Porsche Artificially Limiting 0-60 on RWD and CT4?

[whan]

To be upfront, this is purely speculation, but I'm wondering if Porsche artificially limits 0-60 acceleration for its lower RWD and CT4 trims. For example, I'm looking at Motor Trend's testing of the CT4, they got a 4.5 0-60, but more importantly a 12.7 1/4 mile at 116mph

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-porsche-taycan-4-cross-turismo-first-test-review

Motor trend also recently tested a BMW M440i which did a 4.0 0-60 but only 12.6 1/4 at 110mph.

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-bmw-m440i-first-test/

I recognize there's a significant difference in power delivery and factors with gearing for typical ICE cars vs EVs, but an advantage of an EV has always been instant torque delivery. It's odd that the CT4 has a meaningfully higher trap speed yet is 0.5 sec off from 0-60

The same trend somewhat repeats itself even for other EVs - in the Mach E GT test, they reference it doing a 3.6 0-60 but only 12.6 at 100 quarter (although they later found out the Mach E cuts power after a few seconds of WOT). The Model Y did 12.0 but only trapped 115mph so still slower than a CT4

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/...h-e-gt-performance-edition-first-test-review/

Based on all of this, you'd expect a CT4 to do something closer to the lower 4 second range. I think some RWD owners have also felt that speed after launch builds a lot faster than the 0-60 would suggest

Sponsored

 

[dcmonks]

Some of the 0-110 will have to do with the two-gear rear axle motor on the Taycan. If you watch the Taycan vs Tesla drag race videos you'll see the same thing... it gives quite the advantage at high sustained speeds.

However, they certainly software limit the acceleration, because the batteries and motors in the CT4/4S/Turbo/Turbo S are all the same and the weight difference up to the Turbo S is nominal. There is no other explanation for any meaningful difference in 0-60 times across the product line. The only other thing they might change is the battery architecture for heat dissipation, but I doubt that.

 

[Jhenson29]

However, they certainly software limit the acceleration, because the batteries and motors in the CT4/4S/Turbo/Turbo S are all the same

I’m not saying they aren’t software limiting the motor torque anywhere below capacities, but I’m pretty sure there are different motors and inverters across the range.

 

[Rcrewse7]

To be upfront, this is purely speculation, but I'm wondering if Porsche artificially limits 0-60 acceleration for its lower RWD and CT4 trims. For example, I'm looking at Motor Trend's testing of the CT4, they got a 4.5 0-60, but more importantly a 12.7 1/4 mile at 116mph

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-porsche-taycan-4-cross-turismo-first-test-review

Motor trend also recently tested a BMW M440i which did a 4.0 0-60 but only 12.6 1/4 at 110mph.

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-bmw-m440i-first-test/

I recognize there's a significant difference in power delivery and factors with gearing for typical ICE cars vs EVs, but an advantage of an EV has always been instant torque delivery. It's odd that the CT4 has a meaningfully higher trap speed yet is 0.5 sec off from 0-60

The same trend somewhat repeats itself even for other EVs - in the Mach E GT test, they reference it doing a 3.6 0-60 but only 12.6 at 100 quarter (although they later found out the Mach E cuts power after a few seconds of WOT). The Model Y did 12.0 but only trapped 115mph so still slower than a CT4

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/...h-e-gt-performance-edition-first-test-review/

Based on all of this, you'd expect a CT4 to do something closer to the lower 4 second range. I think some RWD owners have also felt that speed after launch builds a lot faster than the 0-60 would suggest

I also believe that Porsche is leaving power (low end specifically) on the table with the RWD and 4S models. Here is a post I made when I first ordereda RWD (and later switched it to a 4S.)

The SportWow video appears to have the only measurable acceleration data for the Taycan RWD outside of Porsche’s stated figures, and there is some interesting info to gleen from it. He does two acceleration tests in it using what appears to be a and manages the following figures:

Run 1 – 0-60 in 5.118 seconds, quarter mile in 13.28 seconds

Run 2 – 0-60 in 5.26 seconds, quarter mile in 12.71 seconds

Reference Porsche Official figures of 0-60 in 5.1 seconds, and quarter mile in 13.5 seconds


Some mitigating factors to consider:

• Performance Battery Plus
• Cold, wet weather
• Summer tires?
• Remaining Range at start of 1st run is 169 miles, meaning 65-70% charge. Not sure if Taycan’s are as sensitive to battery charge as Tesla’s are when going for max acceleration.

He does say that the acceleration when rolling is pretty good, and Porsche does provide some stats on this on their European sites as follows:

80-120km/h Performance Battery – 3.0 seconds

80-120km/h Performance Battery Plus – 2.7 seconds



For reference the 4S states 2.3 seconds for this same test. Pretty close to the performance battery plus stat.



Here are some other interesting stats straight off Porsche’s website:

Macan Turbo 80-120 – 2.9 seconds

Panamera 4s 80-120 – 2.8 seconds

Cayenne Turbo – 80-120 – 2.7 seconds



When considering in-gear acceleration, it looks like the Taycan RWD is in good company of cars that do 0-60 in around 4 seconds.

Having put a deposit down for a RWD scheduled for delivery in May, and unable to test drive one until March, I’ve concluded that Porsche has detuned this from a dead stop in order to preserve model hierarchy with the 4S, but once rolling, will be very enjoyable car to drive so long as you’re not expecting to drag race people. Can’t wait to get my car.

