WetEV
Well-known member
WetEV said:Taycans can drive more miles than the rated range. Model Y?
TLDR: The Taycan beat the Model Y by a whopping 70 miles in our testing, yet the EPA says it should lose by 88 miles. So what gives?
WetEV said:Taycans can drive more miles than the rated range. Model Y?
TLDR: The Taycan beat the Model Y by a whopping 70 miles in our testing, yet the EPA says it should lose by 88 miles. So what gives?
That's not the case. "Miles added" is the exact number of rates miles for that car ("kWh added" * "rated miles / kWh"). That ratio on the right is is different per Model and configuration (e.g,. a more efficient Raven Model S vs. the one I have). But it's still a firm number. There's no guess or range involved; every time a specific number of kWh are added the car will give the corresponding number of miles added.LeftieBiker said:I'm still not buying the idea that "miles added" is a better metric than "%SOC added" - especially since the former is a range and not a firm number
That's not the case. "Miles added" is the exact number of rates miles for that car ("kWh added" * "rated miles / kWh"). That ratio on the right is is different per Model and configuration (e.g,. a more efficient Raven Model S vs. the one I have). But it's still a firm number. There's no guess or range involved; every time a specific number of kWh are added the car will give the corresponding number of miles added.
:? I don't know why you went off on a rant like that.LeftieBiker said:So Tesla has managed to change the laws of physics?
This is exactly why I said this is Tesla-centric. You're using an unpublished constant and the miles figure will only be correct if you achieve the unpublished miles/kWh value being used.jlv said:That's not the case. "Miles added" is the exact number of rates miles for that car ("kWh added" * "rated miles / kWh"). That ratio on the right is is different per Model and configuration (e.g,. a more efficient Raven Model S vs. the one I have). But it's still a firm number. There's no guess or range involved; every time a specific number of kWh are added the car will give the corresponding number of miles added.
If it really bothers you, you can switch the car to display SOC instead (and some people prefer this). But when I'm thinking of driving to my destination, the road sign tells me miles and I'd personally rather deal in my head with miles. If I'm doing 60MPH, I'll get close to rated miles. If I'm doing 75MPH, then I know I'll get 80% rated miles. If it's raining, I'll drop another 10% off. Etc.
SageBrush said:GRA,
I agree with your example. My point for you is that a car with lower (or higher) efficiency will shift your calculation.
E.g,,
Say you know that driving a Bolt on your mentioned drive results in the fuel consumptions you mentioned, and 20% lower consumption in a Model 3. You would naturally adjust your mental calculations to account for the difference in car efficiency. Charging stop times still vary dramatically from place to place, but you *always* account for differences in car efficiency.
It is no different than deciding to take on more kWh before a hill. The Wh/mile is integral to the assessment of how many kWh to take on for the next leg of the trip. The Wh/mile coming up can be a hill, or headwind, or gravel roads, or it can be vehicle efficiency. It makes no more sense to ignore vehicle efficiency than it does to ignore a mountain.
:? I don't know why you went off on a rant like that.
Tesla heats up the battery to ~ 120F on purpose during very fast charging to mitigate plating. That is not an ouch, the ouch is if the battery stays hot after charging.coleafrado2 said:120F? Ouch
SageBrush said:Tesla heats up the battery to ~ 120F on purpose during very fast charging to mitigate plating. That is not an ouch, the ouch is if the battery stays hot after charging.coleafrado2 said:120F? Ouch
The LEAF does the double-OUCH:
Plating during charging, then
Extended time at a high temperature
There are more details that go into this -- it is not as simple as either of us wrote, and some of the information is proprietary. SoC certainly plays a part. The general point stands though, that really fast charging needs a TMS that can ramp both heating and cooling during the charging cycle and shortly afterwards to mitigate battery degradation.coleafrado2 said:SageBrush said:Tesla heats up the battery to ~ 120F on purpose during very fast charging to mitigate plating. That is not an ouch, the ouch is if the battery stays hot after charging.coleafrado2 said:120F? Ouch
The LEAF does the double-OUCH:
Plating during charging, then
Extended time at a high temperature
In that case it should start out as hot as possible (max current) and taper temperature with current... ending a 260 kW charge at 120F means there's nowhere near enough cooling
SageBrush said:There are more details that go into this -- it is not as simple as either of us wrote, and some of the information is proprietary. SoC certainly plays a part. The general point stands though, that really fast charging needs a TMS that can ramp both heating and cooling during the charging cycle and shortly afterwards to mitigate battery degradation.
2022 Porsche Taycan charges faster on road trips, parks itself, plays well with Android
While the Porsche Taycan features some pretty impressive charging technology built into it, there are plenty of places where EV chargers have yet to pop up. One of those places is Pikes Peak, the rather tall mountain in Colorado that also happens to host one of the most iconic motorsports events in the world each year. After driving up the now-paved surface leading to the peak, which is 14,115 feet above sea level, Car and Driver found itself in a bit of a pickle recently with just 12 miles of range left.
Enter your email address to join: