Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Taycan Takedown

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
They did not do better than 36kWh/100mi. Taycan officially taken down. ;)

It's comically bad for the Turbo. :D I guess they need a larger turbo?

It's interesting how the highway efficiency is slightly better than the city efficiency. That is unusual for an EV. Of course, everything about this result is unusual.

:eek:

View attachment 487115

WHAT!!! that's ridiculous.

So that's 490 wh/mile vs a 3 Performance rated at <250Wh/mile...

That is virtually DOUBLE. No wonder it needs a 800V system, and big radiators. All that waste energy has to go somewhere, you can't say it's 2X less aerodynamic and all the extra energy is being dumped into drag?

And in real-life (rather than EPA), that's going to be down in the 150 mile range!!!
 
They did not do better than 36kWh/100mi. Taycan officially taken down. ;)

It's comically bad for the Turbo. :D I guess they need a larger turbo?

It's interesting how the highway efficiency is slightly better than the city efficiency. That is unusual for an EV. Of course, everything about this result is unusual.

Anyway, at the maximum 350kW charger (assuming you can find one), the Porsche will be adding miles at the maximum rate of ~800 rated miles per hour, vs. the Tesla Model 3 at about 1000 rated miles per hour (at a 250kW charger). So with the Porsche you'll have to stop more often and it will take longer to charge. Seems like a winner.

:eek:

View attachment 487115

Highway speed is using the second gear I imagine so that maybe makes sense that it’s more efficient then. Either way that’s terrible efficiency.
 
Sorry but I have not followed the Taycan very much. Is the "big" battery Taycan just 200 miles EPA?

How can this be? The Porsche is meant to sell well in Europe where people cruise at 140-150 even outside Germany and even Teslas struggle to get decent range. I.e. 80 - 0% Model 3 gets about 300km. The Taycan would probably only get 150km at that speed. How is that even sellable? What happened?
 
Funny thing is, EPA range is influenced quite a bit by the car makers for their own cars.
Does anyone remember the Hyundai-Kia story?
Hyundai and Kia to Pay $41.2 Million over False EPA Estimates - News - Car and Driver
Here is Ford: New Ford F-150 Lawsuit Alleges False MPG Estimates | Top Class Actions

I think, Tesla' EPA range claims could be optimistic and Porsche is playing it safe with conservative EPA estimate.
Luckily, there are some real range tests for EVs. Will be interesting when they do the test with Taycan.
The electric cars with the best real-world range | Autocar

(In miles)
#1 Hyundai Kona 259
#2-3 I-pace, Kia Nero 253
#4 model 3 Performance 239
#5 Model X 100D - 233
#6 Tesla Model 3 long range 211
#7 Mercedes EQC 208
#8 Model S 75D 204
#9 Audi etron 196
#10 Tesla model 3 Standard range+ 181

Disclaimer: I don't know how scientific that test was.

PS: From EPA's site. Manufactiers do the tests. EPA confirm 15-20% results. Pretty sure they won't say anything if a manufacturer puts out conservative estimates.

How Vehicles Are Tested
How Vehicles Are Tested
Fuel economy is measured under controlled conditions in a laboratory using a series of tests specified by federal law. Manufacturers test their own vehicles—usually pre-production prototypes—and report the results to EPA. EPA reviews the results and confirms about 15%–20% of them through their own tests at the National Vehicles and Fuel Emissions Laboratory.
 
Last edited:
Disclaimer: I don't know how scientific that test was.

I have looked at the Autocar/Whatcar methodology (What Car? Real Range: how we work it out) before and it is suspect because it only uses a small upper portion of the battery, and it also leaves the car overnight as I recall. So it is more of a true efficiency test extrapolated to the whole battery than a range test. This also disadvantages cars with larger batteries, since charging tends to be less efficient at the very top end of battery charging, and a larger portion of the topping charge will be so affected for a vehicle with a large battery (potentially). In any case the strategy leaves a lot to be desired, relative to a full discharge test (which is what the EPA test does).

