Just 201 miles, and a consumption of 49 kWh/100 mi (!!!). I was expecting more like 270 miles range. These numbers are so bad it looks like a mistake.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Porsche Taycan EPA range
- Thread starter uujjj
- Start date
blackeducator
Member
They designed the battery pack before Tesla's and never really ventured to upgrade it... hoping to sell EVs thru name recognition and reputation. And that has backfired! Playing catchup is Porsche's MO for the next five years!
PATHETIC - Hope EPA charges them Gas Guzzler Tax.
I did not expect the Taycan to be that bad. Really, I’m shocked.
Think about how many Porsche owners like to drive: hard acceleration and at speeds well above the legal limit. They are going to run out of charge in less than 150 miles.
Porsche Taycan Turbo gets EPA range of 201 miles per charge
This illustrates how superior Tesla battery and drivetrain technology is. Porsche has a lot of catching up to do.
Think about how many Porsche owners like to drive: hard acceleration and at speeds well above the legal limit. They are going to run out of charge in less than 150 miles.
Porsche Taycan Turbo gets EPA range of 201 miles per charge
This illustrates how superior Tesla battery and drivetrain technology is. Porsche has a lot of catching up to do.
Eno Deb
Active Member
Porsche apparently doesn't quite believe it either:
The Porsche Taycan Turbo's EPA Range Of 201 Miles Is So Bad Porsche Requested An Independent Test
Will be interesting to see some real-world impressions. I have never seen such a big discrepancy between WLTP and EPA numbers.
JohnSnowNW
Active Member
It was always going to be terrible, but that is quite a bit worse than I thought. That figure is a full 10% greater discrepancy than the e-Tron...another terribly inefficient German vehicle.
Embarassing.
Good luck running all those track laps in your Taycan when your track doesn't have 350kw CCS chargers and you still need to drive the car home.
After the initial hype and filling reservations I think the Taycan is going to have a Demand Problem. Who wants $200k for 200 miles range, even the much cheaper ones with more efficient trim levels will probably not crack 250 miles.
Good luck running all those track laps in your Taycan when your track doesn't have 350kw CCS chargers and you still need to drive the car home.
After the initial hype and filling reservations I think the Taycan is going to have a Demand Problem. Who wants $200k for 200 miles range, even the much cheaper ones with more efficient trim levels will probably not crack 250 miles.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Porsche really shouldn't have put a turbo in it. They kill efficiency.
Also, I'm sure the actual engineers knew the range was bad years ago in the planning stage. They have Autobahns in Germany, they know how to calculate range at higher speeds, and that's a good indicator of how EPA rating would be compared to WLTP.
Eno Deb
Active Member
Not sure how you arrive at that conclusion. The EPA cycle reaches a top speed of 60 mph, the WLTP cycle 82 mph.
David Roper did some statistical analysis on EPA vs. WLTP numbers for EVs a while ago, with the result that WLTP numbers are on average by a factor of about 1.12 higher than EPA numbers. In case of the Taycan Turbo, it's about 1.39. I wonder what might cause that.
In any case, this will be a big marketing problem for Porsche in the US.
The EPA test cycle does indeed average a higher speed on the highway than WLTP. Yet that cannot be the explanation. The city rating is an inexplicable 68MPGe.
Sorry I didn't explain clearly. All this stuff is calculated in simulation before the vehicles are ever built. There are commercial tools such as AVL Cruise and GT Suite for simulating cycle efficiency. You feed it the specs of the vehicle and components and the test cycle and it will tell you what kind of energy consumption it's going to get. Like any simulation it's not 100% accurate but they definitely knew it was not going to do well.
If they wanted to actually measure how it does on steady higher speed drives (the kind that American drivers care about when they road trip) they can take a prototype and drive it on the Autobahn for a couple hours and there would be obvious warning signs.
Daniel in SD
(supervised)
Maybe they tested it in 1st gear? No idea how the drive modes work on the Taycan.
Eno Deb
Active Member
But according to the EPA numbers not just the highway but also the city cycle shows a big discrepancy.
The cycles are different. EPA city cycle runs at higher speeds and heavier acceleration. WLTP low and mid speed portion of the cycle isn't as aggressive.
The WLTP is based on the extremely unrealistic stop and go pattern of the old NEDC cycle, which was itself a modification of the really unrealistic ECE ("urban drive cycle" below) cycle. These cycles may have originated in actual driving conditions in certain metro areas but their selection for determining range and ICE emissions/mpg ended up being a result of industry lobbying. The EPA cycles are based on somebody doing some driving in LA back in the 60s (city cycle) and in Michigan in the 70s (highway cycle). They've added extra tests and argued over fudge factors over the years, at least in the US.
Attachments
Last edited:
Similar threads
