Tesla Model Y vs. Porsche Taycan: Real-World Range Test - Edmunds

[Reg]

I'm so tired of arguing (on different forums) with Tesla fanboys

It really is not worth the effort. I gave up that long ago and am happier for it!
Besides, I would be really surprised if a main criteria in cross shopping an S with a Taycan is range. It is like saying that a Camry gets better gas mileage than a 911.

The interesting thing about your chart is that only one company underperforms the EPA range for the 56mph test and they do so for 3 different models. LOL.

Advertisement

 

[Gwaihir]

Best range estimate I have seen on the Taycan 4S.
323 miles.


Tesla Model Y vs. Porsche Taycan: Real-World Range Test
Edmunds
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/tesla-model-y-vs-porsche-taycan-real-world-range-test.html

I’m not sure I believe this. From the text: “Edmunds observed 323 miles and saw a better energy consumption of 32.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity used every 100 miles of driving”. That would mean the Taycan would need 100kW/h available capacity and we all know it’s a lot less than that! I love my 4S and would really like to have a range like is stated, but I think it’s just fiction. . . .

 

[martinday]

I’m not sure I believe this. From the text: “Edmunds observed 323 miles and saw a better energy consumption of 32.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity used every 100 miles of driving”. That would mean the Taycan would need 100kW/h available capacity and we all know it’s a lot less than that! I love my 4S and would really like to have a range like is stated, but I think it’s just fiction. . . .

Yes, it looks like there's something badly wrong with Edmunds' numbers. If the 32.3kWh/100 miles is correct that would give the Taycan 4S a range of about 260 miles, not 323. My Turbo gives me about 250 miles on long, fairly easy going drives (mostly cruising to average 50mph over 150 miles) so 260 sounds about right.

 

[Tay Tay]

I’m not sure I believe this. From the text: “Edmunds observed 323 miles and saw a better energy consumption of 32.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity used every 100 miles of driving”. That would mean the Taycan would need 100kW/h available capacity and we all know it’s a lot less than that! I love my 4S and would really like to have a range like is stated, but I think it’s just fiction. . . .

While I agree that article is screwed up, this could be possible if it’s gross energy used, not including savings from regen.

 

[ron_b]

I’m not sure I believe this. From the text: “Edmunds observed 323 miles and saw a better energy consumption of 32.3 kilowatt-hours of electricity used every 100 miles of driving”. That would mean the Taycan would need 100kW/h available capacity and we all know it’s a lot less than that! I love my 4S and would really like to have a range like is stated, but I think it’s just fiction. . . .

With the correct speed and good conditions you can get 360mi with 19” wheels.

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/t...real-world-range-test-edmunds.3020/post-41508

I got 250+ easy in range mode traveling 70mph avg with traffic and going over some small mountains. I will be doing more testing in range mode this weekend.

 

[Tay Tay]

With the correct speed and good conditions you can get 360mi with 19” wheels.

https://www.taycanforum.com/forum/t...real-world-range-test-edmunds.3020/post-41508

I got 250+ easy in range mode traveling 70mph avg with traffic and going over some small mountains. I will be doing more testing in range mode this weekend.

His point though was that Edmunds’ math doesn’t work out. 323 miles * 32.3 kWh / 100 miles = 104 kWh required, larger than the Taycan’s battery. Maybe they gave gross not net energy usage although given 323 & 32.3 they may have fat fingered something.

 

[ron_b]

His point though was that Edmunds’ math doesn’t work out. 323 miles * 32.3 kWh / 100 miles = 104 kWh required, larger than the Taycan’s battery. Maybe they gave gross not net energy usage although given 323 & 32.3 they may have fat fingered something.

Yes, sorry I should have also addressed that. Yes I agree the consumption numbers do not make sense relative to the distance unless they are from different tests for some reason. The Tesla figures that they provide do make sense though.

 

[martinday]

I found this tweet from the article author from when he made the run last May covering 313.3 miles before he got down to 10 remaining. He says it took 9.5 hours so, even if some of that is rest stops, he was still only averaging 35 to 40mph when moving and if he had range mode active as the article suggests then that would explain how he covered that distance. It's not exactly the style that most of us will drive our cars and I wouldn't want EPA tests done this way so it seems pointless to compare this to the EPA value. I guess the 32.3kWh/100 miles is a mistake somehow transcribed from the 323 miles range and it should have been about 26kWh/100 miles. I never get anywhere near that in my car.

 

[ron_b]

I found this tweet from the article author from when he made the run last May covering 313.3 miles before he got down to 10 remaining. He says it took 9.5 hours so, even if some of that is rest stops, he was still only averaging 35 to 40mph when moving and if he had range mode active as the article suggests then that would explain how he covered that distance. It's not exactly the style that most of us will drive our cars and I wouldn't want EPA tests done this way so it seems pointless to compare this to the EPA value. I guess the 32.3kWh/100 miles is a mistake somehow transcribed from the 323 miles range and it should have been about 26kWh/100 miles. I never get anywhere near that in my car.

