PanameraFrank

Well-Known Member
First Name
Frank
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
744
Reaction score
1,108
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
I mentioned on the other thread but please be aware these are NOT real world numbers, despite what Edmunds states. They ACTUALLY use pieces of multiple trips and attempt to calculate range based on pieces of information, while using incorrect math.

I reached out to Edmunds about this and their response was nonsensical (talking about charging capacity and charging losses.) They declined to further discuss or explain how they reached their range numbers but it certainly wasn't from driving the car 323 miles on a single charge.

You can pretty easily see how they screwed up their math in the article. They had a 32.3kWh/100 mi efficiency number and they just divided the 32.3/100 mi = 323, which is obviously wrong. It should be the usable kWh capacity (about 87 kWh) / 32.3 = 269 miles.

This is one of the big issues with EVs currently, the actual real world range is shrouded in mystery. The EPA says one thing, Edmunds says another, C&D says something else, Porsche yet another thing.. blah blah. You should only trust owner posted photos of the trip computer on "Since Charging". If you do so you'll see the efficiency numbers are generally around 29-34 in the Summer and 35-42 in the Winter. There will always be outliers but those are the actual real world, reliable numbers.
 
Last edited:

Fcassells

Active Member
First Name
Fraser
Joined
Oct 22, 2020
Messages
37
Reaction score
54
Location
Vancouver BC
Vehicles
2020 Taycan 4S
Country flag
good know that , but I'm Pretty sure I’d only get that if the world was ending and I had to get somewhere or die trying type situation ... my right foot has a mind of its own.
 

manitou202

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Sep 11, 2019
Messages
204
Reaction score
596
Location
Manitou Springs, CO
Vehicles
Porsche Taycan Turbo S, Audi E-tron
Country flag
I mentioned on the other thread but please be aware these are NOT real world numbers, despite what Edmunds states. They ACTUALLY use pieces of multiple trips and attempt to calculate range based on pieces of information, while using incorrect math.

I reached out to Edmunds about this and their response was nonsensical (talking about charging capacity and charging losses.) They declined to further discuss or explain how they reached their range numbers but it certainly wasn't from driving the car 323 miles on a single charge.

You can pretty easily see how they screwed up their math in the article. They had a 32.3kWh/100 mi efficiency number and they just divided the 32.3/100 mi = 323, which is obviously wrong. It should be the usable kWh capacity (about 87 kWh) / 32.3 = 269 miles.

This is one of the big issues with EVs currently, the actual real world range is shrouded in mystery. The EPA says one thing, Edmunds says another, C&D says something else, Porsche yet another thing.. blah blah. You should only trust owner posted photos of the trip computer on "Since Charging". If you do so you'll see the efficiency numbers are generally around 29-34 in the Summer and 35-42 in the Winter. There will always be outliers but those are the actual real world, reliable numbers.

Their website says differently. They drive the vehicle until 10 miles remaining. Then fill the battery back up and calculate the consumption based on the kWh used to fill the battery divided by the range they tested.

https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/electric-car-range-and-consumption-epa-vs-edmunds.html

What is Edmunds tested range?
Edmunds begins with full battery charge and drives an electric vehicle on a mix of city and highway roads (approximately 60% city, 40% highway) until the battery is almost entirely empty. (We target 10 miles of remaining range for safety.) The miles traveled and the indicated remaining range are added together for the Edmunds total tested range figure. We prefer to use a higher percentage of city road driving because we believe it's more representative of typical EV use.

What is Edmunds tested consumption?
After a vehicle completes its road loop and the battery is nearly empty, it's charged back to full capacity. The kilowatt-hours used from plug-in to a full charge are tracked and then we calculate the consumption based on the miles traveled (less the remaining range). This process takes into account charging losses in the Edmunds tested consumption number.
 

PanameraFrank

Well-Known Member
First Name
Frank
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
744
Reaction score
1,108
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
Their website says differently. They drive the vehicle until 10 miles remaining. Then fill the battery back up and calculate the consumption based on the kWh used to fill the battery divided by the range they tested.
That is what they claim. I strongly, strongly doubt it happened with the Taycan. See if you can get a scrap of evidence from them. A photo of the trip computer, for example. They refused to provide me with even the slightest hint of evidence and insinuated in their response that they calculated the range based on other factors and not from driving it for 323 (or 313) miles.

OR, perhaps most likely, someone drove the car to 10 miles remaining, passed along the efficiency numbers (ie.. 32.3 kWh/100mi rather than saying "I got blank miles"), and the writer screwed up the math.

The reality is they likely have someone drive the cars and take notes, the notes are based to a writer,and the writer bangs out an article.

Or tell me how they got 323 miles of range on 32.3 kWh/100 mi efficiency.

The article clearly states 323 miles on 32.3 kWh/100 mi efficiency, which cannot happen with the Taycan's battery. There is an error in the article, so either they made an error with the range (that happens to line up perfectly with the simplest calculation error possibly) or an error with the efficiency and got better range than everyone else.
 

kort

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2021
Messages
318
Reaction score
160
Location
32082
Vehicles
'21 taycan 4s
Country flag
I and most others haven't even come close to getting those range numbers.
let's try keeping things real.
 

JimBob

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
163
Reaction score
178
Location
Toronto Canada
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
This is great stuff.

You don't have to be an expert to critique the experts when it comes to the Taycan. It's a closed system and you can measure it (sort of). @PanameraFrank is absolutely correct when he says that the testers don't provide enough information to understand how the test was done. What exactly does city driving and highway driving mean? To be really useful you have to be able to duplicate the test results.

Don't want to be pretentious but when finished with my tests, you will know what can be realistically expected from a Taycan at different temperatures at a constant 115kph/71.5 mph on a relatively flat road without wind effects. Change any of those parameters and the results will also change.
 

manitou202

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Sep 11, 2019
Messages
204
Reaction score
596
Location
Manitou Springs, CO
Vehicles
Porsche Taycan Turbo S, Audi E-tron
Country flag
That is what they claim. I strongly, strongly doubt it happened with the Taycan. See if you can get a scrap of evidence from them. A photo of the trip computer, for example. They refused to provide me with even the slightest hint of evidence and insinuated in their response that they calculated the range based on other factors and not from driving it for 323 (or 313) miles.

OR, perhaps most likely, someone drove the car to 10 miles remaining, passed along the efficiency numbers (ie.. 32.3 kWh/100mi rather than saying "I got blank miles"), and the writer screwed up the math.

The reality is they likely have someone drive the cars and take notes, the notes are based to a writer,and the writer bangs out an article.

Or tell me how they got 323 miles of range on 32.3 kWh/100 mi efficiency.

The article clearly states 323 miles on 32.3 kWh/100 mi efficiency, which cannot happen with the Taycan's battery. There is an error in the article, so either they made an error with the range (that happens to line up perfectly with the simplest calculation error possibly) or an error with the efficiency and got better range than everyone else.

I agree the efficiency number doesn't line up with the range achieved and the usable battery capacity. But we also don't know how many kWh went into recharging the battery. Maybe there was a large loss due to inefficiencies in charging (cooling the battery etc) or there might have been a mistake in their efficiency calculation, not necessarily the range. The rest of the vehicles on their list seem to make more sense.

Another data point is Bjorn's Taycan test. He achieved 360 miles of range at 55mph. Obviously this is a very slow speed but it shows 300+ miles are definitely achievable if you baby the car. His data shows how close the Taycan and Model S LR come in actual range when tested at 55mph and 75mph.

Taycan
55mph: 360 miles
75mph: 264 miles

Model S LR
55mph: 400 miles
75mph: 294 miles

 

PanameraFrank

Well-Known Member
First Name
Frank
Joined
Sep 6, 2019
Messages
744
Reaction score
1,108
Location
Seattle
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
@manitou202 Charging has nothing to do with the kWh/100 figure. Zero. Zip. Nadda. You should be using the "Since Charging" in trip computer to get kWh/100 and that's the most accurate number the car displays.

Bjorn has more accurate tests but yes, if you're hypermiling very slowly, in range mode, in perfect conditions, on 19 inch tires, with no elevation gain, you can get some impressive numbers. But that's not real world. His other tests were 273 and 212 on 20" tires driving somewhat more normally, although still slower than most will.

The problem is that Edmunds is claiming 323 as a real world number which is absurd. It's not a normal number. Did they screw up the math? Did they actually hypermile? I don't know. But I do know that they go to great lengths to make it sound like "this is the Taycan's normal range" when it simply is not.

Someone IS going to buy the car thinking they'll get 323 miles of range thanks to articles like that and it really bothers me.
 

manitou202

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Sep 11, 2019
Messages
204
Reaction score
596
Location
Manitou Springs, CO
Vehicles
Porsche Taycan Turbo S, Audi E-tron
Country flag
@manitou202 Charging has nothing to do with the kWh/100 figure. Zero. Zip. Nadda. You should be using the "Since Charging" in trip computer to get kWh/100 and that's the most accurate number the car displays.

Bjorn has more accurate tests but yes, if you're hypermiling very slowly, in range mode, in perfect conditions, on 19 inch tires, with no elevation gain, you can get some impressive numbers. But that's not real world. His other tests were 273 and 212 on 20" tires driving somewhat more normally, although still slower than most will.

