P100D is the last pre-Raven generation. Raven is LR Performance. They're comparing a car that isn't even being delivered to customers yet, with one that they're not even making anymore.
-
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
- Thread starter Dirtcarver
- Start date
P100D is the last pre-Raven generation. Raven is LR Performance. They're comparing a car that isn't even being delivered to customers yet, with one that they're not even making anymore.
Eno Deb
Active Member
Found a stream that is watchable over the Internet:
Thema heute u.a.: Porsche Taycan mit Alex - auto mobil - Oktober 2019 im Online Stream | TVNOW
The Taycan test starts at ~25:00, the drive tests at ~32:00.
Porsche unveils new entry-level Taycan 4S with smaller battery pack for $104,000 - Electrek
Porsche has announced what will be the base version of the Taycan, the 4S. A quick comparison with the base Model S:
Vehicle: Base Model S ——-Taycan 4S —— 4S Plus (bigger battery)
Price: $80K ———- $104K —— $110
Range: 370m ———- 253m —— 288m
Max charge rate: 150kW —— 225kW —— 270kW
0-60 time: 3.7s ——- 4s —— 4s
Top speed: 155mph —- 145mph —— 145mph
Dual Motors: Yes ——- Yes
Auto Pilot: Auto Steer standard —- No
The Model S comes out ahead in all areas except for charge rate, and it is much less expensive. I think the Taycan 4S will almost certainly have better handling and will be a superior car on the track.
Obviously the Tesla Supercharger network is more extensive in the US than whatever high speed DC chargers Taycan owners will be able to find (and the Taycan navigation probably won’t be able to locate and navigate to them) but in Western Europe the Taycan should have lots of charging choices.
The Taycan option list will be extensive and expensive, just like on all Porsches. The Model S offers very few options.
It seems likely that the Taycan 4S will reduce Model S sales by some relatively small amount. It will be more popular in Germany.
Porsche has announced what will be the base version of the Taycan, the 4S. A quick comparison with the base Model S:
Vehicle: Base Model S ——-Taycan 4S —— 4S Plus (bigger battery)
Price: $80K ———- $104K —— $110
Range: 370m ———- 253m —— 288m
Max charge rate: 150kW —— 225kW —— 270kW
0-60 time: 3.7s ——- 4s —— 4s
Top speed: 155mph —- 145mph —— 145mph
Dual Motors: Yes ——- Yes
Auto Pilot: Auto Steer standard —- No
The Model S comes out ahead in all areas except for charge rate, and it is much less expensive. I think the Taycan 4S will almost certainly have better handling and will be a superior car on the track.
Obviously the Tesla Supercharger network is more extensive in the US than whatever high speed DC chargers Taycan owners will be able to find (and the Taycan navigation probably won’t be able to locate and navigate to them) but in Western Europe the Taycan should have lots of charging choices.
The Taycan option list will be extensive and expensive, just like on all Porsches. The Model S offers very few options.
It seems likely that the Taycan 4S will reduce Model S sales by some relatively small amount. It will be more popular in Germany.
"The Model S comes out ahead in all areas except for charge rate"
.. Except that "peak kW" is not a meaningful measure of charge rate. mph or kph are. And Taycan is a far less efficient vehicle, e.g. it takes more kWh charged to go a given distance.
Also, Porsche is playing the "Up to" WLTP range game (all of VW Group seems to have switched to this tactic after it no longer became tenable to use NEDC to inflate their ranges - even ID.3 is doing it). "Up to" ranges are WLTP low-speed (e.g. city). Audi E-Tron's range is 357-417km (222-259mi), e.g. "up to 417km", vs. "up to" 407km WLTP for the small-battery 4S. Despite E-Tron being "up to" 259mi, its EPA range is 204mi. The short-range Taycan will likely be under 200 miles EPA range.
.. Except that "peak kW" is not a meaningful measure of charge rate. mph or kph are. And Taycan is a far less efficient vehicle, e.g. it takes more kWh charged to go a given distance.
Also, Porsche is playing the "Up to" WLTP range game (all of VW Group seems to have switched to this tactic after it no longer became tenable to use NEDC to inflate their ranges - even ID.3 is doing it). "Up to" ranges are WLTP low-speed (e.g. city). Audi E-Tron's range is 357-417km (222-259mi), e.g. "up to 417km", vs. "up to" 407km WLTP for the small-battery 4S. Despite E-Tron being "up to" 259mi, its EPA range is 204mi. The short-range Taycan will likely be under 200 miles EPA range.
Eno Deb
Active Member
They actually have a fairly elaborate route planner:
Porsche Charging Planner and Porsche Intelligent Range Manager: Intelligent range optimisers
Eno Deb
Active Member
Isn't that a rather honest admission that things like speed, temperature, choise of wheels/tires etc. can significantly reduce the range of any EV? It also affects Tesla (e.g. it's almost impossible to hit the stated 310 miles of range with the Model 3 Performance with 20" wheels).
Not at all. They're using an entirely different drive cycle - specifically, the low-speed portion of the WLTP cycle, rather than WLTP combined - so as to inflate comparisons vs. WLTP combined (let alone vs. EPA). The WLTP cycle has four different portions, which can be cited individually, or combined. "Low" (city driving) gives the highest nominal range, while "Extra high" (highway driving) gives the lowest nominal range. When Porsche says that the Taycan goes "up to 407km", they're talking about only that portion on the left - not the whole cycle:
Tesla doesn't break down its WLTP rating into "ranges" (e.g. from "extra-high" to "low"), let alone use "up to" figures (e.g. just "low" / city driving), because it's bloody dishonest. They only give the WLTP combined figure - 610km. If they did give an "up to" (e.g. the "low" portion of the cycle), it would probably be in the ballpark of 660km, given the typical variance between WLTP combined and WLTP low-speed.
