Great Mach-E GT PE Drag Strip Testing - 12 Runs!

[Frankie]

And yes, you're right, we were promised it 5 years ago.

Have it on my Model Y now. Granted, it's MUCH a work in progress and in a VERY LIMITED rollout for testing AND I had to achieve a perfect 100 safety score to get it, but it's real.

It's real? Your Tesla can now drive all the way across the country, driverless, at the press of a button?

Isn't that what Elon promised?

 

[Frankie]

It's smart.

What would you say not really disclosing these limitations is? Also smart?

 

[Frankie]

I don't find bitching and moaning to be a particularly effective means of bringing about change.

What sort of change does bending over and taking it bring about?

 

[Scooby24]

What would you say not really disclosing these limitations is? Also smart?

It appears they've been disclosed with the media drive as well as implementing a power meter. They are not the only ones who haven't fully disclosed their caveats as I noted above. The information is out there now to all except the earliest adopters.

What sort of change does bending over and taking it bring about?

We evolved to be capable of quite a bit more complex thought than binary rationalization. You can avoid bitching and moaning, understanding it's not going to bring about change, while at the same time providing constructive criticisms and feedback.

eg: Ford scheduling calls with owners and their engineers, which is something that can and does happen.

 

[Mach1E]

It appears they've been disclosed with the media drive as well as implementing a power meter. They are not the only ones who haven't fully disclosed their caveats as I noted above. The information is out there now to all except the earliest adopters.



We evolved to be capable of quite a bit more complex thought than binary rationalization. You can avoid bitching and moaning, understanding it's not going to bring about change, while at the same time providing constructive criticisms and feedback.

eg: Ford scheduling calls with owners and their engineers, which is something that can and does happen.

It absolutely has NOT been disclosed!

They briefly mentioned the 5 second boost at a private media event with zero details as to what it actually means and does.

Plus we already know that even the “5 seconds” isn’t accurate as you only get 5 seconds of boost from a complete stop and significantly less from a roll.

Disclosure and transparency would mean actually telling us the facts, including what peak power is without the boost…… just like every other manufacturer on the planet with a boost mode does.

 

[Scooby24]

It absolutely has NOT been disclosed!

They briefly mentioned the 5 second boost at a private media event with zero details as to what it actually means and does.

Plus we already know that even the “5 seconds” isn’t accurate as you only get 5 seconds of boost from a complete stop and significantly less from a roll.

Disclosure and transparency would mean actually telling us the facts, including what peak power is without the boost…… just like every other manufacturer on the planet with a boost mode does.

Surely you understand private media events are how companies get a consistent message out for their products. They share media material which is used as talking points.

It doesn't have to be explicitly stated in marketing material to be disclosed.

As someone who's tuned multiple vehicles, I can tell you that every other manufacturer most certainly does not disclose all the variables factored into how they make peak power.

From long term, short term fuel trims, to boost tables, to dynamic advanced multipliers, to DA scaling, to knock feedback, to throttle mapping, to torque request tables, to torque limiting by gear, etc.

People aren't smart enough to understand it. So they get a dumbed down version. AKA, here's your power meter.

Maybe you want all the information...maybe you're capable of understanding it all. Do they have to give it to you?

No.

Will bitching about it get Ford to give it to you? Probably not.

Can you keep bitching? Sure... go for it. Get it all out of your system. (evidently it's not yet?... must be a lot in there. Maybe consider a laxative?)

edit:
Here ya go, they disclosed it.

https://media.ford.com/content/ford...rformance--online-ordering-for-ford-must.html

6 Calculated via peak performance of the electric motors at peak battery power. Your results may vary. 487 PS performance boost delivered for 5 seconds.

Best not to speak in absolutes with confidence. People tend to end up looking silly when proven wrong.

 

[harrysiii]

Surely you understand private media events are how companies get a consistent message out for their products. They share media material which is used as talking points.

It doesn't have to be explicitly stated in marketing material to be disclosed.

As someone who's tuned multiple vehicles, I can tell you that every other manufacturer most certainly does not disclose all the variables factored into how they make peak power.

From long term, short term fuel trims, to boost tables, to dynamic advanced multipliers, to DA scaling, to knock feedback, to throttle mapping, to torque request tables, to torque limiting by gear, etc.

People aren't smart enough to understand it. So they get a dumbed down version. AKA, here's your power meter.

Maybe you want all the information...maybe you're capable of understanding it all. Do they have to give it to you?

No.

Will bitching about it get Ford to give it to you? Probably not.

Can you keep bitching? Sure... go for it. Get it all out of your system. (evidently it's not yet?... must be a lot in there. Maybe consider a laxative?)

edit:
Here ya go, they disclosed it.

https://media.ford.com/content/ford...rformance--online-ordering-for-ford-must.html



Best not to speak in absolutes with confidence. People tend to end up looking silly when proven wrong.

Oh wow! This is the first time I've seen it in writing. This is the European model, which is a mix between the US GT and GTPE. I wonder if that's why the GTPE has 34ft-lbore torque and 0.3 seconds quicker 0-60....because it gets the 5-second performance boost and the GT doesn't. So it's really a 600ft-lb rating with a temporary overboost ....sometimes. (also worth noting I put a reservation down on this when the power estimates were lower than they are stated now)

That DEFINITELY should have been disclosed by Ford from the beginning and before ordering started. Since they didn't, they absolutely should give use full torque all the time.

