Taycan Turbo - EPA rated 201 miles
12-12-2019, 03:09 PM
#151
How can you take Matt seriously. Joe asked him for the range and he said 300 miles.
It is also possible for press cars to have all battery unlocked let’s say because Porsche doesn’t care about the damage. I don’t know just a guess. It’s hard to explain 201 vs whatever press people were saying.
It is also possible for press cars to have all battery unlocked let’s say because Porsche doesn’t care about the damage. I don’t know just a guess. It’s hard to explain 201 vs whatever press people were saying.
LOLI guess, we'll find out when the cars actually hit the streets, and owner experience?
12-12-2019, 03:13 PM
#152
I'm still hoping someone posts more data about how/why Porsche limits the usable capacity of the 93.4 KWH Taycan battery to only 83.7 KWH...
If this approximate 10% reduction is in the interest of reduced charging time (by eliminating charge tailing at the top), then it takes some of the sting out of the poor range spec.
IOW: If Porsche is recommending/supporting/suggesting charging the Taycan to 100% (of its limited 83.7 KWH) every night, then this makes the 201 mile range more comparable to the 218 I get for DAILY RANGE on my 90% charged 90KWH ModelX.
Anyone know what the RECOMMENDED nightly charge level is? Is Porsche officially recommending charging to 100% (of their 83.7 KWH Limit) on a daily/nightly basis - or are they also recommending less charge (like the 90% suggestion for most other EV's)?
It would still be unfortunate, however, to artificially eliminate the ability to charge to 100% actual capacity when needed for the occasional MAX RANGE longer trips.
DAILY RANGE vs MAX RANGE is the question...
If this approximate 10% reduction is in the interest of reduced charging time (by eliminating charge tailing at the top), then it takes some of the sting out of the poor range spec.
IOW: If Porsche is recommending/supporting/suggesting charging the Taycan to 100% (of its limited 83.7 KWH) every night, then this makes the 201 mile range more comparable to the 218 I get for DAILY RANGE on my 90% charged 90KWH ModelX.
Anyone know what the RECOMMENDED nightly charge level is? Is Porsche officially recommending charging to 100% (of their 83.7 KWH Limit) on a daily/nightly basis - or are they also recommending less charge (like the 90% suggestion for most other EV's)?
It would still be unfortunate, however, to artificially eliminate the ability to charge to 100% actual capacity when needed for the occasional MAX RANGE longer trips.
DAILY RANGE vs MAX RANGE is the question...
However, just looking at various reviews (and battery life, time/common sense protocol), you usually here 5-10-80% runs. Very few people have mentioned charging it to 100%, and the ones that have (only one guy I saw), did say they had to wait a good deal longer for that extra 10-20%-due to the taper no doubt.
12-12-2019, 03:15 PM
#153
In real world driving the poster gets more range on all the vehicles I listed compared to EPA. This is why I asked.
Fiat 500e EPA: 84 miles. ...versus ...."Fiat e500 My average 90 miles"
I3s EPA: 107 miles. ......................... "BMW i3S My average 120 miles"
eGolf EPA: 83 miles .........................."VW eGolf My average 88 mile"
Fiat 500e EPA: 84 miles. ...versus ...."Fiat e500 My average 90 miles"
I3s EPA: 107 miles. ......................... "BMW i3S My average 120 miles"
eGolf EPA: 83 miles .........................."VW eGolf My average 88 mile"
No in all cases I get fewer miles than the EPA rating
Fiat stated a range of 121 I got 90
VW stated a range of 125 I got 88
i3S stated a range of 126 I get 120 on a summer day 99 in winter
Audi eTron stated a range of 225 I get 180 on a summer day 169 in winter
On average 20% to 25% less miles than the EPA rating on each car.
12-12-2019, 03:21 PM
#154
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Context is needed here in this one.
That same poster, Matt Farah (during a conversation with Joe Rogan on that run), said he drove up to 100 mph/was driving fast. Not only did he say the Tesla would have burnt up it's battery the same. He said, if he was going slower he would have gotten a lot better mileage. He basically had grouped them the same, and didn't see the Tesla as substantially better (whether it is or isn't) in Real World Range. That was his comments, feelings.
