EPA rates new Porsche Taycan as least efficient EV ever tested.

EPA rates new Porsche Taycan as least efficient EV ever tested.


Taycan Turbo S in now the new least-efficient champ with 192 miles EPA.

Taycan Turbo EPA is 201
Taycan Turbo S is 192

Model S EPA is 390 (LR Plus)
Performance S is 348

Porsche's new Taycan [Turbo] electric vehicle is the least efficient EV ever, according to the EPA. Its 69 MPGe combined efficiency figure is low for a modern EV, as is its rated range of 201 miles on a single charge. Even the decades-old GM EV1 was more efficient, rated at a combined 85 MPGe.

We previously estimated that the Taycan Turbo's EPA range would land around 270 miles. There is also a more powerful Turbo S model, which will likely offer even less range (we previously estimated it at around 225 miles), and a less powerful 4S model, which will likely offer slightly more range.

Tropopause | 12 December, 2019

Surmising Car & Driver's previous estimates of 270 miles for Taycan Turbo and 225 mile for Taycan Turbo S vs. EPA's 201 miles for Taycan Turbo, would yield an EPA rated range of 156 miles for Taycan Turbo S; or just under $1,200 per rated mile of range for the Turbo S.

Another claim-to-fame for Porsche!

nukequazar | 12 December, 2019

It's the first true Sports BEV. You can't get something for nothing. Performance doesn't come for free. A bit surprising, though, that the low heat loss 800 v system doesn't help (although maybe it does) but I'm not an engineer.

Mark K | 12 December, 2019

Dude calls us fanboys.

Above post is a doozey.

SamO | 12 December, 2019


NKYTA | 13 December, 2019

Oh Snap.

nukequazar | 13 December, 2019

Mark K, SamO, and NKYTA say, as usual... Duuuuuhhhhh, yup, yup, yup

nukequazar | 13 December, 2019

Just waiting for Mathew98 to chime in with his middle-school dropout drool.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

@Nuke 800v is the technical solution for the efficiency trade-offs I'll discuss below due to the focus on performance. Trade-offs are that it's a more powerful car which requires more energy, but because of 800v it draws less current and stays cooler so no limp mode. It has a higher rolling resistance, bigger/heavier wheel/tires/brakes for better handling. It's a bit heavier with it's transmission but that transmission is what allows it to reach 155mph in half of the time it takes Model S. It uses a different regen implementation so that the driver has better control over braking while racing which helps with handling. It also has rear wheel steering for improved handling but that is also adding weight. But again 800v means that it can be recharged much faster which is why it can complete trips more quickly than most cars with 400v systems. What our fanboy friends logic fails to realize is that Porsche wasn't trying to build a economy car like Model S/3, they are making a Sports Car. Also because of the way the EPA test is conducted, you can't get accurate range numbers for BEVs. There's no way to use regen like on the road with a Dyno. And the EPA subtracts a generic 30% of the measured range from BEVs so that means the car got about ~290 miles during the test. This is why the independent road test saw range of 275 miles vs EPAs inaccurate 201 mile adjusted number. Finally, EPA efficiency also factors in charging efficiency in it's MPGe equivalent numbers. They don't use 800v fast DC, they use 240v AC so there's an additional ~15% penalty for that as well. EPA also isn't using the ECO mode for this testing. But the car is absolutely less efficient than a Tesla as are all race cars vs road cars. So Taycan is an EPIC FAIL at pretending to be a Prius! Oh wait, what's this? It's actually more energy efficient at 69 MPGe than a Prius 58 MPG while managing to perform like a 911! Say it isn't so!

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

Forgot to add that the better materials fit and finish which quiet down all the rattles, road noise and add the luxury Porsche customers want also adds weight which impacts range.

Mathew98 | 13 December, 2019

I was too busy benching @Nuke's mama on my pecker to respond. @Dumbazz was otherwise preoccupied by spying in the corner and choking his chicken. He was awestruck and became absolutely speechless for the first time this month...

Let's take thay Toycan out for a spin, shall we?

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019

Well, you’ll have have job with the Ministry of Propaganda when Porsche goes under, at least. That was masterful.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

Bighorn what's propaganda about it? Are you so insecure about our cars that you can't discuss the technical merits of another vehicle?

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019

Not at all insecure. You’re just blowing smoke over obvious shortcomings. All will be revealed, but the party line is that they underestimated EPA on purpose when you know they fought to get every last mile to clear the 200 mile threshold. Plus payed for third party damage control to say 275. It’s so ridiculous to argue otherwise. Again, the car will tell the tale, if they ever get around to delivering them.

jimglas | 13 December, 2019

Slower, less range, more expensive
But its a turbo!

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019


Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

Bighorn you are aware Tesla paid that same firm right?

jimglas | 13 December, 2019

Its a turbo!

SamO | 13 December, 2019

Did Tesla send a press release to each sales location to lie about how that firm’s analysis represent the actual range? Cause if so, maybe one of the astroturfers can post their link.

It’s a Taycon turbo.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

SamO Tesla claimed Model S had a 300 mile range for YEARS.