At the same time, this also doesn't make sense. Coming back to trap speed, which isn't bad until you compare it to the non-GT. This thing isn't acting like it even has 600ft-lb if it traps where the non-GT does. Very fishy.

 

[Scooby24]

Oh wow! This is the first time I've seen it in writing. This is the European model, which is a mix between the US GT and GTPE. I wonder if that's why the GTPE has 34ft-lbore torque and 0.3 seconds quicker 0-60....because it gets the 5-second performance boost and the GT doesn't. So it's really a 600ft-lb rating with a temporary overboost ....sometimes. (also worth noting I put a reservation down on this when the power estimates were lower than they are stated now)

That DEFINITELY should have been disclosed by Ford from the beginning and before ordering started. Since they didn't, they absolutely should give use full torque all the time.

At the same time, this also doesn't make sense. Coming back to trap speed, which isn't bad until you compare it to the non-GT. This thing isn't acting like it even has 600ft-lb if it traps where the non-GT does. Very fishy.

It's not that fishy, just a matter of understanding physics.

The longer time you have to accelerate, the faster you can get.

The shorter time you have to accelerate, the less time you have to build speed.

If you get a fast start, AKA a boost, you accelerate faster but for a shorter period of time before you cross the line where your speed is measured.

This is demonstrated back to back when you get faster 60' times, you generally have slower trap speeds.

The reality is that the GT/PE could and is likely making more power even after the boost than the MME but because the MME has more time to accelerate (slower ET) it can build up more speed in the same distance.

You can't look at trap speeds alone as a measurement.

This is the problem with bench racing.

Here's a decent explanation of it:
http://www.pdq-v.com/files/trapspeedversusETExplained.pdf

 

[harrysiii]

It's not that fishy, just a matter of understanding physics.

The longer time you have to accelerate, the faster you can get.

The shorter time you have to accelerate, the less time you have to build speed.

If you get a fast start, AKA a boost, you accelerate faster but for a shorter period of time before you cross the line where your speed is measured.

This is demonstrated back to back when you get faster 60' times, you generally have slower trap speeds.

The reality is that the GT/PE could and is likely making more power even after the boost than the MME but because the MME has more time to accelerate (slower ET) it can build up more speed in the same distance.

You can't look at trap speeds alone as a measurement.

This is the problem with bench racing.

I'm trying to better understand what you're saying....wouldn't I actually have more time (well, more distance) to accelerate from, say, 60' because I'm starting from a higher speed at that point? I know distance goes by faster at higher speeds, but the much lower powered non-GT should not be able to be going faster just because it was on the same-distance piece of road for longer.

I may need to actually map out the calculations to believe it (or have someone that does this more often do it for me ).

 

[harrysiii]

It's not that fishy, just a matter of understanding physics.

The longer time you have to accelerate, the faster you can get.

The shorter time you have to accelerate, the less time you have to build speed.

If you get a fast start, AKA a boost, you accelerate faster but for a shorter period of time before you cross the line where your speed is measured.

This is demonstrated back to back when you get faster 60' times, you generally have slower trap speeds.

The reality is that the GT/PE could and is likely making more power even after the boost than the MME but because the MME has more time to accelerate (slower ET) it can build up more speed in the same distance.

You can't look at trap speeds alone as a measurement.

This is the problem with bench racing.

Here's a decent explanation of it:
http://www.pdq-v.com/files/trapspeedversusETExplained.pdf

Just saw your edits. Reading this PDF now. Thanks

 

[harrysiii]

Just saw your edits. Reading this PDF now. Thanks

Ok, I read (most of) it. It doesn't seem all that relevant to the MME (et, missed shifts, etc), except in the fact that the last half of the strip impacts trap speed, the first half impacts ET.

This also has a formula in there for adding HP to increase trap speed for the same car. Well, that would equate to our perfect example here non-GT versus GT. With what, 100+ more HP that would equal an estimated 15 more MPH?

 

[Scooby24]

I'm trying to better understand what you're saying....wouldn't I actually have more time (well, more distance) to accelerate from, say, 60' because I'm starting from a higher speed at that point? I know distance goes by faster at higher speeds, but the much lower powered non-GT should not be able to be going faster just because it was on the same-distance piece of road for longer.

I may need to actually map out the calculations to believe it (or have someone that does this more often do it for me ).

Here's the math

The GT crosses the 1/8 at [email protected]. 1/4 at [email protected]

The MME crosses the 1/8 at [email protected]. 1/4 at [email protected]

Now we have 660 feet equal distance.

The GT/GTPE has 4.655 seconds to gain 13.85 mph.

The MME has 4.81 seconds to gain 18.79mph.

GT/GTPE Acceleration: 1.33 m/s2

MME Acceleration: 1.75 m/s2

Based on the numbers it does appear that the MME is accelerating a hair faster than the GT/PE beyond the 1/8 mile.