Differences however become greater when you go to EPA (5-cycle), because EPA favours higher speeds overall, which favours more streamlined vehicles (like Teslas) and punishes less-streamlined vehicles. For example, I-Pace has a WLTP combined range of 292 miles, but an EPA range of 234 miles - a loss of 25%. Model S has a WLTP combined range of 379 miles but an EPA range of 370 miles - a loss of a mere 2,4%.
The short of it is that the official EPA rated range of the Taycan will be terrible.
Attachments
Last edited:
Eno Deb
Active Member
Do you have a source for that? The Porsche web site clearly says "386 - 463 km Reichweite kombiniert (WLTP)". They also have a calculator that estimates the actual range based on travel profile (speed, mountains etc.), temperature and the type of wheel on the vehicle, which makes me think that's what the low and high numbers are about.
"Up to 407km" is from the press release for the new small-pack Taycan ("Performance Battery").
Porsche extends electric sports car model range with the Taycan 4S
"Up to 463km" - the 386-463km that you cite - is for the "Performance Battery Plus" version. Note the game that they play in the press release - citing only the high end figure with the words "up to". Words that invariably get dropped when the press reports on the press release.
With my M3 LR RWD I also recieved a copy of European COC that states:
- Electric energy consumption: 147 Wh/km
- Electric range city: 786 km
- Electric range: 600 km
There is no explicit mention of WLTP but as this is a new vehicle there is no other option.
Eno Deb
Active Member
I don't see how that is any more a "game" than Tesla not even mentioning the fact that some Model 3 variants do and some don't actually achieve the rated range (e.g. Model 3 LR and Performance are both rated at 310 miles, but the Performance has a significantly lower real-world range due to the wheels).
Agreed, I was simplifying to be sure.
Really need to compare the charge taper between the two vehicles under the same conditions.Thanks for the correction, good to know!
I don't think you understand the purpose of drivecycles. The primary issue isn't about telling buyers how far they can drive. The issue is *having an equivalent baseline that all vehicles are compared on*. E.g., "X goes 75% as far as Y". Even if the exact numbers on X and Y aren't realistic, the comparison should roughly hold for the realistic numbers, too.
Porsche however is citing WLTP city ranges, where people expect to see WLTP combined, and it tricks most people, including people here in this thread. It's like saying, "I was in a running race with Usain Bolt and I won!", without mentioning that the track he had to run was twice as long as the one you ran on. It biases the comparison heavily.
The second, less significant issue, which I think most people here are smart enough not to fall for, but not the general public, is to understand that WLTP figures are inflated over EPA figures. Putting a WLTP figure into miles is a surefire way to confuse the US public into thinking that the range is further than it is - and the people who do this know that.
The third, lease significant issue, is that not only is WLTP unreslistic, but it's unrealistic in a way that specifically negates the benefits of streamlining. E.g. Teslas. WLTP is, in plain and simple terms, a Tesla-hostile cycle. I doubt this was deliberate - but it's important to know because it affects A) real-world range, and B) conversion ratios between WLTP and EPA figures.
But ignore issues #2 and #3. The primary issue here is the "up to" WLTP game, and its (very successful) tricking people into making false comparisons with WLTP combined figures of other cars (including Teslas). Including in this thread.
Eno Deb
Active Member
I will ask you a second time for a source of that claim. The Porsche web site very clearly says that it's WLTP combined.
With regard to WLTP vs. EPA, I don't know which one is more realistic, but they are legally required to use WLTP in Europe, simple as that.
Last edited:
Excuse me, but I'm the person in this thread who provided a link to Porsche's website which showed the "up to" game. Which matched your (unlinked) quoted text from Porsche's website. How can you not notice that the numbers for the Performance Battery Plus (longer-range battery):
"386 - 463 km Reichweite kombiniert (WLTP)"
... is the same thing as:
"up to 463 km WLTP"
?
Now do the same thing for the "non-Plus" battery (e.g. the one that's "up to 407km WLTP")
Are you confused by the fact that there's two battery options, with different ranges?
Eno Deb
Active Member
Not sure if you are trolling or just confused. You keep claiming that Porsche is cheating by using some "WLTP city range" instead of the standardized WLTP combined range. You even posted some fancy graphs. I'm asking you for a source for that claim, given that Porsche's web site (and now your own quote) contradicts your claim.
Before I hit my head into the wall, please tell me that you can see that:
"386 - 463 km Reichweite kombiniert (WLTP)"
... is the same thing as:
"up to 463 km WLTP"
Please, please tell me that you can see that.
Please also tell me you know that Porsche just released info for *two* batteries, and that's the numbers for the longer-range battery, right?
And please tell me that you understand that the "up to" ranges are low-speed / city ranges, right?
And please tell me that you understand that Tesla's figures are not in any way "up to" ranges, right? That they're combined ranges - a weighted average of the four WLTP cycles. You understand this, right?
And please tell me that you understand that comparing a combined (e.g. weighted average of the 4 cycles) range to an "up to" range (e.g. low-speed / city only) is equivalent to having a race between two people where one has to run twice as far as the other, right?
Please let me know where the logic train is running off the tracks for you, because I'm scratching my head trying to figure it out.
Eno Deb
Active Member
This is where you are jumping to conclusions without any basis in reality (at least you haven't presented one yet). A far more likely explanation for the low and high numbers is that they represent the WLTP combined ranges for different variants of the car (e.g. one could have aero wheels with low-resistance tires and the other extra-large wheels with sticky summer tires). Again, Porsche clearly says that the numbers are WLTP combined. This has a standardized meaning and I don't think it would be legal for them to make up their own WLTP numbers.
Similar threads
