Porsche Taycan
Discussion
When you take into account the EPA range is usually over estimated in comparison to real world figures by a good 10-20% as well that's Audi E-Tron like efficiency. I imagine you'd be lucky to see 180 miles in the real world with more like 150 during a UK winter?
Sure that will be fine for some buyers but for a car with GT credentials a piss poor result?
Sure that will be fine for some buyers but for a car with GT credentials a piss poor result?
SWoll said:
When you take into account the EPA range is usually over estimated in comparison to real world figures by a good 10-20% as well that's Audi E-Tron like efficiency. I imagine you'd be lucky to see 180 miles in the real world with more like 150 during a UK winter?
Sure that will be fine for some buyers but for a car with GT credentials a piss poor result?
EPA range is achievable in summer at 60mph, at 70mph in winter any EV you might as well halve the EPA rating for a true 90-10% range - Kona/eNiro excluded as they seem to loss little range at speed/winter temps.Sure that will be fine for some buyers but for a car with GT credentials a piss poor result?
201 mile is going to be barely much over 100 miles in real life unless your literally running the battery down from 100-0% which no one does.
If Ionity do bring in their €1.2 per kWh pricing for their 350KW chargers, assuming 10% charging loss, that near 100kWh pack is going to cost £100 to refuel at a 350KW charger, add in only 100 miles of range its going to cost close to £1/mile in fuel costs!!!
t..
Zcd1 said:
jjwilde said:
How on earth have they managed to make an EV that uneconomical.
Lack of experience building EVs. The fundamental reason the Taycan uses more electricity per mile driven than say a Tesla is because it is a SPORTS CAR!
Pretty much everything you do to make a car sporty, results in a higher road load, and nobody buying a car costing £100,000 gives two hoots about the difference in economy that results in a difference of a couple of pence per mile! ie the attribute biases for "SPORTS" have outweighed those of "ECONOMY" which is absolutely as it should be for a high value SPORTSCAR from the worlds no 1 SPORTSCAR maker......
it has a CD of 0.22 right?
Yes they've put on summer sport tires bu so does the perf 3.
And then they have the utter balls to get it 'independently' tested and tell people to go look at those numbers.
it doesnt actually accelerate any faster than a model 3 perf either, with 20kwh larger battery and 400kg more weight?
Yes they've put on summer sport tires bu so does the perf 3.
And then they have the utter balls to get it 'independently' tested and tell people to go look at those numbers.
it doesnt actually accelerate any faster than a model 3 perf either, with 20kwh larger battery and 400kg more weight?
Edited by RobDickinson on Wednesday 11th December 20:19
Max_Torque said:
Zcd1 said:
jjwilde said:
How on earth have they managed to make an EV that uneconomical.
Lack of experience building EVs. The fundamental reason the Taycan uses more electricity per mile driven than say a Tesla is because it is a SPORTS CAR!
Pretty much everything you do to make a car sporty, results in a higher road load, and nobody buying a car costing £100,000 gives two hoots about the difference in economy that results in a difference of a couple of pence per mile! ie the attribute biases for "SPORTS" have outweighed those of "ECONOMY" which is absolutely as it should be for a high value SPORTSCAR from the worlds no 1 SPORTSCAR maker......
The Model S Performance is every bit as quick, runs similar wheels/tyres and has similar weight yet is almost twice as efficient. And to suggest people buying a £125k, 4 seater Porsche don't care about range is laughable.
Try again.
RobDickinson said:
EPA range isnt too bad and you can match it with careful driving but yeah, colder temps and higher average speed etc.
Can you imagine this on the Autobahn? It'll do 100 miles at pace.
it should be better, slippier than an etron, but its not, that dual gearbox cant hurt it that hard?
We can only hope Porsche tuned this thing to run at similar efficiency at higher speeds, so the range drop off as speed goes up beyond the 60mph EPA test the range doesn't drop as quickly as other EVs, but on the face of it the overall numbers look shockingly poor, even compared to a 2015 Leaf.Can you imagine this on the Autobahn? It'll do 100 miles at pace.
it should be better, slippier than an etron, but its not, that dual gearbox cant hurt it that hard?
Max_Torque said:
Pretty much everything you do to make a car sporty, results in a higher road load, and nobody buying a car costing £100,000 gives two hoots about the difference in economy that results in a difference of a couple of pence per mile!
Its not a couple of pence per mile though if your doing a long road trip and planning on using the 350KW Ionity chargers, it may turn out to be £1/mile.....and if the true winter range turns out to be just 100-120 miles in the 90%-10% charge cycle most people run their EVs on long trips, you will be visiting those Ionity chargers ALOT!! I was actually playing the configurator this afternoon, as the 4S pricing isn't mad especially compared to still hight Model S pricing, but EPA rating of 201 miles for a 90kWh+ battery is awful and will translate to real life pains if your planning to use it for any kind fo M-way work, which any £100K+ car should manage with no issues.
Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 11th December 20:40
Just for reference for road trips, our X returned 352 Wh/mile last weekend for a 100 mile+ trip on the M1, which included 20 minutes of traffic and returned surprisingly close EPA rating.
The Taycan at just shy of 500Wh/mile, would have needed 54kWh of electricity for the same trip if hitting EPA numbers, using 60% SOC. Which actually happens to be the same amount of SOC I used up in our X (started with 75%). So maybe the winter range will be OK IF the Taycan can match EPA ratings in winter.....Still for a car with a much lower profile, far less people/cargo volume than our X, and 30% bigger battery, it should return much much better numbers than that.
The Taycan at just shy of 500Wh/mile, would have needed 54kWh of electricity for the same trip if hitting EPA numbers, using 60% SOC. Which actually happens to be the same amount of SOC I used up in our X (started with 75%). So maybe the winter range will be OK IF the Taycan can match EPA ratings in winter.....Still for a car with a much lower profile, far less people/cargo volume than our X, and 30% bigger battery, it should return much much better numbers than that.
gangzoom said:
I was actually playing the configurator this afternoon, as the 4S pricing isn't mad especially compared to still hight Model S pricing.
Never understood the Model S comparisons as space wise the Taycan is comparable to a Model 3 and if you go through the options list to spec similar to the M3P it's £100k+ for the 4S (or twice the price) whilst slower, considerably worse on range and no dedicated charging network.Edited by gangzoom on Wednesday 11th December 20:40
I love Porsche's cars but that does seem to prove what a bargain the M3P is TBH. You could have one + a 718 Cayman T for the weekends for the same price as the Taycan 4S with a few options (panoramic roof, larger battery, driving assists, vegan leather etc.)
I wonder how much of the Taycan's poor measured energy consumption is due to the relatively limited regenerative braking it's configured with? It's a heavy beast and so dumping all that kinetic energy into friction brakes (which you'd have to do on the relatively dynamic WLTP and EPA cycles) would kill the drive cycle efficiency!
AER said:
I wonder how much of the Taycan's poor measured energy consumption is due to the relatively limited regenerative braking it's configured with? It's a heavy beast and so dumping all that kinetic energy into friction brakes (which you'd have to do on the relatively dynamic WLTP and EPA cycles) would kill the drive cycle efficiency!
It still regens afik just thats activated by the brake pedal?Maybe, but also the friction brakes too? I don't know but they'd need a brake-by-wire system to make the transition between regen and friction seamless.
On a drive cycle it doesn't take much of anything to generate huge measured inefficiencies, so even if it runs regen in parallel to friction braking it will still be a huge sink of losses
What's odd to me is that they don't even have an optional single-pedal drive mode, it appears. One would think that could be just a switchable software feature. That it doesn't have it suggests a hardware limitation somewhere.
On a drive cycle it doesn't take much of anything to generate huge measured inefficiencies, so even if it runs regen in parallel to friction braking it will still be a huge sink of losses
What's odd to me is that they don't even have an optional single-pedal drive mode, it appears. One would think that could be just a switchable software feature. That it doesn't have it suggests a hardware limitation somewhere.
Well it looks like old habits die hard at VAG.....
Porsche apparently prepared for the EPA results by asking an 'independent' company to test the Taycan and a range of 280 miles+ figure is been quoted.
The 'independent' company in question is called Automotive Marketing Consultants Incorporated, and appears to be a marketing/PR firm, not a vehicle testing authority.
Their website appears to be setup only this year and the only car they have 'tested' is the Taycan.
Am sure if anyone really looked into their funding will find VAG linked in some where.
All of this seems all too familiar to the VAG attempts to falsify emission testing results, and in particular the fake 'scientific' emissions testing done by VAG on primates.
I had hoped VAG have learnt to be honest about their products, but it appears a lepoard cannot change its spots. Anyone buying a VAG shouldn't forget the lies this company is capable of telling, and sadly lying appears to be still endemic in the company culture.
Porsche apparently prepared for the EPA results by asking an 'independent' company to test the Taycan and a range of 280 miles+ figure is been quoted.
The 'independent' company in question is called Automotive Marketing Consultants Incorporated, and appears to be a marketing/PR firm, not a vehicle testing authority.
Their website appears to be setup only this year and the only car they have 'tested' is the Taycan.
Am sure if anyone really looked into their funding will find VAG linked in some where.
All of this seems all too familiar to the VAG attempts to falsify emission testing results, and in particular the fake 'scientific' emissions testing done by VAG on primates.
I had hoped VAG have learnt to be honest about their products, but it appears a lepoard cannot change its spots. Anyone buying a VAG shouldn't forget the lies this company is capable of telling, and sadly lying appears to be still endemic in the company culture.
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff