Connect with us

News

Performance Gains after P85D Ludicrous Mode Upgrade

TMC member thimel recently had the Ludicrous mode upgrade installed on his Model S P85D. He carefully measured the performance of his car before and after, and found that Ludicrous mode is worth about a half second to 60 mph and a noticeable increase in power at all speeds up to 80.

Published

on

P85D-Ludicrous-Mode-Badge-Emblem

Just how much faster is the the P85D with Ludicrous Mode upgrade? According to Tesla Motors Club (TMC) member thimel, the performance gains are significant, to the tune of 19% more power above 30 mph and a drop in 0-60 time from 3.2 to 2.9 seconds. Quarter mile time also drops from an already quick 11.8 seconds to an astounding 11.5 seconds.

thimel carefully measured the performance of the P85D both before and after the Ludicrous Mode upgrade. The performance data was then meticulously charted and plotted, painting a clear picture of the performance differences from the $5,000 retrofit.

Performance Chart P85D Ludicrous Mode Upgrade

[Image source: thimel via TMC]

According to thimel’s post from the TMC forum, “I started the before Ludicrous tests early in the morning and had not driven the car for many hours, but had charged it that night. The ambient temperature in my garage that morning was 59 degrees and it was 50 degrees outside during the tests. I started with a 90% charge and by the time I was done the charge was 70%. Creep mode was off to help avoid a very slow start. Insane mode was on of course. Climate control was off.

“I drove a few miles before starting the first test but did nothing else to warm the battery. I drove 5 miles at moderate acceleration and speeds between acceleration passes. This was both to give a chance for things to cool down and to return me to the same starting point for each acceleration pass.data shows the Ludicrous mode upgrade it worth nearly a half second in the sprint to 60 mph and several more miles per hour at the end of the quarter mile. ”

Next he charted his power and speed against time and found power to range from 380 kW, before the Ludicrous upgrade, to 451 kW after the upgrade with the Max Battery Power setting on. The setting heats the Tesla battery to a higher temperature thereby reducing its impedance and increasing current to provide short term acceleration and performance gains.

 

thimel chart 2

The biggest boost in performance after the Ludicrous upgrade happens above 30 mph. Below that, performance is about the same. But with Ludicrous mode engaged, there is a sizable increase in available torque. Before the upgrade, lateral acceleration reaches approximately 1.15 g at 15 mph, then falls below 1 g after 25 mph. After the upgrade, lateral acceleration peaks at 1.1 g and continues to pull over 1 g until slightly past 30+ mph. Most notably, the acceleration is consistently above the pre-Ludicrous Mode upgrade all the way until 80 mph.

Advertisement
-
P85D Ludicrous Mode acceleration

[Image source: thimel via TMC]

In his notes, thimel makes some interesting points. “Above 30 mph, ludicrous clearly has more power. This is seen directly with the PowerTools readout…..which shows the maximum power increased from 380 to 451 kW, a 19% increase and by the shorter times to achieve speeds above 30 mph. The max power measured from the battery was 451 kW. This compares to 458 kW that Pete90D measured on his P90DL. So the battery doesn’t make much of a difference. The 0-60 time I got of 2.89 is also nearly identical to that Pete90D got of 2.901.”

He ends his post with this conclusion: “The P85D with ludicrous upgrade is significantly faster than without. There is 19% more power above 30 mph, 0-60 time drops from 3.2 to 2.9 seconds and the quarter mile time drops from 11.8 to 11.5. So it was fast before and is faster now. You get about two-thirds of the improvement if you don’t heat the battery with max battery power.”

"I write about technology and the coming zero emissions revolution."

Advertisement
Comments

Investor's Corner

Tesla and SpaceX take “Terafab” Trademark fight to Federal Court

Tesla and SpaceX sue a small Illinois firm after cease and desist letters over Terafab.

Published

on

By

SpaceX Terafab rendering

Tesla and SpaceX are asking a federal judge to rule that their planned Terafab chip factory does not infringe a small Illinois company’s trademark, a request that arrives only after months of quiet negotiation broke down this summer.

The dispute traces to May 18, when Tesla filed three U.S. trademark applications for “Terafab” and “Tesla Terafab,” covering semiconductor chips and related chip making services. TERA-print LLC, a nanotechnology company that has held a federal trademark for “Tera-Fab” since 2021, responded five days later with a cease and desist letter. According to the lawsuit, first reported by Reuters, TERA-print argued that Tesla and SpaceX’s use of “Terafab” would confuse consumers familiar with its own trademark, which covers a desktop photolithography printer sold to researchers for sensor and bioengineering work.

What stands out in the filing is the timing of TERA-print’s own paperwork. One day before sending that cease and desist letter, on May 22, TERA-print applied to expand its existing registration to cover semiconductor materials, silicon chips, nanoelectronic devices and AI design services, categories it had not previously claimed. Tesla and SpaceX call that filing opportunistic in their complaint, noting it arrived two months after Tesla’s public Terafab announcement and just days after Tesla’s own trademark applications went in.

Elon Musk launches TERAFAB: The $25B Tesla-SpaceXAI chip factory that will rewire the AI industry

By June 10, TERA-print was threatening to sue for federal trademark infringement, false designation of origin and unfair competition, the complaint states. Rather than wait to be sued, Tesla, SpaceX and SpaceXAI met with TERA-print six separate times between June and August trying to resolve the dispute directly. Those talks collapsed, and the companies filed for declaratory judgment this week in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, asking a judge to find that “Terafab” does not infringe TERA-print’s mark before TERA-print can file a claim of its own.

