Porsche Taycan - I think I have nearly worn out the configurator

[seadog]

I always thought the 2 speed transmission would be a good thing, just like battery drills are two speeds and would give better efficiency and range at higher speeds, I assumed the Tesla was single speed mainly for cost reasons.

The Taycan sounds like a "bargain" at £85K and I would pick one any day before a Model S (although they are very different cars), but the base car does not looks great as standard and even trying to keep extra's at a minimum it's not easy to keep it under 6 figures if you spec the larger battery and then your at almost twice the price of a 3 Performance which is quite hard to justify.

 

[Peteski]

Me too. We have a national speed limit of 60mph, and very few locations where there aren't intermediate, lower, speed limits in any area where a standing start is likely. There are very few locations here where anyone can legally go from a standstill to 60mph.

As mentioned before, IMHO the important figure is the mid range acceleration, the sort of speeds where overtaking on single carriageway roads can be made safer. As there is a blanket 60mph speed limit on all these roads, then it seems to me that it's the 30mph to 60mph acceleration that is the more useful figure to know. There's a very real benefit in reducing the time exposed to danger, so much so that it's a topic that's taught on the advanced motoring course.

I totally agree, but it just happens that 0-60 is used as an industry benchmark. In reality there will be very few cars (practically none in the modern era) that are both relatively slow 0-60, yet at the same time relatively fast 30-60. You can pretty much guarantee that a sub 4 sec 0-60 EV will also be blisteringly quick from 30-60. Quoting 30-60 times is very unlikely to change any meaningful comparison across these cars. Where you might start to see significant differences are say from 30-60 vs 60-90 if one car has a much stronger mid-range. Every Tesla I’ve driven has been impressively quick up to at least 80 mph and still pulling strongly at that point. When drag racing ICE supercars, Teslas are usually well into 3 digit speeds before starting to lose ground.

 

[Peteski]

I always thought the 2 speed transmission would be a good thing, just like battery drills are two speeds and would give better efficiency and range at higher speeds, I assumed the Tesla was single speed mainly for cost reasons.

The Taycan sounds like a "bargain" at £85K and I would pick one any day before a Model S (although they are very different cars), but the base car does not looks great as standard and even trying to keep extra's at a minimum it's not easy to keep it under 6 figures if you spec the larger battery and then your at almost twice the price of a 3 Performance which is quite hard to justify.

I’m not convinced about the real world benefits of a 2 speed box. Porsche have used it here primarily to improve the 0-60 time ie fitted an ultra-low ratio. Yes it allows greater optimisation of the motor, but at the expense of weight, complexity and cost. I think Tesla made the right choice here and they were clever in using different front and rear gear ratios to get most of the efficiency benefits anyway.

 

[MrBadger]

That statement doesn’t make much sense. Even in race cars with highly strung engines and super close ratios I’ve never come across a gear setup where the engine torque drop-off at the top end rev range was bigger than the torque drop at the wheels from shifting up into the next gear. In other words maximum acceleration is achieved by red-lining every gear rather than short shifting at peak engine torque.

I can only go on my driving experience that it was quicker to overtake dropping down a single gear and have the engine pulling through the whole overtake manoeuvre than dropping down a couple of gears. Thanks to variable valve timing, it had a pretty flat torque curve so once in the power band, could pull very well over a wide rev range with max torque being relatively low down so 3rd gear was very useful over a wide speed range and no need to change gear when you probably needed the car to be pulling the hardest.

 

[Peteski]

I never understood the obsession with 0-60 times. Especially in large saloon cars like the Taycan and the Model S. Smaller cars I get, hot hatches and the like. Also sports cars but it seems a strange obsession on a car that is probably going to be used for long range cruises or family days out.

Well it’s the effortless torque that makes high powered prestige GT cruisers attractive. The base Taycan will simply have less of it. It may well be enough for most people, but this is supposed to be the pinnacle of sports GT cars. Personally I would still seriously consider it over the much older Model S at the same price point, but the performance is still a bit disappointing nonetheless.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

I'm pretty sure that Porsche only fitted the two speed box because they wanted the car to have a high top speed, and bragging rights on the 0 to 124mph time. Completely pointless for any road car sold in the UK, where either 60mph or 70mph is the maximum speed limit across the whole country. I can understand Porsche wanting to do this for some markets, though, primarily their home market perhaps. I can't honestly see the point of making any non-track car capable of doing more than about 90mph for the UK market, though.

 

[Peteski]

I can only go on my driving experience that it was quicker to overtake dropping down a single gear and have the engine pulling through the whole overtake manoeuvre than dropping down a couple of gears. Thanks to variable valve timing, it had a pretty flat torque curve so once in the power band, could pull very well over a wide rev range with max torque being relatively low down so 3rd gear was very useful over a wide speed range and no need to change gear when you probably needed the car to be pulling the hardest.

Now you have tweaked the parameters, lol. There is no gear change required to do 40-60 in second vs third gear. Torque at the road wheels will be higher in second gear (especially so with a flat engine torque curve). Therefore it will accelerate faster in second gear right up to whatever max speed is in that gear.

I can see why you might want to minimise gear changes when overtaking if they were slow and clunky. But that’s not the same thing as being faster 40-60 while in gear.

Relating all this to the Taycan, it will also accelerate faster in its lowest gear ratio.

 

[Peteski]

I'm pretty sure that Porsche only fitted the two speed box because they wanted the car to have a high top speed, and bragging rights on the 0 to 124mph time. Completely pointless for any road car sold in the UK, where either 60mph or 70mph is the maximum speed limit across the whole country. I can understand Porsche wanting to do this for some markets, though, primarily their home market perhaps. I can't honestly see the point of making any non-track car capable of doing more than about 90mph for the UK market, though.

Well ultimately you get both low and high speed gains with a 2 speed box. I agree they are not remotely worth the added cost and weight in the real world of 70 mph limits

I’ve been wondering for a while if Tesla would use a 2 speed box on their Roadster and Plaid models, due to the 200+ mph top speed. I haven’t seen any mention of this so it would be mightily impressive to achieve that speed range on a single ratio (or more accurately a fixed set of ratios across the triple motors)

 

[pgkevet]

Do all three motors have to have the same ratios? I can imagine some jiggery pokery with power routing....

 

[Peteski]

Do all three motors have to have the same ratios? I can imagine some jiggery pokery with power routing....

No they don’t. Tesla already use different front and rear ratios and vary torque distribution between them for efficiency.

 

[MrBadger]

Now you have tweaked the parameters, lol.

Oddly, when overtaking, I never thought to myself, Ooh, I must slow down to 40, floor it, then lift off at 60. When I wanted to overtake a vehicle and not put anyone's life in danger, 3rd was the gear to do it in.

 

[Peteski]

Oddly, when overtaking, I never thought to myself, Ooh, I must slow down to 40, floor it, then lift off at 60. When I wanted to overtake a vehicle and not put anyone's life in danger, 3rd was the gear to do it in.

Not disagreeing with this at all. But I was commenting on your statement below:-

“it could cover 40-60 (and carry on going) in 3rd quicker than it could cover the same in 2nd”

This is simply not true and especially in the context you were implying might also hold true for the Taycan accelerating faster in its high gear vs low gear. Gears simply do not work like that. Low gear = high torque and vice versa.

 

[simon.c]

I thought the base model wasn't getting the 2-speed transmission, or did I dream that?

The base Taycan has just the rear motor, but it is still 2-speed.

I still have another year of my 2 year lease on my Model 3, but I'm considering of moving to the Taycan when the time comes. At the moment I think the 4S is the sweet spot in the range, but if and when they bring out a GTS then that would probably be my choice, and likely the Cross Turismo for the more practical boot shape.

 

[Peteski]

The base Taycan has just the rear motor, but it is still 2-speed.

I still have another year of my 2 year lease on my Model 3, but I'm considering of moving to the Taycan when the time comes. At the moment I think the 4S is the sweet spot in the range, but if and when they bring out a GTS then that would probably be my choice, and likely the Cross Turismo for the more practical boot shape.

I also think the 4S is the version to buy. But that’s a lot of extra money for virtually the same performance as a Model 3 and no Superchargers. No doubt Porsche build quality and refinement is better, but still I’m not very convinced I would enjoy it more. The 3 is really nice to drive and not overly expensive. I wish Porsche would be a bit more adventurous on interior design. They really do pander to the old fart brigade more than I would have hoped. But I would like to drive a Taycan and see what all the fuss is about.

 

[Glan gluaisne]

The Taycan does seem like a lot of money for a car that doesn't really seem that special in terms of interior design. I quite like the exterior design, though, although have to say that the Model S looks better all around, IMHO.

As an aside, it seems that me posting in this UK thread is upsetting some Americans, no idea why. Maybe they haven't realised this is the UK and Ireland forum, and that we have different laws to them.

 

[Needsdecaf]

Similar for the i-Pace.

Way, way worse for the Taycan. Porsche really is only second to the likes of Ferrari, McLaren, etc. when it comes to the quantity and pricing of their nearly limitless options catalog.

 

[Needsdecaf]

The Taycan is capable of doing it's entire performance range in 2nd gear. In fact, in most modes, that's what it does. It only shifts to first when max performance is requested via a mode change or your right foot.

 

[TMThree]

As Tesla owners I think we so quickly forget how breathtakingly fast 5.4s....once we have been used to 4.4, 3.2, 3.1, 2.6 etc. Even with 5.4 you are going to leave 99.9% way behind moving off at the lights!

OK but the base model 3 is faster.

 

[Gatsojon]

I’m not convinced about the real world benefits of a 2 speed box. Porsche have used it here primarily to improve the 0-60 time ie fitted an ultra-low ratio. Yes it allows greater optimisation of the motor, but at the expense of weight, complexity and cost. I think Tesla made the right choice here and they were clever in using different front and rear gear ratios to get most of the efficiency benefits anyway.

Fully agree. Seems to defeat one of the USPs of the electric power train, its simplicity.

 

[browellm]

Fully agree. Seems to defeat one of the USPs of the electric power train, its simplicity.

I think the very early days of Tesla's mk1 roadster development, the plan was to have a 2-speed gearbox but they ended up scrapping the idea because of complexity and cost.