php?id=7

Oh BTW, the first year of the GTO (Pontiac) was 1963. Er, 1964 as DBZ pointed out.

 

[dividebyzero]

When the "goats" (Pontiac GTO) (*) were released, a few of the car mags were blabbering how the "the little Pontiac that could", would "take the measure of any Ferrari, blah, blah, blah". Some cooler heads prevailed and countered with, "what does take the measure of, even mean". Does it mean for a 1/4 mile, or the 24 hours of Le Mans?

Car and Driver's bs '64 Poncho vs the Ferrari GTO is a legend ( Found a reprint for you here). Back in the day, Motor Trend, Car and Driver, and Road Test amongst others slobbered over basically everything coming off U.S. assembly lines while the party line was that European vehicles were overpriced, fragile, hard to maintain, and didn't live up to their handling and performance claims. I still remember a Road Test comparison where a collection of tired European sports cars were pitted against what was supposedly a "stock" showroom fresh Chev. From memory, the car was a dealer special (maybe Dana, D ick* Harrell, or Nickey) triple carb L71 427 'Vette fitted with drag slicks and a factory delete for every power robbing option (heater, power steer etc). The whole test centred upon 1/4 mile, 0-60, and 0-100 dragstrip action and laps on a Super Speedway oval.

* Obviously there should be no space between "D" and "I". A deliberate grammatical error to circumvent TS's policy of maintaining decorum in forum posting.

Oh BTW, the first year of the GTO (Pontiac) was 1963.

Mid-1964 actually. sport coupe (Model 2227), hardtop coupe (2237), and convertible coupe (2267) were the available body styles.

 

[davislane1]

The following image is ostensibly of a 1962 Ferrari GTO:

An NSFW warning would have been nice.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Yeah, but how far away do you think the kids' school could possibly be? And anyway, you'll get there so fast, you won't mind waiting for the tow truck.

Aw, you're just saying that. Nobody likes to wait for a tow truck. When a man's ride quits under him, the let down is equivalent to erectile dysfunction.

Yes, I agree. I was being sarcastic as that was the direction the discussion had turned... or so I had assumed after the comparison between Tesla's interior and a Hyundai and the touting of the driving range of a car with a V12 that gets around 15MPG.

 

[captaincranky]

Yes, I agree. I was being sarcastic as that was the direction the discussion had turned... or so I had assumed after the comparison between Tesla's interior and a Hyundai and the touting of the driving range of a car with a V12 that gets around 15MPG.

I didn't actually think that, "you won't mind waiting for a tow truck", was anything other than sarcasm. Nonetheless, when you put something like that out here, there still have to be consequences.....

I expect the driving range would depend on the size of the gas tank, or the length of the extension cord, depending on you vehicle of choice.

I do get the biggest kick out of car ads ballyhooing things like, "600 miles per tankful". It reflects how stupid the advertisers think potential buyers are! Well, think about it, if you want more range, just hang a bigger tank on the turd. It will of course, cost you more to fill. OTOH, it does answer the pitches for electrics like, "this car will go 100 miles before you have to recharge it", quite nicely.

Car and Driver's bs '64 Poncho vs the Ferrari GTO is a legend ( Found a reprint for you here). Back in the day, Motor Trend, Car and Driver, and Road Test amongst others slobbered over basically everything coming off U.S. assembly lines while the party line was that European vehicles were overpriced, fragile, hard to maintain, and didn't live up to their handling and performance claims. I still remember a Road Test comparison where a collection of tired European sports cars were pitted against what was supposedly a "stock" showroom fresh Chev. From memory, the car was a dealer special (maybe Dana, D ick* Harrell, or Nickey) triple carb L71 427 'Vette fitted with drag slicks and a factory delete for every power robbing option (heater, power steer etc). The whole test centred upon 1/4 mile, 0-60, and 0-100 dragstrip action and laps on a Super Speedway oval.

A friend of mine bought a 67(?) Camaro with the ZL-1 427 all aluminum engine option. All it had was a heater, (you needed defroster to make the car street legal). The car itself was $3000.00, the engine about $4200.00. Jimmy tired of things easily, so he had it stolen. As fate would have it, they only made a hundred of them, and as of 10 years ago, (?), they were worth about a hundred grand a pop!. God knows the price a clean one would fetch today. The irony continues as he eventually bought the engine back, after someone shoehorned it into a 4 door Ford Anglia.

