Porsche Taycan EPA range

[AlanSubie4Life]

Moving replies to this thread...

Someone over at rennlist saw this after his test drive.
Taycan Turbo - EPA rated 201 miles - Rennlist - Porsche Discussion Forums

View attachment 497385

Also see couple of posts by Nicole. She posted power consumption study done by a German magazine.
I am afraid to copy paste from another forum.

Interesting. It looks like this was likely a round trip as well. Relatively low average speed. It is hard to align this to the EPA numbers. If I had to guess, it looks like the EPA numbers are conservative, but not sure how Porsche accomplished that.

A very detailed review by someone:
Taycan Turbo Test Drive/Review: Even Seattle rain can't dampen your mood when you drive the Taycan

Interesting the quote in this article about the software update to 255 miles. That might be consistent with that caveat in the CARB submission mentioned above, though it doesn't align quite right. But you do wonder if Porsche is still tweaking things. Wonder where the numbers will end up...

41kWh/100mi means about 45kWh/100 miles from the wall or so. So this guy (looks like a lot of surface street driving) seems to have done slightly better than EPA rating. But that won't get you to 255 miles.

Still hard to know without all the data. Sounds like he's doing a range test sometime soon between Seattle and Beaverton. That'll be interesting.

In any case I would say that as expected due to the overall poor efficiency, it's a lot less sensitive (%-wise) to detrimental factors (like rain, using the heat, etc.). That's what you would expect due to the larger energy reserves and the larger amount of energy allocated "per rated mile."

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

The EPA datafile now contains the Taycan Turbo S data, which of course matches the sticker posted earlier in this thread. It's also on the fueleconomy.gov website at the very bottom of the list.

It basically tested to very close to the same range and efficiency as the Turbo, but has been voluntarily derated from 200 miles range (Turbo was 202 derated to 201) to 192 miles.

Download Fuel Economy Data

Anyway, it's really very close to the Turbo - just very slightly less efficient and maybe derated by 5% so that owners with the stickiest tires don't get too surprised.

No evidence yet of any sort of software updates which increase the range but that's not to say they don't exist.

 

[mtndrew1]

I’m mostly curious to see the Taycan 4S EPA range.

I’m guessing something like 250 miles for $110,000 with 0-60 in the 4 second range.

 

[gowthamn]

The EPA datafile now contains the Taycan Turbo S data, which of course matches the sticker posted earlier in this thread. It's also on the fueleconomy.gov website at the very bottom of the list.

It basically tested to very close to the same range and efficiency as the Turbo, but has been voluntarily derated from 200 miles range (Turbo was 202 derated to 201) to 192 miles.

Download Fuel Economy Data

Anyway, it's really very close to the Turbo - just very slightly less efficient and maybe derated by 5% so that owners with the stickiest tires don't get too surprised.

No evidence yet of any sort of software updates which increase the range but that's not to say they don't exist.

I heard some info from dealers and from other people who are close dealers that Porsche will make an update from the June 2020 build onwards. An OTA update is expected to address the range issues. And improved battery capacity from the June build. Also, more roof and color options will be available from June. There is a rumor that HUD will also be an option from then.

 

[M3BlueGeorgia]

I heard some info from dealers and from other people who are close dealers that Porsche will make an update from the June 2020 build onwards. An OTA update is expected to address the range issues. And improved battery capacity from the June build. Also, more roof and color options will be available from June. There is a rumor that HUD will also be an option from then.

So basically, people were thinking of buying a Taycan should hold off for a year while Porsche implement some of the engineering they should have already implemented?

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

And improved battery capacity from the June build.

I'd doubt that so soon.

Still hard to know without all the data. Sounds like he's doing a range test sometime soon between Seattle and Beaverton. That'll be interesting.

Definitely keep an eye on this range test. With nearly 90kWh of battery, it should be no problem at all to go from Bellevue, WA to Beaverton, OR (185 miles). It's a great real world, relevant test; should be in early February it sounds like. It'll be interesting to see how the fast charging experience goes too, in addition to the efficiency.

 

[M3BlueGeorgia]

I'd doubt that so soon.