That same poster, Matt Farah (during a conversation with Joe Rogan on that run), said he drove up to 100 mph/was driving fast. Not only did he say the Tesla would have burnt up it's battery the same. He said, if he was going slower he would have gotten a lot better mileage. He basically had grouped them the same, and didn't see the Tesla as substantially better (whether it is or isn't) in Real World Range. That was his comments, feelings.
Having said that, he got so many facts wrong in his first 3 minutes of one of the snippets I listened to (regarding charging, regen, cooling system, range, etc.) that I couldn't even listen to more. And I listen to the guy's podcast twice a week. I think he's a bit bamboozled by the Porsche pressers and probably was pretty high when he was on with JRE (I know he spoke about being very excited to smoke some very strong stuff with Joe Rogan). So I wouldn't take anything he said on the JRE podcast as any kind of true.
The part about him driving it like a maniac was true, though.
12-12-2019, 03:22 PM
#155
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
12-12-2019, 03:41 PM
#156
I like Matt and generally enjoy his reviews. He's also an EV fan.
Having said that, he got so many facts wrong in his first 3 minutes of one of the snippets I listened to (regarding charging, regen, cooling system, range, etc.) that I couldn't even listen to more. And I listen to the guy's podcast twice a week. I think he's a bit bamboozled by the Porsche pressers and probably was pretty high when he was on with JRE (I know he spoke about being very excited to smoke some very strong stuff with Joe Rogan). So I wouldn't take anything he said on the JRE podcast as any kind of true.
The part about him driving it like a maniac was true, though.
Having said that, he got so many facts wrong in his first 3 minutes of one of the snippets I listened to (regarding charging, regen, cooling system, range, etc.) that I couldn't even listen to more. And I listen to the guy's podcast twice a week. I think he's a bit bamboozled by the Porsche pressers and probably was pretty high when he was on with JRE (I know he spoke about being very excited to smoke some very strong stuff with Joe Rogan). So I wouldn't take anything he said on the JRE podcast as any kind of true.
The part about him driving it like a maniac was true, though.
Nonetheless, I think his overall point was: 'when you drive EV's fast or on the highway, they don't get as good a mileage (Tesla and All)', which is true.
Plus, he said both good and bad (whether accurate or not) as the 17 mile 40% range estimates in the Taycan with out context, wouldn't necessarily look good. And when he rolled down the hill from that point, he could have simply used regenerative braking to recoup back some of that estimate (which is what would have happened), which he didn't. So, he's dumb/care free, high or both? LOL
Regarding the smokes: Oh yeah. It happened, it was more than that. If I remember correctly, he took a big time pull on a spliff ON AIR with Joe in a cloud infested, seemingly eye rubbing haze that would scare a fireman. LMAO.
12-12-2019, 04:08 PM
#157
Context is needed here in this one.
That same poster, Matt Farah (during a conversation with Joe Rogan on that run), said he drove up to 100 mph/was driving fast. Not only did he say the Tesla would have burnt up it's battery the same. He said, if he was going slower he would have gotten a lot better mileage. He basically had grouped them the same, and didn't see the Tesla as substantially better (whether it is or isn't) in Real World Range. That was his comments, feelings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imi5ODmIckw
That same poster, Matt Farah (during a conversation with Joe Rogan on that run), said he drove up to 100 mph/was driving fast. Not only did he say the Tesla would have burnt up it's battery the same. He said, if he was going slower he would have gotten a lot better mileage. He basically had grouped them the same, and didn't see the Tesla as substantially better (whether it is or isn't) in Real World Range. That was his comments, feelings.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Imi5ODmIckw
But since you mentioned Tesla, the Model 3 can run 100 mph for more than 17 miles if I'm not mistaken. I'm fairly certain that the Model S Plaid will too when it arrives this summer assuming similar drivetrain/cooling lessons learned.
Shocking that going slower though would have returned better mileage, news to me.
It will be interesting to see though if the Plaid S which should run circles around the Taycan will also use up 40% of its battery after 17 miles, Assuming of course the Plaid S also has ~100kWh battery too.
I doubt that the Model 3 would use 40% of it's much smaller battery after 17 miles of spirited driving but it's also lighter and more aerodynamic than the S.