Thanks for the link to that article. It was truly a trip,especially for the prices of the options they published. (Like less than 20 bucks for the HD suspension package)!!

* Obviously there should be no space between "D" and "I". A deliberate grammatical error to circumvent TS's policy of maintaining decorum in forum posting.

Richard Avedon likes his friends to refer to him as D ick also.

Mid-1964 actually. sport coupe (Model 2227), hardtop coupe (2237), and convertible coupe (2267) were the available body styles.

I stand corrected. 1963 was the 1st year for these tho;

I think these came with a fuel injected 327 @ 375 BHP. I think one of those would kick a GTO with trips a** too. Those 389 Pontiacs were mostly torque with a low red line (under 5G (?)). Truck engines in disguise.

Unlike the Pontiac GTO, the Corvette "Stingray", was a styling triumph, a masterpiece in every sense. Fisher body works pulled all the best from the Ferrari GTO and the E type Jaguars, improved on it, and made it their own.(y)

 

[Darth Shiv]

Never been a fan of EV vs ICE comparisons/races. It's interesting to see how the paper specs play out in practice, but EVs are passionless vehicles. Consequently, watching videos like this takes a vehicle I genuinely like (the Model S) and reminds me that, at the end of the day, it's just another fancy techno toy. Plenty of tech, devoid of anything emotional.

/car rant

Meh. As much as I love high performance cars, the day of the end of big oil is coming. It is a great thing.

 

[captaincranky]

Meh. As much as I love high performance cars, the day of the end of big oil is coming. It is a great thing.

Perhaps so. But from a socioeconomic standpoint, "big oil", will morph into, "big electricity", (or "big hydrogen"), and all the same people will still have control of your purse strings.

 

[dividebyzero]

A friend of mine bought a 67(?) Camaro with the ZL-1 427 all aluminum engine option. All it had was a heater, (you needed defroster to make the car street legal). The car itself was $3000.00, the engine about $4200.00. Jimmy tired of things easily, so he had it stolen. As fate would have it, they only made a hundred of them, and as of 10 years ago, (?), they were worth about a hundred grand a pop!. God knows the price a clean one would fetch today. The irony continues as he eventually bought the engine back, after someone shoehorned it into a 4 door Ford Anglia.

Your friend would be kicking himself. Only 69 genuine COPO 9560 ( 1969) Camaro ZL1's were built, and maybe a third of them had the engine swapped out by dealers for the more standard 396 ( L78 and L35) to lower the cost and get a rebate back from GM. A numbers matching COPO 9560 fetches $300K+ in good condition (this one sold for $500K, this one $451K). Not a bad return for a 45 year old piece of Detroit iron and aluminium. Makes you wonder what a Tesla might be worth in 2060 - somehow I don't think it would be worth the storage fee.

Thanks for the link to that article. It was truly a trip,especially for the prices of the options they published. (Like less than 20 bucks for the HD suspension package)!!

My favourite option package was the $2000 to turn a stock Coronet or Belvedere into a Super Stock (A990). Cast Magnesium intake on a dual Holley cross-ram 12.5:1 compression 426 race hemi, acid dipped doors, hood, and fenders, lightweight glass and unibody support core, aluminium heads, and the most beautiful factory headers you could wish for

...and of course, no build sheets or documentation - just a bill of sale. No real proof of ownership negated issues with the cars being sold with no warranty.

I stand corrected. 1963 was the 1st year for these tho;

I think these came with a fuel injected 327 @ 375 BHP. I think one of those would kick a GTO with trips a** too.

Easily. The '63 had a near perfect weight distribution, so at least could take a corner without wallowing.

Those 389 Pontiacs were mostly torque with a low red line (under 5G (?)). Truck engines in disguise.

Yup, red line at 4800 for the triple carb (348hp), although they could be massaged for better performance. The 421 Super Duty (an overbored large crank journal 389) with dual quads was factory rated at 405hp ( 16 Grand Prix's and 65 or 66 Catalina's) or 410hp (465hp actual) (13 Catalina's) @ 6400 r.p.m. in 1962.

 

[BMfan]

Will you guy's please stop showing motor porn.
If this doesn't stop I will have to go to the moderators.

 

[davislane1]

Meh. As much as I love high performance cars, the day of the end of big oil is coming. It is a great thing.

