Porsche Taycan - A 300 mile EV

That is amazing range from IEV's test at 70 mph vs. the very low EPA test rating. That blows away the 66 kWh 2020 Bolt despite it having a higher EPA range rating.

Too bad (like many Porsches), it's expensive. No thanks. And, Porsche's are money pits to maintain and repair. Funny enough, a Bolt driver who I met at free public charging (before I had a Bolt) and sometimes bump into after I let him know about the free/discounted charging on DrivetheARC told me he was getting at Taycan awhile ago. He before kept saying he was going to get an EV with the "fastest charging". This is around the time he said he'd get it and I saw him check into Plugshare, w/Taycan selected.

He mentioned to me that the Taycan only supports CarPlay and not Android Auto. He's an Android user and said because of the Taycan, he's going to have to switch to iOS. From the tidbits I've seen about Taycan like https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-music-fully-integrated-in-porsche-taycan/, it seems like a very Apple-centric car. I guess Porsche is (was?) ok w/possibly driving away people who use Android.

Over 260 kW DC fast charging rate is really impressive. Maybe this is the fastest non-Tesla in terms of DC FCing in the US, so far?

Does it have a heated steering wheel?

LeftieBiker said:

Does it have a heated steering wheel?

Click to expand...

You can get one.

Holy cow, I glanced at https://www.porsche.com/usa/modelstart/all/?modelrange=taycan and just for the base "4S" model, there are a dizzying # of options available. Seems like Porsche doesn't believe in simplicity/offering few choices. I noticed under E-Mobility:

Included 3 Years of 30 Minute DC Charging Sessions at Electrify America Stations

With the purchase of your Taycan, the following are included with Electrify America upon activation of the Porsche Charging Service:

Unlimited 30 minute sessions of DC fast charging
Unlimited 1 hour sessions of AC charging
...
Note: Both AC and DC charging require a one hour break between sessions. The Porsche Connect App is required to start charging sessions.

Click to expand...

No wonder I see check-ins on Plugshare on EA stations by Taycan drivers, including the Bolt driver I know. Gotta love the suspicions that a bunch of us had (DaveinOlyWA, I think too) about VW's clever move to allow the dieselgate $ to benefit themselves since VW now owns Porsche.

Interesting that they also offer a 19.2 kW OBC. Tesla doesn't even go that high on their new vehicles in the US any longer. In the US, they now max out at 48 amps.

OT, I forget where I saw the video in this posted.
Porsche Taycan Hits Two Cars In Parking Maneuver Gone Terribly Wrong
https://www.motor1.com/news/455515/porsche-taycan-accident-video/

Oops!

More high end cars (Lucid, Etron, etc) have faster AC options, which I am hoping work their way down soon. 3 phase/19kWh AC charging makes for a not too painful bridge in cross country driving. A long lunch and you could have added 100 miles, easily enough to take you to the next DC charger.

cwerdna said:

He mentioned to me that the Taycan only supports CarPlay and not Android Auto. He's an Android user and said because of the Taycan, he's going to have to switch to iOS. From the tidbits I've seen about Taycan like https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-music-fully-integrated-in-porsche-taycan/, it seems like a very Apple-centric car. I guess Porsche is (was?) ok w/possibly driving away people who use Android.

Over 260 kW DC fast charging rate is really impressive. Maybe this is the fastest non-Tesla in terms of DC FCing in the US, so far?

Click to expand...

I've been in that phone situation before. Easily solved by leaving a dedicated phone in the car.

As for the "260 kW" charging, you should know better.
Miles of range added per minute in the SoC intervals you charge the car is the metric of merit

---
The road test range that is higher than EPA should not be taken as truth, but as a reason to do more tests and figure out why the differences exist. It is not conspiracy theory garbage; there are reproducible reasons that will end up being a YMMV

DougWantsALeaf said:

More high end cars (Lucid, Etron, etc) have faster AC options, which I am hoping work their way down soon. 3 phase/19kWh AC charging makes for a not too painful bridge in cross country driving. A long lunch and you could have added 100 miles, easily enough to take you to the next DC charger.

Click to expand...

You mean 19 kW charging? Having EVSEs/chargers only be able to charge 19 kWh at a time would be a problem.

3-phase? J1772 doesn't support 3-phase. In Europe, they use Mennekes Type 2 which does support it.

Most public j1772 charging I've seen maxes out at 30 amps, so it'd max out at 7.2 kW at 240 volts. Unfortunately, a lot of it is at 208 volts, so the max is 6.24 kW.

Tesla actually from the early Model S days offered a 2nd OBC and equipped some high end S with them for 80 amps of AC charging --> 19.2 kW. Eventually, that went away and the max was 72 amps (on S and X). Maybe a year ago or so, Tesla decided to make 48 amps the max in the US (https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/onboard-charger) on new vehicles. I wonder if they will change their mind.

