[St00k]

It's official, the Taycan Turbo S has worse range than the Turbo. Not that anyone expected anything less.

192 miles or 9 miles less than the Turbo.

The real question is: does it matter?

 

[TripleL]

Nope. Not for the short term at least.

 

[James8955!]

If it was more than 9 mpg worse than the Turbo then it would be more concerning. But given the initial shock of the Turbo's EPA numbers this doesn't feel as bad.

 

[John S 99]

The range is a serious issue for me. I don’t believe any of that until I can see it for
Myself. If the car gets 160-180 miles in cold winter conditions, like where I live, that may be a reason to skip this thing.

 

[Smitty11]

The range is a serious issue for me. I don’t believe any of that until I can see it for
Myself. If the car gets 160-180 miles in cold winter conditions, like where I live, that may be a reason to skip this thing.

Agreed, I really want to see some real-word testing numbers to see what range you can actually get.

 

[John S 99]

Agreed, I really want to see some real-word testing numbers to see what range you can actually get.

I've been waiting so long for this thing and now these abysmal range numbers, it's disappointing. I just want to see one and sit in it and that may be this weekend. But the luster and excitement is gone for me, sadly. If I can drive one for a couple of hours I will know much better where I stand.

 

[Smitty11]

I've been waiting so long for this thing and now these abysmal range numbers, it's disappointing. I just want to see one and sit in it and that may be this weekend. But the luster and excitement is gone for me, sadly. If I can drive one for a couple of hours I will know much better where I stand.

Do you have a test drive scheduled for this weekend? Or are you planning on visiting a dealership?

 

[John S 99]

I am hoping to see the car, but I am not sure they are going to even allow us to drive it. Porsche seems hesitant to let us do drives in it. Maybe they are worried with the cold weather the range issues will be obvious.

 

[Barchetta]

I have driven the Turbo and fit and finish are great as well as the performance and the ride. Having said that 198 miles flat out sucks!! for range then what wait 20-45 mites to charge. I have a deposit (turbo S) and an inquiry at my dealership as to will Porsche make any enhancements to increase the range other wise this becomes a day car to the supermarket vehicle at $205k.

 

[John S 99]

I have no doubt in my mind that the car is well built and performs well. But the range is a real issue for me. I drive a lot, some days 135-160 miles, every week. I use my cars as daily drivers, on highway, at speeds of 85 mph, in traffic, in cold weather, seat heaters on, charging phone, stop and go traffic...I USE my car. I am real worried that this will drain that battery down big time.

 

[Epirali]

John S even in coldest weather and at 85 mph you should be able to that with preconditioning, the accessories don’t really even make a dent, it’s the cabin heating/cooling, air drag/speed and battery temperature. Traffic is actually good for range because stop and go and slow traffic will counter intuitively help with range.

 

[Epirali]

Barchetta, what kind of range would be ok before you have to charge? Just curious. Tesla overstates their real range by 30% typically, I believe the 200 is realistic range. No EV right now can do reliable 350, it would needeven bigger and heavier battery packs, or would have to be an eco efficiency box. A bolt could probably do 300 miles with a 90 kwhr battery of Taycan, but then you are driving a Bolt.

 

[WienerDog#1]

There's another negative consideration besides the cold weather . . . I believe Porsche recommends that you only charge the battery to 85%.

 

[Epirali]

I am curious where is this info? And is there a setting that allows this?

 

[BillyBob]

Porsche has sacrificed performance for range. OK, but at <200 mi range, how r u getting the Turbo S to the track, do laps, then drive home? Will Porsche install charging stations on every track in the country?

 

[Epirali]

Well I am not being flip but honestly if you are spending that kind of money to take to track can’t you get a trailer and take the car there without driving it? And you’d be amazed that EV DC charging it being installed in a lot of tracks because various EVs are now becoming track worthy.

 

[WienerDog#1]

I am curious where is this info? And is there a setting that allows this?

There is an extensive article in "CleanTechnica" entitled "The Secret Life of an EV Battery" that shows the relationship between level of charging and battery life. It is dated 26 August 2018 and I certainly can't vouch for it's accuracy, but here are a couple of stats: If you charge to 100% and run it down to 25%, the battery life will be approximately 2,010 cycles; charging it to 85% and running in down to 25%, 4,500 cycles and 75% to 65%, 12,000 cycles. Now, this article is almost a year and a half old and hopefully things are improving, but everything I've read says that constantly charging to 100% has a severe negative impact on battery life.

 

[John S 99]

Well I am not being flip but honestly if you are spending that kind of money to take to track can’t you get a trailer and take the car there without driving it? And you’d be amazed that EV DC charging it being installed in a lot of tracks because various EVs are now becoming track worthy.

Yes, that may be true. But when I do a track day with my 911, I drive it 65 miles to track, get a coffee on the way there, flog it around the track, refuel if necessary and then drive home with the air on, stereo going and on the phone. That’s always been the beauty of Porsche cars. The Taycan seems cool, but any car, ANY, that has a 200 mile range is a compromise in my book. My Tahoe gets 330+ mile range !!!!!!

 

[Epirali]

There is an extensive article in "CleanTechnica" entitled "The Secret Life of an EV Battery" that shows the relationship between level of charging and battery life. It is dated 26 August 2018 and I certainly can't vouch for it's accuracy, but here are a couple of stats: If you charge to 100% and run it down to 25%, the battery life will be approximately 2,010 cycles; charging it to 85% and running in down to 25%, 4,500 cycles and 75% to 65%, 12,000 cycles. Now, this article is almost a year and a half old and hopefully things are improving, but everything I've read says that constantly charging to 100% has a severe negative impact on battery life.

Beware a lot of this info applies to small batteries and without any accounting for the margins that are built into EV batteries. They are never run to 100% and 0%, what you see as 100% maybe be 90 or 93% and 0% may be 9%. Also the management and cell design (and chemistry) impact all of these. There are extensive data collected by various EV owners. The original Leaf would show 10-20% degradation over 4-5 years in moderate climates, but Teslas and be were EVs with more aggressive thermal and battery charging management do not show nearly as much. If you are interested try to look around and you may find that some cars (including the Bolt) may show as little as 5% degradation over 50K miles.

 

[Epirali]

Yes, that may be true. But when I do a track day with my 911, I drive it 65 miles to track, get a coffee on the way there, flog it around the track, refuel if necessary and then drive home with the air on, stereo going and on the phone. That’s always been the beauty of Porsche cars. The Taycan seems cool, but any car, ANY, that has a 200 mile range is a compromise in my book. My Tahoe gets 330+ mile range !!!!!!

Fair point, but then again this is not a regular Porsche. This car is the future of Porsche and can do things a 911 can not do. If we have a functioning infrastructure at high speed charging you could have stopped for 20 min, grabbed coffee and a rest and gotten there or back. So it may not be the right car for some, just like an ICE Porsche is not something I have ever been interested in in the past.