People say this each and every time there is a major swing in oil prices. When it's down, "they're going out of business!" When it's up, "alternatives and electric will rule the day!" I'll buy the end of big oil act when major producers start going out of business.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

I'll buy the end of big oil act when major producers start going out of business.

And they won't go out of business until we stop needing oil. I doubt any of us reading this will live long enough to see that. In 2015 America will probably pass us Saudi Arabia and Russia and become the world's biggest producer of oil. So if by the 'end of big oil' we mean OPEC, then maybe. ExxonMobil? They'll be around for a while.

 

[davislane1]

And they won't go out of business until we stop needing oil. I doubt any of us reading this will live long enough to see that. In 2015 America will probably pass us Saudi Arabia and Russia and become the world's biggest producer of oil. So if by the 'end of big oil' we mean OPEC, then maybe. ExxonMobil? They'll be around for a while.

Indeed. This is why I am skeptical about the long-term viability of EVs like the Model S. They are nice enough products in their own right, but their primary advantage is (relatively) low operational cost. Unless there is a real crude shortage (supply scarcity, not reduced output), EVs will perpetually be a niche market. That's fine from a consumer standpoint. But Tesla itself will have a difficult time keeping its doors open if it can't compete on a different footing over the next 5-10 years.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

Indeed. This is why I am skeptical about the long-term viability of EVs like the Model S. They are nice enough products in their own right, but their primary advantage is (relatively) low operational cost. Unless there is a real crude shortage (supply scarcity, not reduced output), EVs will perpetually be a niche market. That's fine from a consumer standpoint. But Tesla itself will have a difficult time keeping its doors open if it can't compete on a different footing over the next 5-10 years.

You mean the Model 3 I think, right? That's the mainstream model projected for 2017 or 2018 that'll cost less than $40,000. The Model S is like $70k for a stripped down version, and no one is paying $70k+ for a car so they can save on gas. They're buying it because they're 'green' or because it's cool.
I agree EVs won't get big without an oil problem, but I think that niche will be decently sized. As in over 10% of the market, and that's a lot of cars. I think in 20 years when people buy a car the first thing they'll decide on is engine type. I would bet every major maker has an alternative fuel option, and I wouldn't be surprised if Tesla sells every car it makes for the next 5 years.
I think Toyota/Honda/GM/Ford etc are trying to turn a gasoline car into an EV with their EVs (which makes sense for them), while Tesla is starting from the ground up. That will be an advantage for Tesla.

 

[Darth Shiv]

People say this each and every time there is a major swing in oil prices. When it's down, "they're going out of business!" When it's up, "alternatives and electric will rule the day!" I'll buy the end of big oil act when major producers start going out of business.

I'm not saying it will be tomorrow or next year. Battery prices are plummetting. Lithium battery tech is exploding. OPEC is dumping their oil at prices aimed at pushing out lesser margin competitors. What does that tell you? They know they need to get rid of their stock and there is a lot of competition in the market. Why? Because there is too much supply now for their forecasts. They know the sooner they dump their stock, the more they will be able to sell because demand is going to drop sharply.

And they won't go out of business until we stop needing oil. I doubt any of us reading this will live long enough to see that. In 2015 America will probably pass us Saudi Arabia and Russia and become the world's biggest producer of oil. So if by the 'end of big oil' we mean OPEC, then maybe. ExxonMobil? They'll be around for a while.

OPEC can produce oil much cheaper than the US currently.

OPEC continuing to pump out supply cheaper than US to try to maintain monopoly on shrinking demand...
http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/12/31/us-markets-oil-idUSKBN0K905620141231

We may already be at the tipping point for oil. China's demand is plateauing and the market is saturated. I would suggest you would be making a mistake making long term investments in oil right now.

 

[Hexic]

I'll take my -electric- Barbie Dream Car, because I doubt I'll be able to afford either of these beautiful cars.

 

[Skidmarksdeluxe]

And I was soooo impressed with my dad's old Oldsmobile (another name they won't understand) with that impressive Rocket 440, who would have thought that a luxury car could take off like that! My dad's lawyer thanked me many, many times for finally buying myself a Dodge Charger with the four barrel ... to this day I don't understand how points on the license can magically disappear!!

I don't either. Maybe the points just fall off after the thing rockets off the line.

 

[fimbles]

I think I missed the shaming part. As far as I saw the lambo left it for dead after 30 yards.

Now.. Show me some cornering, A skip full of concrete probably weighs less and would corner better.

 

[Guest]

In term of acceleration, it'll be hard for cars using combustion engine to defeat electric cars..

 

[cliffordcooley]

Now.. Show me some cornering, A skip full of concrete probably weighs less and would corner better.

They better have the same tires on both cars, before making that comparison.

 

[dividebyzero]

They better have the same tires on both cars, before making that comparison.

Usually, any kind of comparison is made with both vehicles in their stock factory fit out. It is why most production car racing is predicated upon homologation - the parts themselves should at least be available through the order book.
Tyres in themselves wouldn't make the difference. Weight distribution, steering setup, braking, and suspension play more of a role.
Just as an aside, except for the wider rear feet of the Lambo, the tyres are actually pretty similar. The Tesla is shod with 21" Michelin PS2's (245/35 front, 265/35 rear) , while the Aventador utilizes 19" Pirelli 255/35 for the front and 20" 335/30 for the rear.

 

[hrowder]

I never understood what is so beautiful about the noise of an internal combustion engine.

And some people are quite happy with MP3 and don't see the attraction of lossless digital or analogue sound sources. It's all relative.

Harley Davidson are pretty much built on the sound of their V-twin, and nothing sounds as sweet to some as a Husaberg 650 single. I personally never bothered much with in-car cassette/CD/head units, as the sound of a well tuned eight (especially a MOPAR hemi) is a symphony in itself to my ears. Even the distinctive coffee-can-half-full-of-rocks-being shaken-violently notes of a Chrysler starter motor cranking over gets my attention from blocks away. All depends upon what you were brought up on, and how ingrained the passion is.

LOL... I just thought about the sound of the MOPAR starters the other day. We used to compare it to a bunch of metal curbside trashcans being kicked over, but the coffee can full of rocks will do too! Personally, I was always more a "mouse motor" fan in my youth, and still remember the original Z28 commercial with an announcer's voice describing the features of the car over the sound of the fast approaching Z28 on a Pikes Peak hill climb, which showed the only visual of the car "side sliding" into view to center stage (uhm... center mountain?) at the very end, then raping the throttle once before fade to black. Ahh... those were the days. It does remind me that certain sounds are evocative of times and treasures.

 

[Darth Shiv]

I think I missed the shaming part. As far as I saw the lambo left it for dead after 30 yards.

Now.. Show me some cornering, A skip full of concrete probably weighs less and would corner better.

Remember the relative price differences as well. On 0-100km/h the Tesla is great bang for buck (compared to a Lambo!).

 

[captaincranky]

Remember the relative price differences as well. On 0-100km/h the Tesla is great bang for buck (compared to a Lambo!).

Right, and how often do you need the, "0 to 100 bang for a buck", that the Tesla provides? The Lamborghini in question, is a tribute to excess, self indulgence, and mid to end life crisis in the human male. The styling, performance, and appointments, are all aimed at massaging those needs in a buyer.. The message involved being quite clear, "if you've done enough with your life to afford one of these, then reward yourself by buying one"! The Aventador was never intended to compete with the Toyota Celicas of the world, so why try to compare it to one?

With that being said, Lamborghini, Ferrari, and ostensibly Maserati as well, all have business models with the end game being turning a profit. Tesla motors never has. Just when you think it might, Musk buys a whole new crap load of "equipment", or develops some other "sound reason", to put his hat in hand, and another round of begging from his investors begins.

The headline reads, "Musk pays back loan from US government ahead of time". What the headlines seem to have missed is, "Musk borrows money from private investors to pay back the US ahead of schedule".

Now riddle me this, if you have almost no intention of turning a profit, what earthly f***ing difference does it make, where you set the price?

And an even better question for pretty much all of the Muskian disciples in the audience, "how does pulling a hole shot, in a more than likely incorrectly stickered car, and then losing the race, amount to shaming the competition"?

From where I sit it surely does not.

When Musk is out of headlines, he either, "thinks it would be easy to build a flying car", or, "thinks he should build a colony on Mars", or pays off a load of clods at a car magazine to claim the Tesla, "shamed the competition by losing a race".

And everybody at Techspot sits around thinking the Tesla is "reasonably priced" at around a hundred grand, then move on to the next thread where they claim, "I download games and movies for free because they're too expensive".