3 ms·

Zero means zero. Who decided they could change the definition of zero?

by supportengineer 3y ago

coin 3y ago
Definitely misleading. It should be advertised as “1 to 60”.
- dragontamer 3y ago
  Standard "rollout" test is 5-to-60. This whole thing stinks of misleading and misdirection, once again. Don't take 5-to-60 times and mislead / misdirect people into thinking it was a 0-to-60 time.
- DonHopkins 3y ago
  -60 to 60 would be more interesting to watch, and pleasingly symmetrical.
  - m463 3y ago
    They used to do something (vaguely) similar, like 0-100-0 which also included brakes in the equation. I also remember a motor trend article where they figured out the "horsepower" of the brakes and a 911 would decelerate like 1000 hp
madeofpalk 3y ago
I mean, if the wheels are just spinning without traction it’s still at zero.
- kllrnohj 3y ago
  The wheels aren't spinning without traction, that results in a terrible 0-60 time. Rollout originated from the practical reality of measuring with a starting beam - the tire doesn't stop breaking the beam until after it's started moving. With modern GPS data loggers and other corrections the use of rollout is just to lie about the 0-60 time to make it seem better than it is. Like the Model S Plaid wouldn't get to claim a 0-60 of under 2 seconds without that cheat code.
ajross 3y ago
Think of it like a microbenchmark. Acceleration for the first second or so is dominated by tire/road traction. Acceleration at non-trivial speed is governed by drive train power. Which measurement you take depends on what subsystem you want to measure. Drag nuts like tuning engines (which can be done in their shops with a high school education) and not choosing tire compositions (which requires a tire factory, and likely some polymer chemistry expertise).
- dragontamer 3y ago
  That's called the 5-to-60 time. Car enthusiasts benchmark both 0-to-60 and 5-to-60 because that rollout can change the behavior of various cars. What we have here is Tesla taking the 5-to-60 time and pretending its a 0-to-60 time. Rollout is fine and all, just ya know, be honest about it. Call it a 5-to-60 time.
  - ajross 3y ago
    > Rollout is fine and all, just ya know, be honest about it. Call it a 5-to-60 time Are they not honest? It says so right in the spec quote. Why is "5-to-60" honest but "with rollout subtracted" dishonest? One is jargon and the other English, but I think you have to stretch really hard to read in an attempt to deceive here.
    - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
      > One is jargon and the other English 5-to-60 strikes me as plain English. 0-to-60 with rollout subtracted is just bullshit.
    - wtallis 3y ago
      Putting "with rollout subtracted" in the fine print doesn't make the 0 in "0-60" less wrong. And doing it inconsistently is even less justifiable.
    - dragontamer 3y ago
      Because everyone who knows something about cars knows that 5-to-60 times are easier to do than 0-to-60 times. Taking the "easier" test and trying to call it the harder 0-to-60 test is just misleading fundamentally. Especially to car culture who has had these standard terms for the last 50 years (or longer). 0 means "Dead stop". Its difficult, it depends on extremely good tires to grip and other parts of the car that are hard to get right. It also rarely comes up in a race, so the 5-to-60 time is actually more useful in a lot of racing scenarios. So yeah, 5-to-60 is a good test. But just don't call it the 0-to-60 time (or torture the language / invent new words as if we're dumbasses and can't see the marketing bullshit going on).
pseudosavant 3y ago
Rollout is a part of many standard tests, even if it makes little sense when it basically means a 0-60 is more like a 5-60 or 10-60. But what makes it sketchy is that Tesla selectively excludes it in the specs for the top end models of cars to make it seem like there is an even greater performance gap.
GloriousKoji 3y ago
Probably the same ones who came up with the idea of "Partial zero" (emissions).

Zero means zero. Who decided they could change the definition of zero?

coin 3y ago

Definitely misleading. It should be advertised as “1 to 60”.

dragontamer 3y ago
Standard "rollout" test is 5-to-60. This whole thing stinks of misleading and misdirection, once again. Don't take 5-to-60 times and mislead / misdirect people into thinking it was a 0-to-60 time.
DonHopkins 3y ago
-60 to 60 would be more interesting to watch, and pleasingly symmetrical.
- m463 3y ago
  They used to do something (vaguely) similar, like 0-100-0 which also included brakes in the equation. I also remember a motor trend article where they figured out the "horsepower" of the brakes and a 911 would decelerate like 1000 hp

madeofpalk 3y ago

I mean, if the wheels are just spinning without traction it’s still at zero.

kllrnohj 3y ago
The wheels aren't spinning without traction, that results in a terrible 0-60 time. Rollout originated from the practical reality of measuring with a starting beam - the tire doesn't stop breaking the beam until after it's started moving. With modern GPS data loggers and other corrections the use of rollout is just to lie about the 0-60 time to make it seem better than it is. Like the Model S Plaid wouldn't get to claim a 0-60 of under 2 seconds without that cheat code.

ajross 3y ago

Think of it like a microbenchmark. Acceleration for the first second or so is dominated by tire/road traction. Acceleration at non-trivial speed is governed by drive train power. Which measurement you take depends on what subsystem you want to measure. Drag nuts like tuning engines (which can be done in their shops with a high school education) and not choosing tire compositions (which requires a tire factory, and likely some polymer chemistry expertise).

dragontamer 3y ago
That's called the 5-to-60 time. Car enthusiasts benchmark both 0-to-60 and 5-to-60 because that rollout can change the behavior of various cars. What we have here is Tesla taking the 5-to-60 time and pretending its a 0-to-60 time. Rollout is fine and all, just ya know, be honest about it. Call it a 5-to-60 time.
- ajross 3y ago
  > Rollout is fine and all, just ya know, be honest about it. Call it a 5-to-60 time Are they not honest? It says so right in the spec quote. Why is "5-to-60" honest but "with rollout subtracted" dishonest? One is jargon and the other English, but I think you have to stretch really hard to read in an attempt to deceive here.
  - JumpCrisscross 3y ago
    > One is jargon and the other English 5-to-60 strikes me as plain English. 0-to-60 with rollout subtracted is just bullshit.
  - wtallis 3y ago
    Putting "with rollout subtracted" in the fine print doesn't make the 0 in "0-60" less wrong. And doing it inconsistently is even less justifiable.
  - dragontamer 3y ago
    Because everyone who knows something about cars knows that 5-to-60 times are easier to do than 0-to-60 times. Taking the "easier" test and trying to call it the harder 0-to-60 test is just misleading fundamentally. Especially to car culture who has had these standard terms for the last 50 years (or longer). 0 means "Dead stop". Its difficult, it depends on extremely good tires to grip and other parts of the car that are hard to get right. It also rarely comes up in a race, so the 5-to-60 time is actually more useful in a lot of racing scenarios. So yeah, 5-to-60 is a good test. But just don't call it the 0-to-60 time (or torture the language / invent new words as if we're dumbasses and can't see the marketing bullshit going on).

pseudosavant 3y ago

Rollout is a part of many standard tests, even if it makes little sense when it basically means a 0-60 is more like a 5-60 or 10-60. But what makes it sketchy is that Tesla selectively excludes it in the specs for the top end models of cars to make it seem like there is an even greater performance gap.

GloriousKoji 3y ago

Probably the same ones who came up with the idea of "Partial zero" (emissions).