This is what I (and I'm sure others) have always felt and been saying for a multiplicity of reasons: Line up these two cars together in similar circumstances-driving them, and I would expect the "range" may not be much different. If not: Then Okay, we would have our answer, and the prospective trade-offs, if any.

Not only is Porsche-Taycan-optimized for performance in it's "regular" modes vs other EV's. But it appears Porsche's more realistic (might even pessimistic) compared to Tesla and other EV's, like it does with performance. Such as when,Tesla gives best case scenarios for acceleration when we all know Ludicrous Mode is a 40 min wait party trick, and it's still slower than the Taycan with the little we know. This is while many Tesla owners, don't come close to seeing their EPA range. But everyone focuses on the Taycan (before they've driven one), assuming, it's going to be worse than EPA under similar circumstances and driving. Could be/Maybe not!?....We'll see?

Somebody's going to eventually drive these cars side by sides for good distance, and/or performance testing. And, it will be interesting to see not only the range. But also the performance; repeatability of it; braking/steering; comfort; panache, etc., relative to range; price and each other. That's when we'll get our ultimate answers.

 

Those 2 posts actually answer none of my questions, but you sure seem to be fond of re-posting your own content, whether relevant or not.

The EPA has already done the testing you suggest - there's no need to repeat it. 49kwh/100 miles is the result - the worst in the business.

 

You seem to understand none of it.

Again. Be familiar with the EPA test. Then comment. You are just trolling right now.

 

Not only that. If Porsche did/supplied the test, then they could give their own pessimistic number that the EPA would have no problem disagreeing with.

That aside. As I said earlier. It will be interesting to see the much discussed Range (and other factor, facets), when these two vehicles are driven side by side for extended periods of time, and/or performance.

 

I am not sure how many people are seriously cross-shopping the S with the Taycan. Besides, Musk has said they are keeping the S around more for "sentimental reasons than any thing else" and the sales have been slacking and they seem to be limiting investments in it ("they are really of minor importance to our future").

 

rotfl. That's Elon straight up lying. They're limiting investment and don't care about the Model S at all. Which is why Elon flew a prototype plaid Model S to the Nurburgring immediately after the taycan announcement and built a supercharger at the track over the weekend, leaked completely ad hoc times like they meant something, and announced it would probably ship in June. Sorry, did that twice, with multiple prototypes, after curiously failing to reserve any private track time all season.

Tesla did everything they could think of to sandbag the Taycan announcement including Osbourne'ing their own future products. Because they don't care. lol

 

I disagree that it was lying. Of course they care whenever another EV grabs some attention and headlines. I certainly think that they wanted to take the spotlight away from Porsche with a bit of a marketing show at the Nurburgring, but that is different from saying they are doing more than limited investments in updates.

Even in July, pre-Taycan he said "There is no “refreshed” Model X or Model S coming, only a series of minor ongoing changes. Most significant change in past few years was to use high efficiency Model 3 rear drive unit as S/X front drive unit. That went into production 3 months ago."

As for Osborning, that ship has sailed with the high performance 3 and the price cut on the S.

 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ the Plaid prototype is completely different power train and trim. It has a new design, new chassis, and 50% more motors. It's the complete opposite of what Elon said pre-Taycan announcement.

 

and yet as you pointed out, they didn’t even have any time reserved on the ring, so why would one believe that it is anything more than a marketing stunt as a knee jerk response to Porsche? I am sure they had people playing around with more motors, etc in the lab, but that is very different than a concerted program and significant engineering investment

 

... this is a real product with publicly announced plans to enter production this year. I'm not sure if you're familiar with how much effort it takes to create a new platform and power train, but this is not a couple guys playing around in a lab with some marketing stunt coverage. What Elon said in June 2019 was completely false, and he contradicted that himself in September.


I don't understand why anyone is surprised. All kinds of not-Tesla companies treat future products this way all the time.

 

jump to 9.24 minute and the reviewer mentions the trip they took with the Taycan Turbo S and they got 268 miles of range on that trip.....again not the 192 mile EPA number which we have never seen on the car we have here btw. Is that around 111 MPGE for the math guys on the 83 KWH battery?

 

I was speaking about You Tubers/Vloggers; magazines, and writers, etc... You know they will just for clicks (as we've seen twice already in Europe).

Nonetheless, I'm sure some potential buyers will do as well, as they're (really) the only two games in town in the "Performance" Luxury Sedan market.

And you guys were both right BTW. LOL

 

There's always a tradeoff and Porsche made the tradeoff of better handling at the expense of range. Those very wide tires which are great for lateral Gs are horrible for range. Stick the two cars on equal size rubber and expect the ranges to even out a bit. I would say that the 2-speed trans of the Taycan is likely also hurting efficiency/range.

 

Like Blume telling us the Taycan would be priced between the Cayenne and Panamera and then having a mandatory option put it past the starting price of the Panamera? I guess technically, without an option you're forced to check, it's a few bucks within that promised range.

No worries though - that ~10-15k Porsche raised the price from what they stated will just be extra that comes out of your pocket in the form of the first two year's depreciation.

Remember when Blume claimed how the Mission E would be L4 self-driving - it's not even fully L2!

Oh and the Taycan J1 chassis is already obsolete. It's on the chopping block and won't be used beyond the Audi eTron GT.

Objectively - the Taycan offers less than what was promised and costs more than what was promised. That's why owners will take it on the chin.

 

It’s funny to me all the semantics, banter etc with a few EV geeks thinking what the public actually wants, cares about etc. I guess really time is the only thing that will tell if this is successful.
1. real world everyday use are you really going to get 240 miles? If not then the range will kill it until they figure that out. No one is going to buy a $150k plus car to have that range anxiety except for the Uber wealthy that have a stable of cars. For those it doesn’t really matter what the car does, it is the I want to be the new cool kid and take it to C&C.
2. For the rest it is all about the range because they don’t have multiple cars to choose from for that road trip or heading to grandmas. With everything non Tesla the charging sucks, not as available, takes way too long and the list goes on. This car WILL NEVER even come close to Tesla sales until them and every other car manufacturer figures out either 1 to partner with Tesla for use of its stations or 2 build a network as rebust as theirs. Plain and simple.

The common shopper could care less about wh/mile, (whatever it is), regen braking, what component is sucking the power etc etc. It is simply range and where and how fast can I charge vs cost of a comparable vehicle.