3 ms·

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

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).
- ncallaway 3y ago
  Subtracting rollout times from one car, but not all cars, presented in the same page as comparisons is inherently dishonest.

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).
ncallaway 3y ago
Subtracting rollout times from one car, but not all cars, presented in the same page as comparisons is inherently dishonest.