Definitely keep an eye on this range test. With nearly 90kWh of battery, it should be no problem at all to go from Bellevue, WA to Beaverton, OR (185 miles). It's a great real world, relevant test; should be in early February it sounds like. It'll be interesting to see how the fast charging experience goes too, in addition to the efficiency.

With EPA range of 201, you shouldn't routinely plan a leg greater than 112 miles (56%) and should be very, very careful of anything over 70%. And this doesn't take account of impact of winter weather, which presumably will remove 20% to 40% of range

Note: The logic for 56% is as follows
- Freeway range in warm weather can get 20% less than EPA
- Prudent driver's typically don't plan to use more than 70% of the battery, ex: 90% to 20%

0.8*0.7=0.56

However, at a stretch you can use up to 90% of the battery, which gives 0.8*0.9=0.72

 

[willow_hiller]

With EPA range of 201, you shouldn't routinely plan a leg greater than 110 miles (55%) and should be very, very careful of anything over 70%. And this doesn't take account of impact of winter weather, which presumably will remove 20% to 40% of range.

What are the highway speeds around those parts? ABRP is saying a Model 3 SR+ (240-250 miles EPA) could just barely make that journey in fair weather if you could keep it under 68 MPH.

 

[gowthamn]

So basically, people were thinking of buying a Taycan should hold off for a year while Porsche implement some of the engineering they should have already implemented?

Tesla too started out with bad range and improved later. Same here too. But since the Taycan drives better, it's bit sad that I have to wait

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

With EPA range of 201, you shouldn't routinely plan a leg greater than 110 miles (55%) and should be very, very careful of anything over 70%. And this doesn't take account of impact of winter weather, which presumably will remove 20% to 40% of range.

That's why I said it would be interesting. Remember we're talking about the Taycan here and it may behave quite differently relative to the rating at speed. That's the whole interesting part of this test. Obviously at 75mph things should definitely not be better than EPA ratings...but we will see.

And for sure, without a doubt, it will do considerably better than Model 3 with respect to adverse conditions (heating) on a % basis. Because presumably the heating energy required is similar to Model 3, but the Taycan is already so inefficient it has much less impact on a % basis.

What are the highway speeds around those parts? ABRP is saying a Model 3 SR+ (240-250 miles EPA) could just barely make that journey in fair weather if you could keep it under 68 MPH.

Assume 75mph on I-5. That's what I would drive for this Taycan test. The SR+ would be a huge pain in the butt for this trip. Though only if you try to skip all the Superchargers (of which there are many options).

 

[ralph142]

If you put the taycan in it shows a single 5 minute stop at an ea station in Vancouver, that’s @75 mph, 45 degrees, leaving with a 90% soc and charging from 24-55%, then arriving with 24%.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

If you put the taycan in it shows a single 5 minute stop at an ea station in Vancouver, that’s @75 mph, 45 degrees, leaving with a 90% soc and charging from 24-55%, then arriving with 24%.

They have very little data at this point though. It's an alpha model. Will all be very interesting to see the reality.

I see starting at 100%, arriving at 3%, with an average speed of 70mph, in 2 hours 46 minutes (that would be a very fast trip for this journey - reference speed is set to 110%). I removed all battery degradation from the model. Should be safe to go down to 3% as apparently there's an extra 10% of the battery below that point that is not used, for the Taycan. YMMV.

A Better Routeplanner

- Prudent driver's typically don't plan to use more than 70% of the battery, ex: 90% to 20%

But for a point-to-point like this you'd start at 100% and just drive as fast as you can to arrive with minimal remaining charge. Not saying it would be a great idea as the first time in a Porsche Taycan, but YOLO. Plus you're driving a Porsche.

 

[gowthamn]

I think Porsche might remove the 12.5% battery reserve just like Tesla to improve range. Not sure though.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I think Porsche might remove the 12.5% battery reserve just like Tesla to improve range. Not sure though.

Maybe. But presumably that is there for safety and also to hide degradation. For sure you should expect 10% degradation over the first year or two, so something to keep in mind if they do reduce the reserve. If they don’t remove it you might not have any apparent degradation.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

One of the issues with the Taycan is its a dual-speed transmission, but we're treating it as if has the same efficiency issues the Tesla vehicles have at high speed. Yet, it was made specifically to run on the autobahn to satisfy German buyers.