RedShift | 13 December, 2019


To avoid addressing the elephant in the room, you seem to be chasing imaginary flies.

Curb weight of the Taycan and Model S are quite close, not enough to account for a 40% deficit in range.

It all comes to how efficient the power train is, how efficient the electronics are, how effective the closing off of the gaps is, when not needed (front cooling ports on the S).

Porsche screwed up. Bottom line. They know it, which is why their test at the independent firm is rightly being termed ‘damage control’. Not by us, by most everyone outside.

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019

I came up with “damage control” all on my own. That others said the same is pure coincidence.

RedShift | 13 December, 2019


I believe you, BH :-)

reed_lewis | 13 December, 2019


Using Apples to Apples comparisons (the EPA ratings), the Taycan has a rated range of about 200 miles. The new Model S has a rated range of 370 miles. These are facts, not opinion.

Having a 400/800V system means nothing in terms of rated range.

Fit and Finish mean nothing in terms of rated range

EPA range has NOTHING to do with charging speed. They do not even mention those numbers.

The numbers mentioned are:
- Range of travel on a full battery
- MPGe for city/highway/combined driving which is based on the number of miles capable of traveling over the size of the battery (efficiency).

The Porsche may be a driver's car, but it does not drive as far as a Tesla does.

These are facts, not opinions.

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019

Jalopnik’s take on the interiors:

Despite all the screens and leather, I wouldn’t call the interior opulent. It’s clearly high quality, and both comfortable and elegant, but in a subdued sort of way that tends to be common among German sport sedans.

The Tesla interior is quite nice. I don’t think it’s quite as sexy as the Porsche’s cabin, but it’s still elegant enough considering the price delta, and I thought the material quality was decent. Tesla’s definitely paved the way with the giant tablet screen, which lots of automakers have adopted since.

Does it really matter if you’re just going to have Marc Jacobs rip it all out?

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

@Reed I know it doesn't have the range of Model S. No one ever said that. But the EPA ranges are not accurate for either car. Taycan will get more range than the EPA test, but less range than Model S. Model S will get less range than EPA test, but more than Taycan will significant margin. It's the way these cars are designed vs the faulty test methodology.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

@Bighorn you are spinning and dodging. What was propaganda?

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019

Taycan Turbo: 48:46 with 7:25 of charging
Taycan 4S: 48:38 with 7:32 of charging
Performance Raven: 46:55 with 9:41 of charging
LR Raven: 46:26 with 9:19 or charging.

RedShift | 13 December, 2019


“Where is the propaganda”

Here, from your own post just above :

“ Taycan will get more range than the EPA test, ...”

See, the above line is why people jump on you. There is NO WAY you can assert the above. You have no knowledge of what the Taycan can do in real life, have not driven one, and aren’t even lining up to buy one.

So ridiculous one could suspect real mental issues in you, Darth. Seriously.

RedShift | 13 December, 2019


next he will say it’s comparing to a *P90D* that the Taycan wins. Why? It’s the only way he can make the Taycan win, by comparing to a lesser model that’s no longer on sale from Tesla.

I don’t think anyone on this forum cares anymore about that ridiculous race. Just like no one cares about the Model S vs Hummer madness.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

Bighorn, what settings are you using? Even the Taycan numbers seem too good to me.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

@Bighorn, even if your numbers are valid, it shows the point I've been making. Even with shorter range, faster charging via 800v makes up the difference so that these cars are all within 1-2 hours. And this is on today's EA network. Summer 2020 Taycan will have more chargers and may end up in the lead.

Boonedocks | 13 December, 2019

I just went to the Electrify America site and did a search for "locate a charger". Try on every icon you'll see exactly ONE 1 UNO 350K charger at each location. I can only conjecture, as @Darthamerica has about on all of his posts, that a cannonball run will be slow as hell waiting on all of those single charges to free up.

Hoping for and hype are two things that are not reality.

jimglas | 13 December, 2019

Joshan | December 13, 2019
So the real question, would a Tesla towing a Taycan get better mileage than the Taycan itself.

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

Boonedocks yup, that could be an issue.

Bighorn | 13 December, 2019

Like I said, the charging numbers for the Taycan are imaginary and unrealistic alpha guesses. Charging to 100% in twenty some minutes is not going to happen. Let’s wait for reality before taking a victory lap on which car is faster while sitting still. I don’t see how it matters anyway since nobody is buying the Taycan for road trips.

Tldickerson | 13 December, 2019

I was too busy benching @Nuke's mama on my pecker to respond. @Dumbazz was otherwise preoccupied by spying in the corner and choking his chicken. He was awestruck and became absolutely speechless for the first time this month...

Do you really have to always use such filthy words in so many of your post? I don't see other members on here talking the way you do.

jordanrichard | 13 December, 2019

"SamO Tesla claimed Model S had a 300 mile range for YEARS" ummm Darth, it wasn't "years" but they did indeed state a 300 mile range, but your are forgetting or purposely leaving out the fact that was based on an now outdated EPA range/MPG calculation method. For those of us that remember, that 300 was "Ideal" miles for the 85kwh battery. One could switch the miles displayed between Rated and Ideal.

