What is your Taycan Range after X miles, Let's get some data

[RTH]

@4thPcar , as I understand it, preheating the car helps to charge the car faster. But since you are charging at home, I don't really see the benefit. On the other hand, it is the heat generated in the battery from the high speed DC charging that is detrimental to the battery health. So as far as I am concerned, I would rather take a little longer to charge than having the battery charged at a higher temperature and for a longer duration. I have been using the free DC Charging for the 12000mi and never use the pre-heat. I usually start the charge at around 25% at temp. around 70*+F. It takes me 25 min to charge to 80%. After 12000mi of DC charging, I also have around 250mi at 100% (guesstimate for Porsche). I would love to see others' input and opinions in this though.

Sponsored

 

[feye]

Range as reported by the car in the "guess-o-meter" must not be taken literally. I had a long, calm, dry and warm trip yesterday and my range at 100% SoC now is 462 km (287 miles) for Normal mode. With another type of trip, range at 100% SoC could easily have been 25% less today. The recent driving history matters much more than degradation.

Let me repeat my proposal to Porsche: range should be shown with the specific consumption the car calculates it from. In Europe for example 250 km @ 21,2 kWh/100 km (or even better 250 km @ 212 Wh/km). You Americans may have this in your notation of course,

I agree after a certain type of drive, the next time you drive the GOM is very much off. Perhaps would be much smarter to show based on total average consumption and then quickly adjust depending on your current driving...

Alternatively offer the ability to enter a consumption value as a starting point...

The current solution in the Taycan can be quite misleading.

 

[or1]

I agree after a certain type of drive, the next time you drive the GOM is very much off. Perhaps would be much smarter to show based on total average consumption and then quickly adjust depending on your current driving...

Alternatively offer the ability to enter a consumption value as a starting point...

The current solution in the Taycan can be quite misleading.

Good suggestions I think. Basing the range estimate on a known consumption figure instead of an unknown is my basic point. Whether that known figure is known because it is displayed directly or because it can be seen somewhere else, does the same thing: it makes us know more instead of being left in the dark.

 

[or1]

@4thPcar , as I understand it, preheating the car helps to charge the car faster. But since you are charging at home, I don't really see the benefit. On the other hand, it is the heat generated in the battery from the high speed DC charging that is detrimental to the battery health. So as far as I am concerned, I would rather take a little longer to charge than having the battery charged at a higher temperature and for a longer duration. I have been using the free DC Charging for the 12000mi and never use the pre-heat. I usually start the charge at around 25% at temp. around 70*+F. It takes me 25 min to charge to 80%. After 12000mi of DC charging, I also have around 250mi at 100% (guesstimate for Porsche). I would love to see others' input and opinions in this though.

I don’t think any of us know how daring Porsche have been when determining the charge curve versus temperature. They may have enough data to have their decisions on the safer side even for the really quick charging. Would love to read enlightening pieces from people who know more than me on this.

But in general, I agree with you. My intuition (based on little data) is that I increase the functional lifetime of the battery by not preheating it, or by setting the battery saving mode for slightly slower DC charging. On most of my trips involving DC charging, a few minutes extra for charging per stop is not a problem - it may even be welcome.

The few times when my time is scarce, however, I am not very worried about doing the fastest charging I can.

 

[draladow]

2022 4S with 19 inch Aero S wheels and the 93kwh battery. 12,200 miles and right now can get 275 mi at 100%. Consumption is about 31 kwh/100 miles or 3.22 mi/kwh, at 73-75 mph.

 

[kl98cwg]

I took delivery of my 4S PB in January 2021, so now 2.5 years into ownership and nearly 19k miles. My driving pattern probably hasn’t changed much in that time, although I do use recuperation less after adjusting away from “engine braking” (manually toggling recuperation on and off rather than using auto). In the past few months I’ve also done some much longer, high speed trips (the Taycan is fantastic on those German autobahns ). The car has the 20“ Taycan Turbo Aero wheels.

I typically charge to 80% at home and occasionally to 100% for long journeys. I’ve perhaps used DC charging 20-30 times in the whole time I’ve had the car.

I often extrapolate what the range would be in Normal mode at 100% and during the summer of 2021 it was coming out in the 280’s; it is now more typically in the mid-270’s. That suggests some minimal degradation, although I wonder if it may be offset with improvements from the uPdate. The very best consumption I’ve had on a journey recently is 3.5 miles/kWh whereas in the past it seemed to be 3.4 (figures that high are rare).

 

[TXAG]

Apologies for the late response, but I was out of town. Here's a chart of my data. I've had my 2022 RWD with the large battery for just over a year and it's approaching 11,000 miles (~16,100 km).

 

[DuffNation]

One other thing to consider is the AC temperature. My wife normally keeps it at 74F and AC on Eco. If you run your much cooler, then it'd definitely reduce your range.