In the US, the 3 and Y never shipped with above 48 amps of OBC.

SageBrush said:

cwerdna said:

He mentioned to me that the Taycan only supports CarPlay and not Android Auto. He's an Android user and said because of the Taycan, he's going to have to switch to iOS. From the tidbits I've seen about Taycan like https://www.macrumors.com/2020/08/20/apple-music-fully-integrated-in-porsche-taycan/, it seems like a very Apple-centric car. I guess Porsche is (was?) ok w/possibly driving away people who use Android.

Over 260 kW DC fast charging rate is really impressive. Maybe this is the fastest non-Tesla in terms of DC FCing in the US, so far?

Click to expand...

I've been in that phone situation before. Easily solved by leaving a dedicated phone in the car.

As for the "260 kW" charging, you should know better.
Miles of range added per minute in the SoC intervals you charge the car is the metric of merit

---
The road test range that is higher than EPA should not be taken as truth, but as a reason to do more tests and figure out why the differences exist. It is not conspiracy theory garbage; there are reproducible reasons that will end up being a YMMV

Click to expand...

The article clearly states the reasons for the differences re the Taycan. 2 cycle (Porsche and AFAIK know everyone other than Tesla) vs. 5 cycle is responsible for about 30% difference. Then, the EPA tests everything in the default modes, while Edmunds used other options, especially Range mode and high vs. low regen.

SageBrush said:

As for the "260 kW" charging, you should know better.
Miles of range added per minute in the SoC intervals you charge the car is the metric of merit

Click to expand...

Is that EPA miles or the miles you can actually drive the car?

SageBrush said:

As for the "260 kW" charging, you should know better.
Miles of range added per minute in the SoC intervals you charge the car is the metric of merit

Click to expand...

No, I would never look at "miles of range" added per time unit as miles aren't a unit of energy. That seems like a very Tesla-centric thing. Neither of my EVs says anything about miles of range added per time unit. I'm not aware of any other non-Tesla plug-in vehicles that express that in their UI.

The EVgo and Electrify America DC FCs and ChargePoint J1772 EVSEs I use say nothing about how many "miles" were added on their screens. EVgo's app and emails also don't say anything about miles. Ditto for EA's emails and I believe their app.

And, the "miles" added would always be wrong anyway unless your future driving exactly matched whatever (unpublished?) miles/kWh constant was being used. So, even if some other vehicles or UI's gave such a value, it's of little value to me unless I knew that constant and whether that was realistic/would match my future driving.

cwerdna said:

Tesla actually from the early Model S days offered a 2nd OBC and equipped some high end S with them for 80 amps of AC charging --> 19.2 kW. Eventually, that went away and the max was 72 amps (on S and X). Maybe a year ago or so, Tesla decided to make 48 amps the max in the US (https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/onboard-charger) on new vehicles. I wonder if they will change their mind.

In the US, the 3 and Y never shipped with above 48 amps of OBC.

Click to expand...

I found the piece about Tesla changing from 72 amps of OBC at max in the US to 48 amps: https://electrek.co/2018/11/10/tesla-model-s-model-x-option-price-changes/. It happened two years ago.

Also, gen 3 wall connector (https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/wall-connector) is now only 48 amps max. Previous gens were 80 amp max output on a 100 amp circuit. My work has a bunch of gen 2's and previously had two different versions of gen 1's (see bottom of https://www.tesla.com/support/home-charging-installation/wall-connector-second-generation).

cwerdna said:

No, I would never look at "miles of range" added per time unit as miles aren't a unit of energy.

Click to expand...

Congrats, you won the pathetic answer of the month award.

Can you really not understand the relevance of knowing how long the charging stop will take ?

SageBrush said:

cwerdna said:

No, I would never look at "miles of range" added per time unit as miles aren't a unit of energy.

Click to expand...

Congrats, you won the pathetic answer of the month award.

Click to expand...

:roll: It's fricking useless. Why would I look at the GOM value on either of my vehicles before or after I finished charging? There's no point. Just turning the heater on/off lower or raises the GOM.

I am FAR better off looking at the before and after % SoC. The DC FC counts up how many kWh were dispensed. My charging activity reports and emails, when applicable, tell me how many kWh were dispensed. That's useful. How many miles I might be able to drive on those kWh depends on many factors.

I am FAR better off looking at the before and after % SoC. The DC FC counts up how many kWh were dispensed. My charging activity reports and emails, when applicable, tell me how many kWh were dispensed. That's useful. How many miles I might be able to drive on those kWh depends on many factors.

Click to expand...

Cwerdna is right. How many "miles" of range get added is not an actual value - it's at best a range of values. How much SOC gets added is much more precise and useful. Don't drink the Tesla cool-ade, Sagebrush.

LeftieBiker said:

I am FAR better off looking at the before and after % SoC. The DC FC counts up how many kWh were dispensed. My charging activity reports and emails, when applicable, tell me how many kWh were dispensed. That's useful. How many miles I might be able to drive on those kWh depends on many factors.

Click to expand...

Cwerdna is right. How many "miles" of range get added is not an actual value - it's at best a range of values. How much SOC gets added is much more precise and useful. Don't drink the Tesla cool-ade, Sagebrush.

Click to expand...

Deal, if you drink a drop of reason. Does fuel economy (aka fuel efficiency) matter to you ? Is it an "actual" value, or a range of values ?
Why do you tell people to buy a LEAF with a heat pump if they drive in the winter ?

SageBrush said:

Does fuel economy (aka fuel efficiency) matter to you ?

Click to expand...

EPA or what you actually can get?

cwerdna said:

How many miles I might be able to drive on those kWh depends on many factors.

Click to expand...

Not the least of which just happens to be efficiency. Even you should accept that, so why do you ignore it ?

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Do you and Leftie drive around with flat tires ? No in-car energy meter for that, either.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

SageBrush said:

cwerdna said:

How many miles I might be able to drive on those kWh depends on many factors.

Click to expand...

Not the least of which just happens to be efficiency. Even you should accept that, so why do you ignore it ?

Click to expand...

Efficiency that the manufacturer claimed on the EPA test or actual efficiency in the real world?

Taycans can drive more miles than the rated range. ETron drives just about exactly 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?

Click to expand...

Having EVSEs/chargers only be able to charge 19 kWh at a time would be a problem.

Click to expand...

True, but it would be very helpful to have an EVSE that could be set to charge x.x kWh rather than use time intervals etc.

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, while the latter is just that - a firm number, at least relatively speaking. Of course efficiency matters, but it's a red herring here: the fact remains that the number of miles added will vary from person to person, by the weather, and from trip to trip. It is about as precise as replacing calories or grams of carbohydrate in food labeling with "push-ups" or "miles bicycled."

LeftieBiker said:

Of course efficiency matters, but it's a red herring here: the fact remains that the number of miles added will vary from person to person, by the weather, and from trip to trip.

Click to expand...

You are missing the obvious

Keep the weather constant for two cars with different efficiencies
Then change the weather for two cars with different efficiencies;
Then change it again ...

Keep the person constant for two cars with different efficiencies
Then change the person, and let them drive two cars with different efficiencies
Then change the person again ...

Keep the trip constant, and let two cars with different efficiencies take the drive
Then change the trip, and let two cars with different efficiencies take the drive
Then change the trip again ...

Drive the EPA cycle with cars with different efficiencies
Drive the Euro cycle with cars with different efficiencies
Drive the Japanese cycle with cars with different efficiencies
Pick another drive cycle ...

EVERY SINGLE TIME the car with the higher efficiency goes farther if the tests are otherwise similar. And similarly,

Add X kWh to the battery of two cars that have different efficiencies and drive them in similar conditions,
THE CAR WITH THE HIGHER EFFICIENCY GOES FARTHER.

Why do you think standardized fuel economy exists in the first place ?!?
Because everybody always drives identical to the drive cycle ?

I cannot but feel like I have fallen into a trumpian hole of abject stupidity.

SageBrush said:

You are missing the obvious

Keep the weather constant for two cars with different efficiencies
Then change the weather for two cars with different efficiencies;
Then change it again ...

Keep the person constant for two cars with different efficiencies
Then change the person, and let them drive two cars with different efficiencies
Then change the person again ...

Keep the trip constant, and let two cars with different efficiencies take the drive
Then change the trip, and let two cars with different efficiencies take the drive
Then change the trip again ...

Drive the EPA cycle with cars with different efficiencies
Drive the Euro cycle with cars with different efficiencies
Drive the Japanese cycle with cars with different efficiencies
Pick another drive cycle ...

EVERY SINGLE TIME the car with the higher efficiency goes farther if the tests are otherwise similar. And similarly,

I cannot but feel like I have fallen into a trumpian hole of abject stupidity.

Click to expand...

Stop shoveling, you might be able to get out.

Take a car with a heat pump and another car with resistance heating.

Warm spring day, the car with the heat pump might not go as far. Freezing day, the car with the heat pump might go farther. All at the same speeds, of course. Efficiency isn't a single number.

Take two car with a sport mode and with an eco mode.

Cars are otherwise exactly identical. Car 1 default is eco mode... Car two default is sport mode. Of course, eco mode is more efficient than sport mode.

Following the EPA test standards, both cars would be tested in default mode. Car one would be more efficient as default is eco mode. Car two would be less efficient as default is sport mode. Cars are identical, other that the default mode.