TERA-print isn’t backing down. The company told PCMag it discussed a settlement with Tesla as recently as September 2 and feels misled by what it called Tesla’s professed interest in settling. Its CTO, Andrey Ivankin, said TERA-print holds a Defense Department contract to fabricate semiconductors and partially owns Mattiq Inc., an AI company built on TERA-print’s products, and that the company will vigorously defend its rights.

Advertisement
-

Tesla and SpaceX argue the overlap is superficial. Terafab is planned as a $16.8 billion complex spanning roughly 100 million square feet at the Grimes County site SpaceX confirmed last month, built to produce chips for Optimus robots, Tesla’s AI computing needs and SpaceX’s orbital data center ambitions, a scale and purpose the companies say no reasonable consumer would confuse with a tabletop lab printer. TERA-print’s product line has stayed focused on lithography tools for biological and sensor research since it registered its mark in 2021.

The trademark fight is the second legal dispute tied to the Terafab project in the past week, following a separate SpaceX suit aimed at keeping company records about the facility out of public view, as KBTX reported. Whether construction proceeds under the Terafab name now depends on a federal judge in Austin.

Continue Reading

News

NHTSA just escalated its Tesla Cybercab investigation in a big way

NHTSA escalated its Cybercab audit into a sworn Special Order with a September 30 deadline.

Published

on

By

Federal regulators have moved from asking Tesla questions about its Cybercab to demanding sworn answers. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration issued a Special Order that requires a Tesla officer to sign an affidavit attesting to the completeness of the company’s responses, with a deadline of September 30.

The order builds on Audit Query AQ26002, which NHTSA opened on September 3, the same day Tesla began commercial Cybercab service in Austin. Teslarati covered that initial inquiry when it surfaced, noting the agency wanted to understand how Tesla certified a vehicle with no permanently attached steering wheel, pedals, or mirrors as compliant with Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards. A Special Order is a different tool and converts a fact finding review into a legally enforceable demand, the same mechanism NHTSA used against Tesla in 2023 during its Autopilot investigation.

Several of the 21 requests target a specific gap in Cybercab’s design. One asks whether Tesla used temporarily attached human controls at any point to help certify the vehicle, and if so, which standards depended on that equipment being present. Another quotes an existing rule directly: “The service brakes shall be activated by means of a foot control.” Cybercab has no foot pedal. NHTSA wants a detailed explanation of how the vehicle satisfies that requirement, and how it complies without the kind of exemption granted to Zoox in July under Part 555, the regulatory pathway built for steering wheel free vehicles.

The order does not claim Cybercab is unsafe or that Tesla broke a rule. It requires Tesla to explain, under oath, the reasoning behind decisions the company already made when it self-certified the vehicle. That distinction matters, but so does the exposure. Motor1’s reporting, summarized here, put potential civil penalty exposure as high as $139 million if NHTSA later finds the certification was flawed, on top of whatever criminal risk comes with a false sworn statement.

Tesla has not said publicly how it plans to respond. Cybercab is still carrying passengers in Austin through the Robotaxi app while the September 30 deadline approaches, and the company has continued expanding the vehicle’s footprint even as the regulatory question remains open. The Special Order does not pause any of that and just sets a date by which Tesla has to put its certification logic on the record, with a company officer’s name attached to it.

Continue Reading

Investor's Corner

Tesla uber bull Ron Baron says ‘the time to buy the stock is now’

Published

on

Credit: Tesla

In a new interview on Wednesday, Tesla uber bull Ron Baron said that anyone looking to buy the company’s stock should do so as soon as they can.

Baron, founder and CEO of Baron Capital and one of Tesla’s most persistent institutional bulls, used a CNBC Squawk Box appearance on Wednesday to deliver a familiar message with fresh urgency: In his opinion, Tesla stock is a buy:

“The time to buy the stock is now. FSD is catching on, and it’s going to be bigger and bigger. 55% of new buyers are buying it (Teslas) with FSD. It’s going to be everywhere. It’s safer.”

The Baron Capital frontman’s case is built around Full Self-Driving. Tesla reported 1.48 million active FSD subscriptions in the second quarter, up 56 percent year over year, and company officials have said roughly 55 percent of new North American deliveries left with a subscription enabled.

Baron framed that attach rate as proof the product is moving from enthusiast extra to default expectation, and as a reason software, not just vehicle volume, should drive the next phase of value.

His conviction on Tesla shares is not theoretical, as Baron Capital made its first Tesla investment in 2014, after years of meetings that began around the 2010 IPO roadshow. The firm later built a large SpaceX position starting in 2017.

Advertisement
-

Baron said those Musk-led bets have generated about $30 billion of the $71 billion in profits Baron Capital has produced for clients. He put the firm’s current exposure at roughly $25 billion in SpaceX and $5 billion in Tesla. Personally, he described SpaceX as his largest holding, at about $5 billion, with about $1.5 billion in Tesla and additional Tesla exposure through the firm’s funds.

That concentration is also a statement of loyalty. Asked about talk of a SpaceX-Tesla combination, Baron said he had already walked Elon Musk through arguments for and against a deal, then declined to repeat them on air. His public position was simpler: “Whatever you decide is better is what I’m going to support,” he said to Musk.

Baron also said that he picked up the farewell edition of the Model S after Tesla decided to sunset the vehicle earlier this year, calling it his favorite car he’s ever driven.

Advertisement
-
Continue Reading