We also have to pretty much throw away the EPA range estimate because that's not well suited for real world road trips.

For example the updated Range rating for my P3D+ with 20inch tires is 293 miles, and I don't get anywhere close to that. If I use ABRP it shows similar results that I get for the routes I do. I can usually go a bit faster than the "stay under" estimates from ABRP so it's a bit conservative, but its a good "can I do this" check.

The reason it's much lower than rated range is a combination of high speed limits combined with elevation changes that are typical in the PNW region.

I've accepted awhile ago that my real world range is a lot closer to 250 than 293 or the originally advertised 310. Sure I can slow down as needed to stretch things, or I can switch wheels/tires to something smaller.

If I was considering the Taycan (which I'm not due to its insane cost) is what the real world trip range is at 75mph with the assumption of mild elevation changes throughout the trip.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I think Porsche might remove the 12.5% battery reserve just like Tesla to improve range. Not sure though.

It's a Porsche so obviously they're going to make that a $4K option where they call it something fancy.

 

[MP3Mike]

One of the issues with the Taycan is its a dual-speed transmission, but we're treating it as if has the same efficiency issues the Tesla vehicles have at high speed. Yet, it was made specifically to run on the autobahn to satisfy German buyers.

I don't think a two speed transmission is going to make that big a difference in efficiency. Electric motors are just too efficient to start with.

The transmission is about performance not efficiency.

 

[S4WRXTTCS]

I don't think a two speed transmission is going to make that big a difference in efficiency. Electric motors are just too efficient to start with.

True.

After some googling it seems like it's more for acceleration reasons.

This article claims range, and acceleration.
Why the Porsche Taycan EV's Two-Speed Transmission Is a Big Deal

This says you don't even get it out of first gear until 62mph.
Porsche Taycan Turbo S Two-Speed Transmission Explained

This article says he drove close to 200 miles, and the car still had around 25 percent of its battery remaining.
Driving the Taycan, Porsche’s first electric car

I look forwards to a range comparison at various speeds for the Taycan. Nothing I've seen so far really supports the idea that the real world range is under 200 miles.

 

[FlatSix911]

This is the EV that Porsche should be manufacturing... Opinions & Insights: The case for a new Porsche 914 EV | Porsche Club of America

Opinions & Insights: The case for a new Porsche 914 EV
This column appears in the January 2019 issue of Porsche Panorama as the Editor's Note.

I’ve mentioned in this column before, although I’m a fan of Porsche’s past entry-level efforts from the 912, 914, and 924 to the original 986 Boxster, I’ve accepted Porsche’s explanation as to why it no longer feels the need to play in that sandbox. Ironically though, my first drive in the decidedly non-entry-level $150K plus Taycan Turbo has irrevocably changed my point of view on Porsche’s low-end strategy. Porsche desperately needs a new 914, and it needs to be electric.

Particularly among younger brand devotees, the existence of the Taycan, and what it represents, is going to cause an aspirational sea change — electricity is going to become the perceived gold-standard in performance. It’s already been noted by others that a Taycan Turbo S is faster in many situations than a McLaren 570S. How long will it be before people take note of the fact that a Taycan Turbo can hang with a GT3? No longer will Porsche’s current entry-level solution, a five-to-ten-year-old combustion-only Boxster or Cayman, suffice for someone in the 25-to-40 demographic. And since it will likely be 10 to 15 years or more before any Taycan depreciates sufficiently to become affordable for younger people, Porsche is in danger of losing an entire generation.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

. Nothing I've seen so far really supports the idea that the real world range is under 200 miles.

This does seem to be the case. It is pretty mysterious relative to the current EPA rating. It is what makes me fairly sure it will go Seattle to Portland at freeway speeds no problem. Normally for any vehicle you would expect driving at 75 mph would be worse, and the same must be true of the Taycan. Yet apparently the rating is somehow just incredibly conservative, so even at freeway speeds 200 miles is no problem. (This has been the central mystery of this thread...)

I guess Porsche has successfully lowered the bar by testing the car in some horribly inefficient manner during their internal EPA testing. Now we think 250 miles is great!