You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They did not do better than 36kWh/100mi. Taycan officially taken down.
It's comically bad for the Turbo. 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.
View attachment 487115
They did not do better than 36kWh/100mi. Taycan officially taken down.
It's comically bad for the Turbo. 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.
View attachment 487115
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.
Disclaimer: I don't know how scientific that test was.
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.
Just for fun.. If we check the difference between WLTP on e-NV200 40 kW and Leaf 40 kW.They did not do better than 36kWh/100mi. Taycan officially taken down.
It's comically bad for the Turbo. 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.
View attachment 487115
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.
Can you provide a reference to the EPA completely discharging the fully charged battery for its test, preferably on official site?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).
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.
Ha, 370? Try 670Has anyone in the real world has got close to 370 miles range in their S, under any conditions?
These folks:Has anyone in the real world has got close to 370 miles range in their S, under any conditions?
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/