tstafford

Generally no. Tesla experimented with gearing in the gen-1 Roadster and it continuously destroyed the gears. There's really no need for gearing although I suppose a really high second gear could extend range maybe. Probably not worth it.

Sonnen Porsche

I think the exact opposite as gearing is the final piece of the puzzle to get the 250 mile + range at speed that consumers need...especially German consumers. My EV goes 85 miles at 50 mph on a 62 degree day. At 80 mph it goes about 40 miles because it only has 1 speed and not an overdrive. 2 speeds would allow a less powerful car to go faster and further than a car with a direct drive 1 speed only. Hopefully all of the EV manufacturers are working on gearing...

bdoviack

I believe the mileage decrease you are seeing when increasing your speed from 50 mph to 80 mph is not primarily due to gearing, rather it's due to aerodynamics. I believe wind resistance goes up exponentially (not linearly) the faster you go. Electric motors have a relatively flat power band so they do not need gears as much as ICE motors to stay in their optimum range.

Here are some simple charts I found that show what causes the most power consumption on EV's

http://www.solarjourneyusa.com/EVdistanceAnalysis5.php

cometguy

Very interesting article. But I wonder with today's cars -- a full decade after the data were produced in that article -- how much the computer system(s) play into the ancillary power drain. Running the active navigation map on my 2018 Panamera E-Hybrid, for example, might take more power than running the audio system. Running my night-vision camera might take a fair amount of power also. How much power does the Adaptive Cruise Control use when employed constantly? It would be interesting and potentially useful to know which of these computer functions take the most power, and which should be used more sparingly if one desires to get the most range out of the electric motor (whether an EV or PHEV).

daveo4porsche

all of the power draws for the in car electronics pail in comparison to the traction motor - you're using 300-400 watt-hours per mile of driving in the 50-70 mph range - the in car electronics don't play much of a role at that sort of consumption rate - Air-conditioning and heating however do play a role - and the Chevy Bolt for example gets about 10-20% with the AC off - and 30% better range if the heater is off in winter and it's below 40F outside…

you'd be amazed how far you can drive a Tesla Model S at 55 mph or less - and 70-80 mph is a dramatic reduction in range vs. 60 mph - all due to increased aero-dynamic loads - if you're going into a head wind that makes it even worse - I almost got stranded driving 70 mph north on I-5 from LA to SF with a 15 mph head wind - what should've been a run with 15% battery buffer between Tejon Ranch and Harris Ranch in a Model S P85 - turned into a zero % battery and the car almost died on me pulling into Harris Ranch with no battery capacity left - I'd done the run several times before - and driven even fast - the only difference was a 15 mph head wind on the night I lost all my battery - luckily I noticed the increase consumption rate and lowered my speed for the last 60 miles to nurse the battery to get to Harris ranch to charge…

beware head winds when trying to maximize range in an EV on a distance trip - the aero-dynamic load will screw you every time!

various cheeses

https://www.autoblog.com/2018/09/10/...can-spy-shots/

New spy shots from a few days ago. My favorite is the obvious camo cladding exhaust tips.

ace10

Front end is HEAVILY disguised. I like the size. Looks to shave at least 8-10" off the length of the Panamera. Which I find to be comically oversized.
I sincerely hope that the charge port location is a ruse. It's really stupid to put it in front of the front doors. And doubly dumb if it's only on the passenger side.
Rear US driver's side makes perfect sense. And it's where the PSeH is docking currently.

GreggT

Same cars from the fleet they built about a year ago.