Taycan 4S range results for each drive mode - owner's test

[JimBob]

This is what happens when you are under lockdown with nothing else to do.

If you go to your car and cycle among the drive modes you might get something that looks like this.

	Indicated Range in km​	Difference​
Range	294	0
Normal	286	8
Sport	279	7
Sport +	272	7

So you may be thinking that if I drive in Sport+ I will only loose 22 km over Range mode. (Hint, not)


These tests have not been converted to imperial measurements. I will probably get around to that later if someone wants to see them.

The test was a loop out and back with 25 minutes under each mode. Temperatures were pretty constant around -7C and wind was under 12 kph as a cross wind. Observations were made at 1-minute intervals. Cruise control was set to 115 kph and traffic was light.

Chart 1 is a plot of all the observations made. If you were to look at it, you would be hard pressed to identify the range modes. There appears to be a slight bend to the data, but nothing to get excited about.

Chart 2 is a plot of the observations for each mode, extracted from Chart 1 and the differences now appear. A linear model was applied to the data for each mode and a best fit linear line plotted. The standard error of the estimate and RSquare for each of the modes are highly supportive that at constant speed (load) the relationship of SOC to distance is linear.


Conclusions

The changes in indicated ranges on the dash, look a bit (a lot) light, but this may depend on how Porsche thought you were driving prior to departure.

Sport and Sport + are energy pigs when compared to Range and Normal.

Small gains and losses applied over the range of a trip, mean big differences at the end.

It is very easy for Range gains to be swamped by outside factors such as changes in elevation and head winds.

If you want to totally kill your range drive at high speed in Sport +, up hill, into a head wind, in sub-zero temperatures with a bike on your roof. If you want to extend your range to the max, do the opposite.

Sponsored

 

[oalsaker]

As a math teacher, I approve of your linear modelling!

 

[PanameraFrank]

Interesting test but I'm not sure it's going to be accurate over a longer range. The energy drain is simply not linear and the first 25 minutes of driving are not indicative of longer range efficiency.

Sport and Sport Plus are much less efficient in short windows (think miles 1-25) but find more efficiency after that.

I have tested all four on longer trips and given the same conditions & a relaxed driving style the efficiency loss of Sport or Sport Plus over a 200+ mile trip isn't extreme. In fact I believe the air suspension height plays more of a role than the mode selection.

You're certainly not losing 100 km of range by using Sport Plus and driving in a relaxed highway manner, probably closer to 50km.

I will drive in Sport Plus on my next ski trip to compare, as that is consistently 72 to 74% of the battery using mostly Range mode over 165 miles.

 

[JimBob]

Interesting test but I'm not sure it's going to be accurate over a longer range. The energy drain is simply not linear and the first 25 minutes of driving are not indicative of longer range efficiency.

Sport and Sport Plus are much less efficient in short windows (think miles 1-25) but find more efficiency after that.

I have tested all four on longer trips and given the same conditions & a relaxed driving style the efficiency loss of Sport or Sport Plus over a 200+ mile trip isn't extreme. In fact I believe the air suspension height plays more of a role than the mode selection.

You're certainly not losing 100 km of range by using Sport Plus and driving in a relaxed highway manner, probably closer to 50km.

I will drive in Sport Plus on my next ski trip to compare, as that is consistently 72 to 74% of the battery using mostly Range mode over 165 miles.

"The energy drain is not linear" (under constant load). Either it is or it isn't. You can't just take start and end points. You have to look at all the points in between. Have you? I have and I have the data to back it up. What I don't have is multiple tests under multiple conditions. That takes time. I posted this before but here is a recent test under Range mode. So is it just happenstance that the line appears straight?

ADD
And the first 25 minutes has nothing to do with the reported SOC. That is calculated by the BMS. I suggest you do a literature search on SOC. You have confused SOC with indicated range which is not accurate in the first 20-25 minutes.

Agreed, that tests under short windows are not necessarily accurate. But the amount of the inaccuracy depends on the model and accuracy of measurement.

I am happy to debate on facts, but not on anecdotes. Makes one party either right or wrong.

 

[porsche_coyote]

"The energy drain is not linear" (under constant load). Either it is or it isn't. You can't just take start and end points. You have to look at all the points in between. Have you? I have and I have the data to back it up. What I don't have is multiple tests under multiple conditions. That takes time. I posted this before but here is a recent test under Range mode. So is it just happenstance that the line appears straight?

ADD
And the first 25 minutes has nothing to do with the reported SOC. That is calculated by the BMS. I suggest you do a literature search on SOC. You have confused SOC with indicated range which is not accurate in the first 20-25 minutes.

Agreed, that tests under short windows are not necessarily accurate. But the amount of the inaccuracy depends on the model and accuracy of measurement.

I am happy to debate on facts, but not on anecdotes. Makes one party either right or wrong.

I think that you can both be right on this one.