Either way, I find it interesting that Porsche fanboys are getting all bent out of shape over efficiency of a Porsche. What Porsche owner has ever put efficiency or value as a top 10 criteria when buying a Porsche?
I would think the list would be:
Performance
Handling
Something
Something
Quality
Something
Aesthetics
Something
Something
Brand
Something
Luxury
Something
Efficiency
Something
Value
Fire away
12-12-2019, 04:26 PM
#158
Burning Brakes
I never mentioned the Tesla. I was just responding to someone's opinion that real world experiences trump EPA estimates.
But since you mentioned Tesla, the Model 3 can run 100 mph for more than 17 miles if I'm not mistaken. I'm fairly certain that the Model S Plaid will too when it arrives this summer assuming similar drivetrain/cooling lessons learned.
Shocking that going slower though would have returned better mileage, news to me.
It will be interesting to see though if the Plaid S which should run circles around the Taycan will also use up 40% of its battery after 17 miles, Assuming of course the Plaid S also has ~100kWh battery too.
I doubt that the Model 3 would use 40% of it's much smaller battery after 17 miles of spirited driving but it's also lighter and more aerodynamic than the S.
......
But since you mentioned Tesla, the Model 3 can run 100 mph for more than 17 miles if I'm not mistaken. I'm fairly certain that the Model S Plaid will too when it arrives this summer assuming similar drivetrain/cooling lessons learned.
Shocking that going slower though would have returned better mileage, news to me.
It will be interesting to see though if the Plaid S which should run circles around the Taycan will also use up 40% of its battery after 17 miles, Assuming of course the Plaid S also has ~100kWh battery too.
I doubt that the Model 3 would use 40% of it's much smaller battery after 17 miles of spirited driving but it's also lighter and more aerodynamic than the S.
......
Just a little math here. Let's say a car has 400kW peak power. EVs can deliver their peak power over a wide range, like from 30 mph up to 90mph.
If someone keeps accelerating in this range. (assuming battery to wheel efficiency is 90%). It will use up 100kWh energy in 27 minutes assuming acceleration and deceleration times over the whole trip are the same. Now if the average speed was somewhere at 67 mph, the total distance driven is around 30 miles. This applies to any car. Tesla, Porsche, whatever.
12-12-2019, 04:34 PM
#159
I never mentioned the Tesla. I was just responding to someone's opinion that real world experiences trump EPA estimates.
But since you mentioned Tesla, the Model 3 can run 100 mph for more than 17 miles if I'm not mistaken. I'm fairly certain that the Model S Plaid will too when it arrives this summer assuming similar drivetrain/cooling lessons learned.
Shocking that going slower though would have returned better mileage, news to me.
But since you mentioned Tesla, the Model 3 can run 100 mph for more than 17 miles if I'm not mistaken. I'm fairly certain that the Model S Plaid will too when it arrives this summer assuming similar drivetrain/cooling lessons learned.
Shocking that going slower though would have returned better mileage, news to me.
It will be interesting to see though if the Plaid S which should run circles around the Taycan will also use up 40% of its battery after 17 miles, Assuming of course the Plaid S also has ~100kWh battery too.
I doubt that the Model 3 would use 40% of it's much smaller battery after 17 miles of spirited driving but it's also lighter and more aerodynamic than the S.
I doubt that the Model 3 would use 40% of it's much smaller battery after 17 miles of spirited driving but it's also lighter and more aerodynamic than the S.
We'll know in 7-8 months.
Either way, I find it interesting that Porsche fanboys are getting all bent out of shape over efficiency of a Porsche. What Porsche owner has ever put efficiency or value as a top 10 criteria when buying a Porsche?
I would think the list would be:
Performance
Handling
Something
Something
Quality
Something
Aesthetics
Something
Something
Brand
Something
Luxury
Something
Efficiency
Something
Value
Fire away
I would think the list would be:
Performance
Handling
Something
Something
Quality
Something
Aesthetics
Something
Something
Brand
Something
Luxury
Something
Efficiency
Something
Value
Fire away
Honestly, I'm certain Porsche is OK with all of this. They never expected to do better than the Panamera line, and appear just as surprised as anyone else to have more deposits than years of production capacity. A lot of people will skip v1.0, and Porsche, Audi and VW will make a lot of range improvements in gen .2. It's all going to be okay.