That being said, the less efficient the car, the better it will do (%-wise) in adverse conditions. So in general the Taycan will very likely have a smaller hit (%-wise) in winter and perhaps even at high freeway speeds, than we are used to with Teslas.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Electroman
I think, Tesla' EPA range claims could be optimistic and Porsche is playing it safe with conservative EPA estimate.
Luckily, there are some real range tests for EVs. Will be interesting when they do the test with Taycan.
The electric cars with the best real-world range | Autocar

(In miles)
#1 Hyundai Kona 259
#2-3 I-pace, Kia Nero 253
#4 model 3 Performance 239
#5 Model X 100D - 233
#6 Tesla Model 3 long range 211
#7 Mercedes EQC 208
#8 Model S 75D 204
#9 Audi etron 196
#10 Tesla model 3 Standard range+ 181

Disclaimer: I don't know how scientific that test was.

Pretty misleading list... at first glance, sounds like Autocar is listing the Top 10 BEVs in the market in terms of range. But they're NOT:

Autocar (from your link): The ten cars listed here have the longest range capability of all the electric cars we have tested to date.

Which makes sense, when you realize that the Model S they list is the 75 KWh model (discontinued for a year now), when 100 KWh models have been available for nearly three years now (with EPA ranges of as much as 373 miles!). o_O

So basically, that list is far from comprehensive, since it doesn't reflect ALL BEVs that are available, much less the many BEV models that are releasing in the near-term. Ah well.
.
.
 
  • Like
Reactions: E Dizzle and Seven7
They did not do better than 36kWh/100mi. Taycan officially taken down. ;)

It's comically bad for the Turbo. :D I guess they need a larger turbo?

It's interesting how the highway efficiency is slightly better than the city efficiency. That is unusual for an EV. Of course, everything about this result is unusual.

Anyway, at the maximum 350kW charger (assuming you can find one), the Porsche will be adding miles at the maximum rate of ~800 rated miles per hour, vs. the Tesla Model 3 at about 1000 rated miles per hour (at a 250kW charger). So with the Porsche you'll have to stop more often and it will take longer to charge. Seems like a winner.

:eek:

View attachment 487115
Just for fun.. If we check the difference between WLTP on e-NV200 40 kW and Leaf 40 kW.
e-NV200 gets 124 miles and the Leaf gets 177 miles. e-NV200 efficiency is 124/177= 70% of the 40kW leaf.
upload_2019-12-12_12-8-35.png

The e-NV200 would by EPA get about 78 MPGe combined efficiency (112*70%), Taycan should probably be a little better on the highway but by how much?
 
  • Informative
Reactions: nativewolf
I have looked at the Autocar/Whatcar methodology (What Car? Real Range: how we work it out) before and it is suspect because it only uses a small upper portion of the battery, and it also leaves the car overnight as I recall. So it is more of a true efficiency test extrapolated to the whole battery than a range test. This also disadvantages cars with larger batteries, since charging tends to be less efficient at the very top end of battery charging, and a larger portion of the topping charge will be so affected for a vehicle with a large battery (potentially). In any case the strategy leaves a lot to be desired, relative to a full discharge test (which is what the EPA test does).

That being said, the less efficient the car, the better it will do (%-wise) in adverse conditions. So in general the Taycan will very likely have a smaller hit (%-wise) in winter and perhaps even at high freeway speeds, than we are used to with Teslas.

I don't agree that What Car's methodology disadvantages cars with bigger batteries. If anything, when comparing two cars with the same rated range, the methodology seems to favor the car with the larger battery.

I think the reason Tesla does somewhat poorly on this test is because it is done in moderately cold weather. Some of the other cars at the top of the list use heat pumps, while Tesla doesn't. (Tesla does use waste heat from the motors, though, but that doesn't help on short drives.) In the 10C to 15C temperature range of this test, a heat pump has a huge advantage over resistive heating.

Mercedes EQC, Kia Nero, Jag I-Pace, Nissan Leaf, and Euro model (not US) Hyundai Kona all have heat pumps. I'm not sure about the Audi Etron.