In the graph, I see that your battery temp doesn't fluctuate all that much, which suggests to me that either the battery was conditioned for departure or that your car was in an environment that kept the battery temperature relatively close to the ideal operating temperature. In cases where the battery is quite cold, the Taycan can use a lot of energy heating it, which can significantly impact the energy consumption per mile for the initial part of a trip (until the battery gets close the ideal operating temperature). Since the battery has significant thermal mass, the bad news is that heating it uses a great deal of energy and the good news is that maintaining the temperature uses a good deal less energy.

I've definitely seen this effect in my own driving, and I've seen that starting out with the battery conditioned avoids this issue.

One place where Sport or Sport + mode comes into it is that it seems try to (based on my observations) heat the battery to a temperature where it can draw power more quickly, giving you better response to instantaneous loads (like slamming on the throttle, doing launch control starts, etc.). The actual steady state temperature can be higher in Normal or Range mode, but neither of those modes seems to try to hit 27-28°C as quickly as Sport and Sport +.

 

[JimBob]

To some extent this is about real observational data rather than anecdotal data.

I don't think we can both be right.

You are correct that the battery temp doesn't fluctuate much, and a departure timer was set, so the battery was preheated. If not the range would have been less. As the air temps were cold the battery was using some of its energy to warm itself, hence not available for range. This will go away as the temps warm up and I expect to see near 300 miles when the air temps reach 70F and the battery runs hotter. Those in warmer climates will already see this, but I would like to nail it down with real life observations.

What I am trying to do is create a log of change in distance at constant speeds.

The key difference between me and @PanameraFrank is that he disagrees that SOC and distance have a linear (at constant load). My limited number of tests say it is. If so, lots of nice things happen. But I stand to be corrected.

This can easily be disapproved by one run under constant load which comes out non linear. If someone would like to take the screen shots, I would be happy to process the data.

 

[porsche_coyote]

T

The key difference between me and @PanameraFrank is that he disagrees that SOC and distance have a linear (at constant load). My limited number of tests say it is. If so, lots of nice things happen. But I stand to be corrected.

This can easily be disapproved by one run under constant load which comes out non linear. If someone would like to take the screen shots, I would be happy to process the data.

Fair enough.

I'm really just trying to note that there are some ready explanations for why you and @PanameraFrank would have observed differences. I believe that for a preconditioned battery and constant load you're likely right that there is a linear relationship between SoC and distance. I also believe that violating either of those assumptions leads to a distinctly non-linear consumption curve. In fact, I can even see the curve violating monotonicity, since terrain can create not only loads that increase demand, but also can return energy to the battery.

 

[JimBob]

Fair enough.

I'm really just trying to note that there are some ready explanations for why you and @PanameraFrank would have observed differences. I believe that for a preconditioned battery and constant load you're likely right that there is a linear relationship between SoC and distance. I also believe that violating either of those assumptions leads to a distinctly non-linear consumption curve. In fact, I can even see the curve violating monotonicity, since terrain can create not only loads that increase demand, but also can return energy to the battery.

Yes if you violate enough assumptions you can kink the curve in any direction. Just consider that to make a successful EV, the output of the battery has to be measurable and forecastable, otherwise you are likely to be stranded on the roadside.. The car does a very good job at that.

 

[Wakesurfer]

This is what happens when you are under lockdown with nothing else to do.

If you go to your car and cycle among the drive modes you might get something that looks like this.

	Indicated Range in km​	Difference​
Range	294	0
Normal	286	8
Sport	279	7
Sport +	272	7

So you may be thinking that if I drive in Sport+ I will only loose 22 km over Range mode. (Hint, not)


These tests have not been converted to imperial measurements. I will probably get around to that later if someone wants to see them.

The test was a loop out and back with 25 minutes under each mode. Temperatures were pretty constant around -7C and wind was under 12 kph as a cross wind. Observations were made at 1-minute intervals. Cruise control was set to 115 kph and traffic was light.

Chart 1 is a plot of all the observations made. If you were to look at it, you would be hard pressed to identify the range modes. There appears to be a slight bend to the data, but nothing to get excited about.

Chart 2 is a plot of the observations for each mode, extracted from Chart 1 and the differences now appear. A linear model was applied to the data for each mode and a best fit linear line plotted. The standard error of the estimate and RSquare for each of the modes are highly supportive that at constant speed (load) the relationship of SOC to distance is linear.


Conclusions

The changes in indicated ranges on the dash, look a bit (a lot) light, but this may depend on how Porsche thought you were driving prior to departure.

Sport and Sport + are energy pigs when compared to Range and Normal.

Small gains and losses applied over the range of a trip, mean big differences at the end.

It is very easy for Range gains to be swamped by outside factors such as changes in elevation and head winds.

If you want to totally kill your range drive at high speed in Sport +, up hill, into a head wind, in sub-zero temperatures with a bike on your roof. If you want to extend your range to the max, do the opposite.

This is what happens when you are under lockdown with nothing else to do.

If you go to your car and cycle among the drive modes you might get something that looks like this.

	Indicated Range in km​	Difference​
Range	294	0
Normal	286	8
Sport	279	7
Sport +	272	7

So you may be thinking that if I drive in Sport+ I will only loose 22 km over Range mode. (Hint, not)


These tests have not been converted to imperial measurements. I will probably get around to that later if someone wants to see them.