12-12-2019, 04:37 PM
#160
Just a little math here. Let's say a car has 400kW peak power. EVs can deliver their peak power over a wide range, like from 30 mph up to 90mph.
If someone keeps accelerating in this range. (assuming battery to wheel efficiency is 90%). It will use up 100kWh energy in 27 minutes assuming acceleration and deceleration times over the whole trip are the same. Now if the average speed was somewhere at 67 mph, the total distance driven is around 30 miles. This applies to any car. Tesla, Porsche, whatever.
If someone keeps accelerating in this range. (assuming battery to wheel efficiency is 90%). It will use up 100kWh energy in 27 minutes assuming acceleration and deceleration times over the whole trip are the same. Now if the average speed was somewhere at 67 mph, the total distance driven is around 30 miles. This applies to any car. Tesla, Porsche, whatever.
The following users liked this post:
JB43 (12-23-2019)
12-12-2019, 04:38 PM
#161
Tesla uses 4% buffer only at the bottom and they don't use top buffer. VW group uses more buffer at the top in order to protect the battery. I also think they are going to slowly open it up over years as the car ages to keep the range the same. But this latter is just a guess.
12-12-2019, 04:39 PM
#162
Burning Brakes
Just a little math here. Let's say a car has 400kW peak power. EVs can deliver their peak power over a wide range, like from 30 mph up to 90mph.
If someone keeps accelerating in this range. (assuming battery to wheel efficiency is 90%). It will use up 100kWh energy in 27 minutes assuming acceleration and deceleration times over the whole trip are the same. Now if the average speed was somewhere at 67 mph, the total distance driven is around 30 miles. This applies to any car. Tesla, Porsche, whatever.
If someone keeps accelerating in this range. (assuming battery to wheel efficiency is 90%). It will use up 100kWh energy in 27 minutes assuming acceleration and deceleration times over the whole trip are the same. Now if the average speed was somewhere at 67 mph, the total distance driven is around 30 miles. This applies to any car. Tesla, Porsche, whatever.
100kWh / 400 kW = 0.25h = 15 minutes.
minus lost energy due to efficiency
12-12-2019, 05:18 PM
#163
The more I ponder it, the more I think that the two speed transmission may be a significant range eater here. Tesla experimented with transmissions on the original Roadster but abandoned them because they couldn’t handle the torque. The burlier the transmission, the more power it’s going to eat and the heavier it will be. When engineers are microanalysing wheel bearings to eke out range, having gear sets sloshing through gear oil at high speeds cannot be good.
The following users liked this post:
JB43 (12-23-2019)
12-12-2019, 05:25 PM
#164
RL Community Team
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
The more I ponder it, the more I think that the two speed transmission may be a significant range eater here. Tesla experimented with transmissions on the original Roadster but abandoned them because they couldn’t handle the torque. The burlier the transmission, the more power it’s going to eat and the heavier it will be. When engineers are microanalysing wheel bearings to eke out range, having gear sets sloshing through gear oil at high speeds cannot be good.
But again, I keep returning to my other question. Porsche is quite desperate to prove that the "usable" mileage of the Taycan is more than the EPA rated range. Desperate enough they would pay for an independent study and face that ridicule. They need to sell cars. But HOW. What's the difference in the EPA test vs. the independent test that gives a magic bullet?
I can't wait to drive one of these cars and get a realistic consumption figure.
The following 2 users liked this post by Needsdecaf:
daveo4porsche (12-12-2019),
JB43 (12-23-2019)
12-12-2019, 05:31 PM
#165
No in all cases I get fewer miles than the EPA rating
Fiat stated a range of 121 I got 90
VW stated a range of 125 I got 88
i3S stated a range of 126 I get 120 on a summer day 99 in winter
Audi eTron stated a range of 225 I get 180 on a summer day 169 in winter
On average 20% to 25% less miles than the EPA rating on each car.
Fiat stated a range of 121 I got 90
VW stated a range of 125 I got 88
i3S stated a range of 126 I get 120 on a summer day 99 in winter
Audi eTron stated a range of 225 I get 180 on a summer day 169 in winter
On average 20% to 25% less miles than the EPA rating on each car.