 

[Jrkennedy37]

I speculated on a related launch control thread that the 0-30 is slower than the 30-60. Someone with proper instrumentation should test this theory!!

My experimentation with LC has yielded widely varying results but the one thing that provides consistently quick launches is a warmer battery, whether using sport+ for extended time before a launch or the battery already being warmed up to 75*F+.

From what I’ve read the 4 and 4S CTs have the same hardware so there must be software limitations, which no one can blame Porsche for doing to differentiate model tiers while optimizing production costs. I agree this effect is most apparent off the line, while the 30-60 seems to fly by, ticking up 5-7 mph at the speedo refresh rate. This rapid acceleration continues until the gearbox transition in the 70-80mph range, then it takes off again.

 

[Sidicks]

I’m not saying they aren’t software limiting the motor torque anywhere below capacities, but I’m pretty sure there are different motors and inverters across the range.

Yes! At the GTS launch they made a big thing of that model having the same (rear?) motor as the Turbo and Turbo S, different than the 4 and 4S.

 

[RAHRCR]

Porsche is intentionally conservative on every model in their lineup when it comes to 0-60 (whether EV or ICE). Been doing this for years….

 

[hhf2]

To be upfront, this is purely speculation, but I'm wondering if Porsche artificially limits 0-60 acceleration for its lower RWD and CT4 trims. For example, I'm looking at Motor Trend's testing of the CT4, they got a 4.5 0-60, but more importantly a 12.7 1/4 mile at 116mph

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-porsche-taycan-4-cross-turismo-first-test-review

Motor trend also recently tested a BMW M440i which did a 4.0 0-60 but only 12.6 1/4 at 110mph.

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2021-bmw-m440i-first-test/

I recognize there's a significant difference in power delivery and factors with gearing for typical ICE cars vs EVs, but an advantage of an EV has always been instant torque delivery. It's odd that the CT4 has a meaningfully higher trap speed yet is 0.5 sec off from 0-60

The same trend somewhat repeats itself even for other EVs - in the Mach E GT test, they reference it doing a 3.6 0-60 but only 12.6 at 100 quarter (although they later found out the Mach E cuts power after a few seconds of WOT). The Model Y did 12.0 but only trapped 115mph so still slower than a CT4

https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/...h-e-gt-performance-edition-first-test-review/

Based on all of this, you'd expect a CT4 to do something closer to the lower 4 second range. I think some RWD owners have also felt that speed after launch builds a lot faster than the 0-60 would suggest

I got a 12/21 RWD PB and I had the same suspicion as you initially. However, I compared it to my 2016 Model S RWD85 and it's almost identical performance figures on overboost. 0-100km/h 5.4 seconds. Both really struggle with traction, that's the biggest advantage of the 4 wheelers. That's why the second act on the Taycan is where it leaves the Model S in the dust, when 2nd gear kicks in at around 120-130km/h. No more traction issues then. I still think they could and should be able tweak theRWD PB to be a little faster than the standard battery. A sub 5 seconds would be nice for the ego ?...right now it's no match for the hot hatches even. Still, I take the RWD's range over the Turbo's insanity any day.

 

[Marcad80]

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/threads/rwd-power-weight-vs-accel-anomoly.8837/

 

[BJCanadaMax]

I speculated on a related launch control thread that the 0-30 is slower than the 30-60. Someone with proper instrumentation should test this theory!!

My experimentation with LC has yielded widely varying results but the one thing that provides consistently quick launches is a warmer battery, whether using sport+ for extended time before a launch or the battery already being warmed up to 75*F+.

From what I’ve read the 4 and 4S CTs have the same hardware so there must be software limitations, which no one can blame Porsche for doing to differentiate model tiers while optimizing production costs. I agree this effect is most apparent off the line, while the 30-60 seems to fly by, ticking up 5-7 mph at the speedo refresh rate. This rapid acceleration continues until the gearbox transition in the 70-80mph range, then it takes off again.

I hope that they are like what i heard of CPUs. The poorer batch will have some thing limited and sold as a lower grade product. Thus there is more assurance that the higher price you pay, the less issue your car may experience. Of course this is wild wilid speculation.

 

[BJCanadaMax]

I’m not saying they aren’t software limiting the motor torque anywhere below capacities, but I’m pretty sure there are different motors and inverters across the range.

I would think that it's the same way different grade of meat/fish/truffle are differentiated. Raised on same farm but differentiated by quality.

 

[BJCanadaMax]

Yes! At the GTS launch they made a big thing of that model having the same (rear?) motor as the Turbo and Turbo S, different than the 4 and 4S.

Is that true? i am not doubting. But will have implication on which i choose. I hope that the Cross Turismo 4S use the good one.

 

[DerekS]

I've long suspected the 0-60 is nerfed on the RWD.

How else is it possible the PB+ adds HP and yet the 0-60 is the same?

 

[Sidicks]

I've long suspected the 0-60 is nerfed on the RWD.

How else is it possible the PB+ adds HP and yet the 0-60 is the same?

It also adds weight?

 

[Sidicks]

Is that true? i am not doubting. But will have implication on which i choose. I hope that the Cross Turismo 4S use the good one.

https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/taycan/taycan-saloon-2020/first-drive

‘The GTS uses the Turbo S’s motors, but because it’s less powerful (510bhp, or 590bhp with overboost during Launch Control starts) than the 751bhp flagship, it actually sends more power to the rear wheels more of the time than the Turbos”

Sponsored