Just watched this NextMove Autobahn range comparison of a Taycan Turbo (lowest rated range among the Taycan variants) vs a Model 3 RWD Long Range (highest rated range among the Model 3 variants). At an average of just above 80 mph, their range is as near as makes no difference identical, despite the huge disparity in the EPA numbers.

This mirrors my experience with the eTron vs the Tesla. Tesla's huge on-paper range advantage does not seem to materialize in real life.

 

This only talks about range at high speeds on the autobahn, NOT efficiency, where Tesla is the easy winner. Further the Tesla has a 75kWh(?) battery versus the 95kWh battery in the Taycan, hence again, it’s apples to oranges.

Don’t get me wrong, IMHO the Taycan is a far superior car for my needs in every metric except for efficiency and of course price. But in a real world combination of varied traffic conditions a Tesla is a more efficient BEV.

 

Someone at some point has to explain the efficiency fetish to me. It is a pointless metric in the long run.

So M3 523 EPA > 332 Actual = 63%
Taycan 323 EPA > 314 Actual = 97%.

 

EPA numbers simply provide an average over a mix of driving situations. Heavy/dense EVs will perform much better in steady state, high speed, flat highway driving compared to lighter EVs because of the high mass to wind resistance ratio. This is why electric motorcycles are horribly inefficient. At 80 mph they will use at least 3x more energy to propel 100 lbs of mass forward. Having said that, I think efficiency is far less relevant than it would be for gas vehicles because electricity is generally much cheaper, stable (cost) and often renewable. To me the efficiency argument ties only to range with other efficiency benefits being more or less white noise to most buyers. Compared to MPG, watt hours per mile mean nothing. Once everyone gets their cars to 400 mile range, the efficiency argument will be back on the table. Because we all need something to argue about.

 

I’m looking forward to the day where there’s not a gas station on every corner and it’s ICE drivers’ turn to suffer range anxiety trying to find a remaining gas station selling fuel that isn’t stale.

 

I would argue that this is the right approach:
Arguing about range in a city driving scenario is pretty pointless, especially if you can level 2 charge at home. I don't know anyone apart from maybe taxi drivers / couriers who will hit 300 - 400km /day of city driving. For the rest of us, "range anxiety" solely exists for Highway driving.
​​​​​​
There is about 800 pounds / 350kg in weight difference between the Model 3 LR and base Taycan: an efficiency difference in city driving should be expected. Additionally, aren't all Taycans AWD?

I think there are some established AC/DC converter efficiency differences and advantages that Tesla has, but I honestly believe that these differences are smaller than the media and EPA numbers suggest. There are enough anecdotal reports of EPA differences being much closer in real life. The question then becomes what are you willing to trade for "range". Seems like the Germans are not willing to trade vehicle comfort, overall performance and reliability (conservatism) for all out range. And I feel this this is probably the smart approach. You just need to look at the Model X vs E-tron 1000km challenge to see how little - if any - real world difference exists:

 

That was largely my take on it as well. Around town, the range is entirely sufficient as is. It’s long distance freeway travel where the differences start to matter. At the prevailing traffic speeds in TX (can’t be driving 65 on an 80 mph speed limit freeway and dodge semi trucks passing you at 85 mph), it would seem that both the eTron and Teslas perform on par (as in tolerable but barely adequate).

The more attractive spec sheet does sell though, at least in the short term.

 

Today I averaged 2.9mi/kWh on the way to work. I'm still at 196 miles of range with 81%. Yes it was under pretty ideal conditions, but I don't ever see the range being an issue for me even at 200 miles.
​​​

 

I think the other thing that needs to be considered is just how much headroom these cars (E-tron) have to boost range. I have said this in a previous post (Audi upgrades E-tron electric SUV...), but I think they could pretty easily see anywhere from 8-15% total range increase with very minimal changes to the car.

Software upgrades (based on E-tron sportback release information):

• Battery capacity increase from 83.6 to 86.5 kwh: @4km / kwh this will equal 12km of increased range;
• Cooling pump: this is a parasitic load and they are finding that they're being overly aggressive on heat management. 6km of increased range;
• Coasting / level 3 Regen / asynchronous motor tweaking: another 6km of increased range.

This would bring the EPA range to 345km / 220 miles.

While I don't know exactly the usable battery specs of the Model 3, it seems like there is very little buffer left when the car is at the 100% charge that was used for the EPA testing. The pack is officially listed at 75kWh and it seems like some drivers are getting up to 78 kWh out of them when new. I would assume that this would be MAX capacity. This may explain the rapid reduction in peak charging rate on these cars that seems to kick in, around 50% State of Charge.

If the E-tron used that same amount of battery (i.e. no buffer, full 95kWh pack), there would be another 34 km / 21 miles of range available, for a total of ~380 km / 240 miles. Frankly, I would be surprised if VAG allowed this. But I could see that 86.5kWh number increasing towards 90kWh over the next few years as they get more and more data on these cars (another 14 km / 9 miles for a total of 360 km / 229 miles).

Other future mods (let's call this E-tron V1.5);

• The brake caliper tweak mentioned in the E-tron sport-back range increase is probably worth 4 Kms / 2.5 miles....
• SiC Power Electronics: this seems to be a big one with 5% or so available room for improvement: 20 km (12 miles) depending upon driving conditions.
• Audi seems to be in favour of induction motors vs permanent magnet motors: PM motors could achieve upwards of 10% efficiencies gains around town, but probably only around 5% difference at highway speeds. Induction motors are insanely reliable, so I don't see them switching any time soon. Hence no available range increase here...

So, perhaps 4 + 20 = ~25 additional km of range possible with "nothing crazy" hardware updates for a total range for E-tron V1.5 (assuming same 90kWh usable battery capacity) of real world 385 km / 241 miles range.


Theory crafting E-tron V2: would get a small weight reduction benefit in moving to a dedicated EV platform and save 100 - 200kg. While not a huge difference, it will still be measurable, especially in elevation gain situations: 100kg x 9.8m/s^2 * 100m = 98,000 joules. 1 kWh of battery capacity is: 1000 watts x 3600 seconds = 3,600,000 joules. A 900m (3,000') elevation gain will use ~0.25kWh of energy per 100kg of mass. A 200kg weight reduction will free up another 0.5kWh of battery = 2km / 1.25 miles of range for a typical trip into the mountains. Not huge, but still measurable... In stop and go traffic this could be more noticeable and easily increase range upwards of 5km or so...

 

Another test showing similar results:

https://www.caranddriver.com/reviews...tesla-model-s/

Adjusted for the usable battery capacity, the Taycan actually shows slightly better efficiency. The steady 75 mph driving should also favor the Tesla, since any speed variance would highlight the superior regen strategy/implementation of the VW platform.


So, same actual range, different marketing yardstick.