So I changed the AC to ‘eco’ and bumped the pre cool from 73 to 74… 5% more range one day 1. Appreciate the tips. Will watch this further and see what further adjustments do.

 

[feye]

Sorry, but my Taycan has been downgraded to be a local city car only. All longer drives we take the big gun now:

Today I went to the next big city and back. In my old MS90D, when it was still new, I came back from the same trip with 30% SoC left. Later with the Taycan I came back with 45% SoC.

Today I came back in this monster with 75% SoC left. It drives like an EV, but does not feel like one, cos you don't care about range and charging anymore...

 

[ciaranob]

Apologies for the late response, but I was out of town. Here's a chart of my data. I've had my 2022 RWD with the large battery for just over a year and it's approaching 11,000 miles (~16,100 km).

Great to see more data - very similar to the ranges I have plotted from my car's predictions (despite mine being a heavier CT on 21" wheels etc) - see this post in this thread #14 - I've also broken it down into seasonal impact on charge guestimations which are noticeable.

 

[or1]

Apologies for the late response, but I was out of town. Here's a chart of my data. I've had my 2022 RWD with the large battery for just over a year and it's approaching 11,000 miles (~16,100 km).

I love this graph. Single data points for range can be misleading by an unknown quantity, this gives a bigger picture and is more informative. As @ciaranob says, also seeing the seasonal variation is very nice. But the simplicity and richness of this one is highly appreciated.

But you have to note the range and SoC result of each charge manually, don't you?

 

[ciaranob]

I love this graph. Single data points for range can be misleading by an unknown quantity, this gives a bigger picture and is more informative. As @ciaranob says, also seeing the seasonal variation is very nice. But the simplicity and richness of this one is highly appreciated.

But you have to note the range and SoC result of each charge manually, don't you?

My charts show all of this data and more so not entirely sure what you are seeing here that is different esp the ref to 'single data pts' as both charts contain these? In this case just a different way to display - for ref., my car's mileages/timeline are posted at the top of my chart, his color coded etc. This plot also does not differentiate range variation between winter and summer etc.

For example what's also missing from this chart is what was measured and what was calculated i.e. I'd assume (rightly or wrongly!) that he did not charge to 100% every time so was it to 80 or 85% and 100% range was then calculated as in my chart; are these all AC or a mix of AC and DC charging (I separate mine out in the same chart); also what was the car's mode when reading the predicted range, is this Normal or Range mode max. predictions etc etc.

Not a criticism - just depends on what level of detail you are interested in

 

[or1]

My charts show all of this data and more so not entirely sure what you are seeing here that is different esp the ref to 'single data pts' as both charts contain these? In this case just a different way to display - for ref., my car's mileages/timeline are posted at the top of my chart, his color coded etc. This plot also does not differentiate range variation between winter and summer etc.

For example what's also missing from this chart is what was measured and what was calculated i.e. I'd assume (rightly or wrongly!) that he did not charge to 100% every time so was it to 80 or 85% and 100% range was then calculated as in my chart; are these all AC or a mix of AC and DC charging (I separate mine out in the same chart); also what was the car's mode when reading the predicted range, is this Normal or Range mode max. predictions etc etc.

Not a criticism - just depends on what level of detail you are interested in

I certainly agree that your chart gives much more data. It also takes more time to understand and glean info from.

The questions you have about calculated tor 100%, AC or DC, range etc for the simpler chart are also surely valid. Simplification makes you lose something (some of it could have been explained in text). In this case I like the simpler graph for what it does: show an overview and not all the details. I think that is an OK concept for a chart.

At other times, I appreciate the details and can then spend the necessary time on your chart to learn even more. So I think both types of chart are useful.

 

[TXAG]

But you have to note the range and SoC result of each charge manually, don't you?

Yes. A lot of the data comes from my trips from my home in the Phoenix area to Las Vegas. The charge at home is AC and the rest are DC. I take before and after pictures of my dashboard at each charging station. I enter the data into my spreadsheet when I get home.

Note how the guess-o-meter is affected by elevation change. Kingman AZ is 2000 feet higher than my home, so the guess-o-meter thinks I drive more miles than actual when going uphill and less miles than actual when going downhill.

 

[ciaranob]

Yes. A lot of the data comes from my trips from my home in the Phoenix area to Las Vegas. The charge at home is AC and the rest are DC. I take before and after pictures of my dashboard at each charging station. I enter the data into my spreadsheet when I get home.

Note how the guess-o-meter is affected by elevation change. Kingman AZ is 2000 feet higher than my home, so the guess-o-meter thinks I drive more miles than actual when going uphill and less miles than actual when going downhill.

Can you clarify as to when you read/have read your range 'guesstomates', what driving mode were/are you in and is the AC on or off? All these factors can add anywhere between 8-20 miles of addition guestimated range!

And yes there are many factors including terrain/elevation, temperature etc that do indeed have a direct impact on the PCM's calculated ranges.

Re spreadsheet, same approach

Sponsored