Nicole

The next gen Macan will be on a completely different "platform" than the Taycan. This new platform is currently under development together with Audi.

Nicole

Let's hope that 254 miles is realistic. I would consider anything above 250 acceptable, 275 good and 300 awesome.

Once the 800V fast chargers, or other DC fast chargers are plentiful, the range will become a little less important. We are not there, yet, for non-Tesla vehicles. In 5 years, a combination of 300 miles of range and the fast charging network will probably satisfy most needs.

Cpoarchy

Nice
https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a2...021-confirmed/

Thinc2

That is super cool of you - thank you for pulling this together as I have never explored these apps. Really appreciated. Merry Christmas!

Needsdecaf

Very good discussion by Jason Fenske here.

He is a Tesla owner but not a fanboi, IMO. Called them out pretty good on his first Model 3. At heart he’s an engineer. I think this is a pretty fair discussion. I would have liked to have him go into the pros and cons a little deeper at the end but it’s pretty good for those who are EV newcomers.

Bob Roberts

He lost me in the first sentence: "....according to the EPA". Given that all the reviews are showing real world results, with aggressive driving, that are considerably above the EPA numbers, that may not be the right benchmark to start an analysis. Heck, even the trip in Norway in the snow and ice at around 29 degree weather got more than the EPA range.

He claims he will tell people why they should care that it is so "inefficient", even if they don't need to drive 200 miles at a time. I didn't get that far, what is his claim about why we should care?

Needsdecaf

LOL, you dismiss the video based on the first sentence and the want to know his conclusions? Watch the video with an open mind and see for yourself!

The EPA test is what it is. It's a standardized test based on a certain pattern of acceleration and deceleration. Nothing more, nothing less. The test parameters are not a secret. Also, results are almost always self-tested and reported. In this case, Porsche submitted the results to the EPA. They do not, officially and one record, dispute the EPA test results.

Your Mileage May Vary is particularly important to EV's since they carry so little energy compared to an ICE car. Of course you'll not likely get the EPA rated range; depending on how you drive you'll get above or below. When was the last time you got exactly the EPA rated mileage in your ICE car?

But you can't compare "what if's". When you are comparing two vehicles, you can only do it based on parameters that are representative and repeatable. You can't compare it based on what some random tester got driving around the mountains, etc., because once you say that, al objectivity is out the window. It's possible to better the EPA range on a Tesla, a Leaf, etc, if you drive it in favorable conditions. The test is the same for all, that's the purpose of a standardized test. There is no disputing that in a certain set of parameters (i.e. the EPA standardized testing) that the Taycan scores quite low for a total range given the size of its battery pack. Other EV's do better win this test, even with smaller batteries.

From what I was able to tell by my research, the EPA testing methodology is pretty similar to the EPA testing cycles for ICE cars. They use the same testing cycles for city and highway as the ICE cars. The cars are charged to 100%, left overnight, then driven through either the city or highway cycle and then stopped. After a certain testing time, the cycle is started again this is done until the car is no longer capable of accelerating at the rate required to match the test rates (the exact sequence of accel / decel can be found on the EPA's website). Once that happens, that's considered "depleted" and the test is stopped. That's total range. The car is charged back to 100% and the amount of electricity measured. There is no mystery involved.

Now, can the Taycan go further? Obviously. Can it do that regularly? Remains to be seen. But if I gave you a test, and provided you with the questions ahead of time, gave you no constraints on how much you could study, or what you could do to find the answers, and you could take it as many times as you wanted and hand in your best answer, why would you then argue that the results you got aren't representative of the best you could do on THAT PARTICULAR test?

Bob Roberts

That is not what the point. I would argue that if 10 other data points of real world driving and two other independent tests all conclude significantly higher results than one test then maybe that one outlier test is not an relevant representation of range and one should not do an entire analysis based on the outlier data point. You can draw any straight line you want if you only use one data point.

Needsdecaf

The point is that all other real world results lack variable control.

The title of his video was not “The Porsche has an EPA rated range of 201 miles and that’s it, you will never get a single more mile on a full charge”. The title is “it’s the least efficient EV”. If you watched the video, and listened to the points he makes, you would understand why a low efficiency is bad. Spoiler alert: he even says it’s not about cost of charging NOR ABOUT TOTAL RANGE.

Watch with open ears and an open mind. Don’t jump to conclusions based on one sentence.

Bob Roberts

The AMCI and NEDC tests lack variable control? I didn't know that.

Well, thanks for nothing. With those spoilers, there is no reason to even watch this anymore.

svp6

It was not a bad analysis, but he got couple points wrong. Tesla battery also has an inaccessible buffer which he does not mention at all. It is smaller than the Taycan, and my understanding from forum discussion is that the reserve prevents permanent damage (bricking) by fully discharging the battery. I assume that 0-100% in EVs refers only to the usable part of the battery - so 0% for the Taycan is in reality 93.4 - 83.7 = 9.7kWh, 100 %= 93.4 kWh. The other thing he forgot is that both Tesla and Porsche recommend less than 100% daily charge - someone mentioned 80% recommended for the Taycan, but I did not see anything official yet.

The main claim he makes is that efficiency is important for everyone because if the car is inefficient, it needs to be heavier to maintain a meaningful range - which is a fair statement. If the Taycan was more energy efficient, it could have been lighter. I am sure Taycan 2.0 will do that.

I am eagerly awaiting real life testing in winter and testing done at reasonable highway speeds - 75 mph, nothing crazy. I know there are a lot of reports of projected range in excess of the EPA - but most were done in mixed city / highway driving, so they are better than you get in pure highway. My experience with all my vehicles - electric or ICE - was that I hardly ever get the EPA range on highway trips. If the Taycan does exceed EPA I will be extremely happy, as it will save me recharging on my frequent 200 mile roundtrip (100 mile each way). I am not holding high hopes though, and will most likely need to live with it. The car is gorgeous though, worth it.

Bob Roberts

it is a silly and trivial analysis since he is assuming that efficiency is the most relevant measure, but ignores that by that measure the Tesla and Taycan are disasters since you can buy a Corolla for a fraction of the cost, have a range that is over 1.5x as much and in a car with half the weight

there are many other reason people buy cars, even if it weighs more or has a lesser range. After all people buy far more corollas than model S

Needsdecaf

What are you even talking about? You’re missing the entire point of the video. It’s about relative efficiencies. Not overall range

The AMCI test has not been done on any other car besides the Taycan. It’s useless for a comparison.

If if you want to go by WLTP results, well, here they are:

Taycan Turbo WLTP range: 279 miles

Model S Performance: 365 miles

Needsdecaf

You haven’t watched the video yet have you?

Bob Roberts

Yes, I did before posting that.