Taycan Forum banner

1 - 5 of 5 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
576 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
The Porsche Taycan Turbo will has an EPA estimated range of 201 miles, according to government ratings posted today. By comparison it's behind the Jaguar I-Pace and way behind the Tesla Model S.

For reference, in Europe the WLTP range of the Porsche Taycan Turbo is up to 279 miles

Despite the lower EPA range estimate, Porsche said it’s not disappointed.

“We sought to build a true Porsche, balancing legendary performance our customers expect of our products with range sufficient to meet their everyday needs,” a Porsche spokesperson told TechCrunch. “The Taycan is a phenomenal car built to perform and drive as a Porsche should. We stand by that.”

I know the EPA is more stingy with range numbers than WLTP but I'm surprised it's this low for the Taycan Turbo. How does everyone else feel about this?

Here's the link to the EPA page - https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=42383

 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
147 Posts
The Porsche Taycan Turbo will has an EPA estimated range of 201 miles, according to government ratings posted today. By comparison it's behind the Jaguar I-Pace and way behind the Tesla Model S.

For reference, in Europe the WLTP range of the Porsche Taycan Turbo is up to 279 miles

Despite the lower EPA range estimate, Porsche said it’s not disappointed.

“We sought to build a true Porsche, balancing legendary performance our customers expect of our products with range sufficient to meet their everyday needs,” a Porsche spokesperson told TechCrunch. “The Taycan is a phenomenal car built to perform and drive as a Porsche should. We stand by that.”

I know the EPA is more stingy with range numbers than WLTP but I'm surprised it's this low for the Taycan Turbo. How does everyone else feel about this?

Here's the link to the EPA page - https://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=42383

honestly.. range vs. price is hard pill to swallow even as a Porsche fan like myself. I am hoping Porsche will improve upon its range by June 2020 when i am scheduled to execute on my Turbo S build. If not I am gonna wait for the Cross Turismo
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
711 Posts
TaycanDude: So are you going to back out of the Turbo S then?

The range is petty low. But I think for daily driving it's more than enough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
755 Posts
The range was so low that it forced Porsche to already to independent testing to prove the EPA findings wrong.

They got testing done by AMCI and here's the results. They claim that the Taycan Turbo can do 275 miles in "real-world city/highway commute driving, Normal Mode"

AMCI TESTING CERTIFICATION OVERVIEW

AMCI Testing’s Certification protocol is based on the statistical imperative for unbiased, repeatable results:
  • The Taycan Turbo was driven over two specific routes: AMCI Testing’s Certified City/Highway Route (commute simulation in Normal Mode) and AMCI Testing’s Real-World City Route (city-driving simulation in Range Mode)
  • All driving was done during weekdays at the same time of day
  • The vehicle began each test cycle with its state-of-charge (SOC) indicator at 100%
  • It was operated on course until it entered its restricted-power “limp home” mode—which was considered the vehicle’s terminal mileage for battery depletion
  • All accessory loads were held consistent during each testing cycle and headlights were set to “Auto”
Specific to the AMCI Testing City/Highway Route:
  • The Taycan Turbo was operated in Normal Mode with Regen set to “Auto” and HVAC to “ECO”
  • Driving was precisely coordinated at the speed of traffic up to and including the legal speed limit during city driving, and up to 5 MPH over the legal limit on highways
Specific to the AMCI Testing City Route:
  • The Taycan Turbo was operated in Range Mode with Regen set to “On” and HVAC to “Off”
  • Driving was precisely coordinated at the speed of traffic up to and including the legal speed limit
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
755 Posts
Jalopnik did a great job explaining the EPA testing process for range and how it differs from the WLTP. In a nutshell the EPA factors in hot and cold weather while the WLTP method doesn't.

I wasn't that familiar with how they test EV range and this was pretty handy.

The EPA figure accounts for hot and cold condition testing, which the WLTP does not, and they can do it two ways. The first EPA protocol runs a five-cycle test, which finds how efficient the car would be in ideal conditions on the city and highway, alongside more testing in more extreme conditions to de-rate the car back down to what could be a more realistic estimation.

The other way to do it is to run only a two-cycle test, the city and highway cycles. But the EPA still requires a de-rating for a more conservative estimate and to avoid any chance of misleading customers. If an automaker chooses just the two-cycle test, a de-rating factor of 0.7 is applied to the estimate, cutting down the range.

Here’s a little more detail on the test procedure, from FuelEconomy.gov:

Electric Vehicle - Adjustment Procedure used to Derive FE Label (Window Sticker) Estimates
EPA regulations require fuel economy, energy consumption, CO2 and driving range values listed on the FE Label (window sticker) to be adjusted to more accurately reflect the values that customers can expect to achieve in the real world.
EPA currently allows fuel economy, energy consumption, CO2 values, and range values listed on the FE Label (window sticker) for electric vehicles to be adjusted using one of the following methods:
  • by multiplying city/highway fuel economy and range values by 0.7 and dividing city/highway energy consumption and CO2 values by 0.7
  • using the derived 5-cycle method described in 40 CFR 600.210-12(a)(2) and EPA guidance letter CD-15- 15, June 22, 2015 (available here)
  • using a method which is equivalent to the vehicle specific 5-cycle method described in 40 CFR 600.210- 12(a)(1) (with prior EPA approval) such as the method provided in Appendix B of SAE J1634 July 2017 Recommended Practice;
  • using adjustment factors which are based on in-use data (with prior EPA approval). Currently, most EVs use the first or third method (the 0.7 factor)
If you do some backwards math and take the Taycan’s 201 mile de-rated EPA range estimate and divide it by the 0.7 de-rating factor, you get 287 miles. That means the Taycan must have achieved an estimated range of 287 mile on the EPA’s two-cycle test, which closely aligns with the WLTP’s 280-mile range estimate, as well as Porsche’s own third-party test resulting in 275 miles of range.

Keep in mind that this does not mean you can go back to other EVs sold in the U.S., divide by 0.7, and reasonably expect that number to be accurate. You have to know how the car was tested for certification, based on one of the methods outlined above.

Unfortunately, electric vehicle testing is complicated, both globally and locally here in the U.S., which can make it difficult for the average car shopper looking at a window sticker to understand.

But what’s actually happening is automakers are taking it upon themselves to protect their reputation by perhaps holding back their equipment a little bit to ensure reliability and consistent performance, not just the biggest number they can hit.

That, and the government is also keeping figures conservative to ensure buyers don’t blame them for unreasonable expectations on range, even if the EPA could do a little better job explaining exactly how a car can lose over 80 miles of range between driving in the U.S. versus driving it in Europe.
 
1 - 5 of 5 Posts
Top