The test was a loop out and back with 25 minutes under each mode. Temperatures were pretty constant around -7C and wind was under 12 kph as a cross wind. Observations were made at 1-minute intervals. Cruise control was set to 115 kph and traffic was light.

Chart 1 is a plot of all the observations made. If you were to look at it, you would be hard pressed to identify the range modes. There appears to be a slight bend to the data, but nothing to get excited about.

Chart 2 is a plot of the observations for each mode, extracted from Chart 1 and the differences now appear. A linear model was applied to the data for each mode and a best fit linear line plotted. The standard error of the estimate and RSquare for each of the modes are highly supportive that at constant speed (load) the relationship of SOC to distance is linear.


Conclusions

The changes in indicated ranges on the dash, look a bit (a lot) light, but this may depend on how Porsche thought you were driving prior to departure.

Sport and Sport + are energy pigs when compared to Range and Normal.

Small gains and losses applied over the range of a trip, mean big differences at the end.

It is very easy for Range gains to be swamped by outside factors such as changes in elevation and head winds.

If you want to totally kill your range drive at high speed in Sport +, up hill, into a head wind, in sub-zero temperatures with a bike on your roof. If you want to extend your range to the max, do the opposite.

Ha! I just picked up my 4S a week ago and planned to run a similar test..................but I am just a regular guy.............no graphs; not an engineer, scientist, actuary, or a math teacher, just a driver. I intend to charge the car to 85% and leave the house on three separate days going to the same destination about 40 miles away. Have lunch, drive home and compare the remaining charge, the number of miles of remaining range. It will clearly not be a scientific test but it will be a real world test of just taking the car to the same place using three different modes: range, normal and finally sport. I am hoping to do this this week as long as 'stuff' does not get in the way of fun. Will post on completion.

 

[feye]

The key difference between me and @PanameraFrank is that he disagrees that SOC and distance have a linear (at constant load).

The BMS has algos in order to make it appear near perfect linear. That's the job of a good BMS in order for the driver to have a reliable display - same as gas consumption in an ICE.

 

[kort]

in my very unscientific experiment, while driving on a 160 mile road trip I scrolled through the various settings and noted that from range to sport plus resulted in about a 16 mile difference in projected range. I know that the guess o meter is fluid and will report different numbers under differing conditions but for me, I don't need to be precise, the result is that when I am bombing around close to home I care less about the range then when I am cruising on an extended trip.
so around town it's individual mode, set to the lowest chassis level and normal, which is only a couple of mile more than range mode on long trips where conservation of range is needed.

 

[JimBob]

in my very unscientific experiment, while driving on a 160 mile road trip I scrolled through the various settings and noted that from range to sport plus resulted in about a 16 mile difference in projected range. I know that the guess o meter is fluid and will report different numbers under differing conditions but for me, I don't need to be precise, the result is that when I am bombing around close to home I care less about the range then when I am cruising on an extended trip.
so around town it's individual mode, set to the lowest chassis level and normal, which is only a couple of mile more than range mode on long trips where conservation of range is needed.

If there is one fair criticism to be leveled at my analysis, it is that the 25 minute interval could be too short to adequately capture the full characteristics of the individual drive modes. Small changes in grade for instance might have an outsized impact on the results given a smaller sample size when projected over the full range. I did not actually state what the range was, just gave a chart and left it to the readers imagination. With a larger sample size, I would have been more forth write. However the statistics were very good with respect to the data captured and a visually inspection of the graph didn't show anything crazy.

 

[kort]

If there is one fair criticism to be leveled at my analysis, it is that the 25 minute interval could be too short to adequately capture the full characteristics of the individual drive modes. Small changes in grade for instance might have an outsized impact on the results given a smaller sample size when projected over the full range. I did not actually state what the range was, just gave a chart and left it to the readers imagination. With a larger sample size, I would have been more forth write. However the statistics were very good with respect to the data captured and a visually inspection of the graph didn't show anything crazy.

I wasn't attacking your in depth analysis. I am just not so technically inclined.
for my needs rotating the drive modes gives me the info that I need to decide what mode works best at different times. I have all of 1200 miles on the car and I still have so much to learn about the car's nuances.
FWIW: I am in florida where the terrain is mostly flat and on sunday, which was not a normal day the temps ranged from 48 to 67 degrees and it was breezy but less than 15 mph winds but I can't say if headwinds had an impact. so other than having more conducive warmer temps my little experiment should return similar results regardless of timing, unless SOC impacts range.

 

[JimBob]

I know you weren't. I attacked my own analysis.

I have grown to appreciate the different driving modes. Range mode is so quiet that it is nice to listen to the music, without the engine and road noise. Normal mode is great for city driving. I doubt I will ever much use Sport or Sport +.

 

[kort]

I know you weren't. I attacked my own analysis.

I have grown to appreciate the different driving modes. Range mode is so quiet that it is nice to listen to the music, without the engine and road noise. Normal mode is great for city driving. I doubt I will ever much use Sport or Sport +.

I prefer the responsiveness of the sport+ mode and when range is of no concern that is what I'll use, everyone is different and we are fortunate to have choices.

Sponsored