Very nice research Martin!

 

[Bill4444]

Edmund’s figures don’t surprise me than much. My brother takes his 4s as far as 290 miles driving pretty normally in 70F weather.

the 4s does have a better range than the turbo

 

[Chas1]

I will add that this is a problem for Porsche and many other automakers. Range is a huge factor in buying an EV. Maybe not as big of a factor for a high end sports car like the Taycan, but it is in more moderately priced vehicles like the Audi E-tron for example.

Tesla continually overachieves in the EPA ratings which most people seem to take as gospel. As a result Tesla probably gets a lot of additional sales off the difference. There is a lot of misinformation about EV's in general. Initially is was centered around all EV's, but it has now shifted to Tesla is the only long range EV available and is far superior to all other EVs, which obviously isn't true.

My favorite example is when I drove my E-tron to my father-in-laws house a month ago. My brother-in-law showed up with his recently purchased Model S. He was shocked that I was able to drive my E-tron 300 miles to my father-in-laws because he didn't realize there are other fast chargers available. He thought that Tesla was the only EV that had fast chargers.

Edit: Charging speed is another variable. Tesla loves to use their peak charging power (250kW for example) as a metric of how fast their vehicles charge. However, as many tests have shown the Audi E-tron charges faster to 100% than almost any other EV (including the Taycan) even though it has a peak charging power of 150kW. This is because charging speed (or total charging time) isn't based on peak charging power, but more based on how long your vehicle can charge at moderately high rates (above 100kW). There are a lot of variables in these charging speeds, but again a lot of misinformation out there. Someone (maybe SAE) needs to develop a standard charging test to be used as a way for manufactures to rate vehicle charging speeds.

I will add that this is a problem for Porsche and many other automakers. Range is a huge factor in buying an EV. Maybe not as big of a factor for a high end sports car like the Taycan, but it is in more moderately priced vehicles like the Audi E-tron for example.

Tesla continually overachieves in the EPA ratings which most people seem to take as gospel. As a result Tesla probably gets a lot of additional sales off the difference. There is a lot of misinformation about EV's in general. Initially is was centered around all EV's, but it has now shifted to Tesla is the only long range EV available and is far superior to all other EVs, which obviously isn't true.

My favorite example is when I drove my E-tron to my father-in-laws house a month ago. My brother-in-law showed up with his recently purchased Model S. He was shocked that I was able to drive my E-tron 300 miles to my father-in-laws because he didn't realize there are other fast chargers available. He thought that Tesla was the only EV that had fast chargers.

Edit: Charging speed is another variable. Tesla loves to use their peak charging power (250kW for example) as a metric of how fast their vehicles charge. However, as many tests have shown the Audi E-tron charges faster to 100% than almost any other EV (including the Taycan) even though it has a peak charging power of 150kW. This is because charging speed (or total charging time) isn't based on peak charging power, but more based on how long your vehicle can charge at moderately high rates (above 100kW). There are a lot of variables in these charging speeds, but again a lot of misinformation out there. Someone (maybe SAE) needs to develop a standard charging test to be used as a way for manufactures to rate vehicle charging speeds.

Thanks for this. Such an interesting point that charging speed has several variables not just a headline grabbing max charge rate. Of course Taycan does have a quick charge capability which is so important on a long road trip but fo me and I suspect most others 200 mile+ range covers 95% of my yearly driving. I’m sure Porsche carefully worked this out and most of its customers are able to conclude the same. Why haul around bigger battery than you really need?

 

[Tiredoftesla]

Best range estimate I have seen on the Taycan 4S.
323 miles.


Tesla Model Y vs. Porsche Taycan: Real-World Range Test
Edmunds
https://www.edmunds.com/car-news/tesla-model-y-vs-porsche-taycan-real-world-range-test.html

I did a real word world test and was blown away. I have been driving an MS since 2013. My last one was a 2017 MS 100D. We have a vacation home 200 miles away, a twisty mountain road drive with 6400 feet of vertical climb: very range demanding. I would always charge my MS to 100% and drive 10 miles over the limit, which is 75 mph for half the trip and 65 mph for a quarter of the trip. The Tesla would make it with about 50 miles of range left. In March I test drove a Taycan And loved it. In terms of fit and finish and engineering it is an order of magnitude better than a Tesla. But, I told the salesman, with a 200 mile range it won’t work for me. To make a long story short, they let me a used 2020 turbo to test it. Overnight. I had them charge to 100% and drove exactly as I drove my Tesla: 10 miles over. My wife followed me in her 4Runner in case the car ran out of range. I was absolutely blown away: it outperformed the MS and I finished with about 70 miles of range left. I ordered a 4S and sold my Tesla. I get my 4S in July.

 

[feye]

...I was absolutely blown away: it outperformed the MS and I finished with about 70 miles of range left. I ordered a 4S and sold my Tesla. I get my 4S in July.

Sounds like an easy decision?