In warm weather, the Tesla's would get close to their rated range on this test. In sub-freezing weather, heat pumps lose their advantage and the range of the other cars would suffer.

Why did they choose the 10-15C temperature range? What Car is from the UK. If you want real-world UK range, test at realistic UK temperatures.
 
  • Like
Reactions: E Dizzle
I don't agree that What Car's methodology disadvantages cars with bigger batteries. If anything, when comparing two cars with the same rated range, the methodology seems to favor the car with the larger battery.

I think the reason Tesla does somewhat poorly on this test is because it is done in moderately cold weather. Some of the other cars at the top of the list use heat pumps, while Tesla doesn't. (Tesla does use waste heat from the motors, though, but that doesn't help on short drives.) In the 10C to 15C temperature range of this test, a heat pump has a huge advantage over resistive heating.

Mercedes EQC, Kia Nero, Jag I-Pace, Nissan Leaf, and Euro model (not US) Hyundai Kona all have heat pumps. I'm not sure about the Audi Etron.

In warm weather, the Tesla's would get close to their rated range on this test. In sub-freezing weather, heat pumps lose their advantage and the range of the other cars would suffer.

Why did they choose the 10-15C temperature range? What Car is from the UK. If you want real-world UK range, test at realistic UK temperatures.

It’s true that the temperature is a big factor here. I agree it may be the largest one.
 
In any case the strategy leaves a lot to be desired, relative to a full discharge test (which is what the EPA test does).

That being said, the less efficient the car, the better it will do (%-wise) in adverse conditions. So in general the Taycan will very likely have a smaller hit (%-wise) in winter and perhaps even at high freeway speeds, than we are used to with Teslas.
Can you provide a reference to the EPA completely discharging the fully charged battery for its test, preferably on official site?
I find it hard to believe that they are going to spend so much time driving the car for 6-8 hours to do that.

Reading how gas EPA mpgs are sometimes wrong and manacturers get blamed for it, I think it is the automaker's responsibily to provide good estimate. Else, they risk getting sued. IIRC, in Hyundai's case, it tested in Korea which led to inaccurate results (as it said). But it is possible that EPA does something special about electric cars.

For the red herring experts: What car full list has 20 cars. I just listed the top 10 from their list. Feel free to complete the list.
 
Can you provide a reference to the EPA completely discharging the fully charged battery for its test, preferably on official site?
I find it hard to believe that they are going to spend so much time driving the car for 6-8 hours to do that.

Reading how gas EPA mpgs are sometimes wrong and manacturers get blamed for it, I think it is the automaker's responsibily to provide good estimate. Else, they risk getting sued. IIRC, in Hyundai's case, it tested in Korea which led to inaccurate results (as it said).

For the red herring experts: What car full list has 20 cars. I just listed the top 10 from their list. Feel free to complete the list.

It's called a charge-depleting test. It's driven on a dyno, presumably by a computer, so the time really is not an issue. And to be clear, it is NOT the EPA that does this test! It's the manufacturer, or the manufacturer contracts with a test facility, to do the testing. For example, these tests were done at Tesla's Fremont facility. It would be completely un-American to have the EPA test the vehicles. ;)

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=46968&flag=1

https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=48305&flag=1

"SAE J1634 (as revised 2012‐10) was followed for all Range testing and SAE J2263 (as issued 1996‐10) was followed for Road load measurement"
 
Last edited:
Great article, thanks for sharing.

That is impressive for the Model S Long Range -- 359 miles with 11% battery left (400 miles combined.)

As we pull into the Supercharger stall, our elapsed time from the Bay Area stood at 6 hours, 11 minutes, 359 miles. With 83 kWh used, we had 11 percent of the battery remaining—which equates to 41 more miles at the rate I was going. Right at 400 miles if you add it up. Had I continued down the I-405, I could have driven on to my abode in Costa Mesa. Frankly, I'm a little embarrassed that I was being too conservative; I could have easily driven faster and still made it.

https://www.motortrend.com/cars/tesla/model-s/2019/exclusive-2019-tesla-model-s-review/
 
  • Love
Reactions: Electroman