But I believe we've seen a 12.4 @ 104-105 for the GT. If the 1/8 was about the same, and mph was 105, that would be the same acceleration as the MME (1.76 m/s2) which is probably closer to the truth than the two select time slips I've found for the above numbers.

Point being, The GT isn't necessarily slower than the MME just because the trap speeds are roughly the same or the MME being slightly higher in some cases.

It just has the boost. Without that boost, it seems to have roughly the same power as the MME. The only way an MME is gonna beat a GT in a roll race is if the GT just used up its boost time and then they take off after that....and even then it's probably going to look pretty close to a tie...the MME may have the upper edge due to lighter overall weight including lighter wheels and tires.

 

[harrysiii]

Here's the math

The GT crosses the 1/8 at [email protected]. 1/4 at [email protected]

The MME crosses the 1/8 at [email protected]. 1/4 at [email protected]

Now we have 660 feet equal distance.

The GT/GTPE has 4.655 seconds to gain 13.85 mph.

The MME has 4.81 seconds to gain 18.79mph.

GT/GTPE Acceleration: 1.33 m/s2

MME Acceleration: 1.75 m/s2

Based on the numbers it does appear that the MME is accelerating a hair faster than the GT/PE beyond the 1/8 mile.

But I believe we've seen a 12.4 @ 104-105 for the GT. If the 1/8 was about the same, and mph was 105, that would be the same acceleration as the MME (1.76 m/s2) which is probably closer to the truth than the two select time slips I've found for the above numbers.

Point being, The GT isn't necessarily slower than the MME just because the trap speeds are roughly the same or the MME being slightly higher in some cases.

It just has the boost. Without that boost, it seems to have roughly the same power as the MME. The only way an MME is gonna beat a GT in a roll race is if the GT just used up its boost time and then they take off after that....and even then it's probably going to look pretty close to a tie...the MME may have the upper edge due to lighter overall weight including lighter wheels and tires.

Yes, and that seems fishy with a vehicle about the same weight but with much less power and torque to keep up with the GT.

 

[Scooby24]

Yes, and that seems fishy with a vehicle about the same weight but with much less power and torque to keep up with the GT.

Much less PEAK power/torque.

At the end of the day, the GT is just over 4k more than the extended range AWD.

It's the same battery size and has the same rear motor duplicated to the front axle. These sorts of prices and mechanics don't really jive with an expectation of the vast differences you all are expecting.

For 4100 more than the MME EX AWD, you basically pay for a package improvement. With that improvement you get a 5 second boost which gives you a significant amount more power and torque....for those 5 seconds or however long the boost lasts.

That seems like a pretty fair trade off. After all the GTPE owners are happy with paying 5 grand more than the GT, only getting 34 ftlbs more and a hair faster 0-60.

They're paying more for upgrading to magneride and getting some summer tires (and now as we know bigger brakes god damnit) over the GT than the GT owners paid over the Premium owners to get all those extras of the GT.

Seems like a steal actually.

Ya'll know of ANY other vehicle out there that will offer a package that will shave 1 second off your ET and 1 second off your 0-60 for about 4 grand?

Model Y LR vs Performance is a 7 grand premium.

LR = 0-60 4.1 seconds 1/4 = [email protected]
Performance = 0-60 3.6 seconds 1/4 = 12.1@113

Note the trap speeds.

 

[Mach1E]

Surely you understand private media events are how companies get a consistent message out for their products. They share media material which is used as talking points.

It doesn't have to be explicitly stated in marketing material to be disclosed.

As someone who's tuned multiple vehicles, I can tell you that every other manufacturer most certainly does not disclose all the variables factored into how they make peak power.

From long term, short term fuel trims, to boost tables, to dynamic advanced multipliers, to DA scaling, to knock feedback, to throttle mapping, to torque request tables, to torque limiting by gear, etc.

People aren't smart enough to understand it. So they get a dumbed down version. AKA, here's your power meter.

Maybe you want all the information...maybe you're capable of understanding it all. Do they have to give it to you?

No.

Will bitching about it get Ford to give it to you? Probably not.

Can you keep bitching? Sure... go for it. Get it all out of your system. (evidently it's not yet?... must be a lot in there. Maybe consider a laxative?)

edit:
Here ya go, they disclosed it.

https://media.ford.com/content/ford...rformance--online-ordering-for-ford-must.html



Best not to speak in absolutes with confidence. People tend to end up looking silly when proven wrong.

Wow you are missing the simplest of points.

Saying they use a 5 second boost for peak hp isn’t disclosure, it’s maybe 1/3 of what needs to be disclosed.

Power without boost- needs to be disclosed.

How long the boost ACTUALLY lasts- needs to be disclosed (it isn’t always 5 seconds).

This is NOT anything like sftf ltft timing tables etc (yes, I spent my share tuning cars as well).

This is about being honest about how much power the car makes….. with and without boost.

All the other car manufacturers disclose power with and without boost. And they do it on the REGULAR PUBLIC WEBSITE. Not hidden in some media event or media release.

FWIW, I did already see that European disclosure about the 5 seconds, someone posted it yesterday. It’s not enough disclosure.

Sponsored