Daisy the Road ... | 13 December, 2019

Agreed. We can keep this civil.
Well, publicly making fun of the village fool may not be civil, but we all have our vices. | 13 December, 2019

The 400v pack vs. 800v pack is unimportant. Either design could be better for some aspect, but if using the identical batteries, the 800v system will save a small amount of weight and cost by using less copper in about 4 to 6 feet of wire within the car. The 800V system requires much thicker insulation, so the weight savings are less than one might expect. We are talking about a few pounds, and cost difference of less than $20 or so. Neither is a significant issue in cars of these costs and weight.

The heat generated by charging and discharging is identical for a 400v vs 800v system if using the identical batteries. They are just strung together differently. There could be some other minor tradeoffs, such as battery balancing might be easier in production in one system vs the other (not sure which one benefits), but not something that would not matter in a completed car.

Now we don't know the actual cells Porsche uses, nor even the exact cells Tesla uses - both are proprietary. Is one better than the other? No one knows. Each cell design has various advantages and disadvantages- and they interact quite a bit. You want super-fast charging (beyond Porsche or Tesla), you will pay for it with reduced longevity. There are at least a dozen attributes of the cells that designers must balance against each other. No doubt Porsche's attributes are different than Tesla, but unlikely by very much. They still need longevity, fast charging, dealing with wide temperature extremes, and more.

We don't know what tradeoffs Porsche has made in the pack design, but so far it appears nothing special. There is nothing wrong with going to 800v, but it has little to do with charging speed or performance. The cell design is the one that counts, and no one knows how well Porsche designed there cells until a few years from now, or maybe longer.

jordanrichard | 13 December, 2019

Is it remotely possible that Porsche is purposely gimping the battery pack to later "magically" improve the range to show that they are making progress?

Audi just announced that they have done some tweaks and got I think 17 more miles of range out of the E-Tron. From the beginning they did say they were purposely limiting the available battery power to preserve the life of the battery.

Just a thought.

neezer | 13 December, 2019

"Is it remotely possible that Porsche is purposely gimping the battery pack to later "magically" improve the range to show that they are making progress?

Audi just announced that they have done some tweaks and got I think 17 more miles of range out of the E-Tron. "

Nah. All Audi did was make available a bit more of their pack that was reserved off-limits as they all have usually (all BEVs).

With the Raven S/X, Tesla got ~15 miles of added range simply by changing out to wheel bearings that had less friction than the ones used prior.

I also have ZERO doubt that Tesla's incredible built-in-house AP3/HW3 computer contributes to their stellar efficiency in all their models, compared to the inferior stuff out there used by the competition, and yes that includes the best of the best from Intel or Nvidia or AMD.

tes-s | 13 December, 2019

You don't buy a Porsche based on price of fuel economy.

tes-s | 13 December, 2019

price or fuel economy

Mathew98 | 13 December, 2019

@TLD - Some numbskull invited a middle school kid to the playground. So I obliged. Each of the word is PG rated.

If you want to drag mud to the playground, what do you expect.

So when are you placing your order your car from VAG? Why are you still hanging around this dog pound?

Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

@Bighorn lol imaginary? Ok if you say so but I disagree. I do agree with you that our calculations are close and theoretical so we will see soon enough. I think you're going to be very surprised. Oh and one more thing, a Cannonball Run isn't a road trip. It's an edurance race. That is what Taycan is built for. A road trip means family, kids and cargo. While Model S is better and more convenient for that, Taycan is capable of doing it too.

neezer | 13 December, 2019

Yeah? Then who gives a damn about a six figure Model S or X for economy then? Especially the Performance (previously "P" models)? Just let them run WILD BABY! 100 miles range, but tear the skin off your face in the corners, the ride, and in a straight line and also add unbelievably massive brakes!

There's no free lunch. And I love how everyone and their mother keeps bringing up that "oh it's an expensive Porsche. It's a performance machine!". Sigh. It is not common knowledge that Porsche has always, ALWAYS released cars that are lighter and more efficient than the competition?! Do I even have to get into this here? I hope're either a car enthusiast and know your stuff from a long time ago before you got excited about Teslas or EVs, lol, or you're not....whoever the dear reader is here ...

neezer | 13 December, 2019
Darthamerica | 13 December, 2019

Jordan I remember and Tesla left that adsurd ideal miles nonsense in the cars for marketing purposes. But the point is that all car manufacturers give wildly optimistic specs. Sometimes they are achievable, most of the time not. But the EPA test is not good for BEVs. Just to give you an example, imagine if Tesla adds solar panels to Cybertruck. How will the EPAs outdated indoor lab test account for that? Auto technology moves too fast for a government mandated test. It would be better for manufacturers to develop the test and have independent auditors observe confirm the results. Range should be reported as average high and low values over typical operating conditions. For example, my P90D has a range from ~150 to 200+ miles. Algorithms in our cars software should then use statistical analysis to predict 99% confidence level indicated range.

jimglas | 13 December, 2019

Darth is a paid troll for Porsche

BarryQ | 13 December, 2019

Looks like I picked the wrong week to quit sniffing glue!