The problem is that Edmunds is claiming 323 as a real world number which is absurd. It's not a normal number. Did they screw up the math? Did they actually hypermile? I don't know. But I do know that they go to great lengths to make it sound like "this is the Taycan's normal range" when it simply is not.

Someone IS going to buy the car thinking they'll get 323 miles of range thanks to articles like that and it really bothers me.

I agree that 323 miles is not a "normal" expected range and can be misleading, but that is the same as the other vehicles on that list. Many of the state ranges for vehicles on that list compare to Bjorn's 55mph tests. So I would guess that Edmunds was doing a bit of hypermiling. Regardless it shows that the Taycan is one of the best in terms of range.

Regarding the kWh/100 mile figure, I agree the best method generally speaking is to use the trip computer in the vehicle for the measured efficiency. I'm simply pointing out that Edmunds claims they did not use the vehicle's stated efficiency. Instead they claim they drove the vehicle until ten miles of range remained, filled the battery to 100%, recorded the amount of kWh added to the battery during that charging session, and used that kWh to calculate the efficiency. Based on their math the Taycan would have added 100kWh to the battery during the charging session which is much greater than the 87kWh of expected usable battery capacity. So I agree something doesn't add up, but the error may be in the efficiency calculation not the range achieved.
 

daveo4EV

Well-Known Member
First Name
David
Joined
Jan 28, 2019
Messages
1,713
Reaction score
2,599
Location
Santa Cruz
Vehicles
Tesla(s), 911 GT3, Boxster S, Bolt, Taycan, Cayenn
Country flag
my 3 separate trips with data show the Turbo is a solid 270 miles at north american hwy speeds

based on my personal experience 300+ miles is unrealistic
 

Tay Tay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
272
Reaction score
192
Location
State of Confusion
Vehicles
Loving him is like driving a new Maserati down a dead-end street
Country flag
@manitou202 Charging has nothing to do with the kWh/100 figure. Zero. Zip. Nadda. You should be using the "Since Charging" in trip computer to get kWh/100 and that's the most accurate number the car displays.
Umm no... how is the actual amount of energy used to charge the car (including charging losses) not the most accurate measure of efficiency? TBC I think they’re metering the power themselves, not relying on the car.
 

Tay Tay

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2020
Messages
272
Reaction score
192
Location
State of Confusion
Vehicles
Loving him is like driving a new Maserati down a dead-end street
Country flag
my 3 separate trips with data show the Turbo is a solid 270 miles at north american hwy speeds

based on my personal experience 300+ miles is unrealistic
Edmunds is doing 60% city though. In my experience in a 4s completely realistic if you were trying.
 

JimBob

Well-Known Member
First Name
James
Joined
Jan 26, 2021
Messages
163
Reaction score
178
Location
Toronto Canada
Vehicles
Taycan 4S
Country flag
I agree that 323 miles is not a "normal" expected range and can be misleading, but that is the same as the other vehicles on that list. Many of the state ranges for vehicles on that list compare to Bjorn's 55mph tests. So I would guess that Edmunds was doing a bit of hypermiling. Regardless it shows that the Taycan is one of the best in terms of range.

Regarding the kWh/100 mile figure, I agree the best method generally speaking is to use the trip computer in the vehicle for the measured efficiency. I'm simply pointing out that Edmunds claims they did not use the vehicle's stated efficiency. Instead they claim they drove the vehicle until ten miles of range remained, filled the battery to 100%, recorded the amount of kWh added to the battery during that charging session, and used that kWh to calculate the efficiency. Based on their math the Taycan would have added 100kWh to the battery during the charging session which is much greater than the 87kWh of expected usable battery capacity. So I agree something doesn't add up, but the error may be in the efficiency calculation not the range achieved.
If you measure the energy input to the battery at the wall, you will get a higher number than what the PCM will show. The difference is due to losses due to heating while charging the battery. I have seen the number 20% quoted as to the energy loss. If you wanted to know what it cost to operate the car, then measuring at the wall is probably the better measure as you have to pay the power company for all the energy used. If you wanted to know the efficiency of the car, then the number from the PCM would probably make more sense. The problem is that there is no standardized method to use.
 

rich_r

Well-Known Member
First Name
RIch
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Messages
60
Reaction score
55
Location
USA
Vehicles
Range Rover sport
Country flag
Edmunds is doing 60% city though. In my experience in a 4s completely realistic if you were trying.
Interesting point. When talking about "range" for EVs, I dont' think most people care about "city" driving since that tends to be local driving that falls well within any EV's range. If you charge at home at night it's pretty much irrelevant. Highway range is really what matters...
 

Advertisement





 
ZYRUS


Advertisement
Top