What makes the difference between Range Mode limiting to 60mph or 90mph?

[thebuttonmonkey]

And 4) on some highways it is less comfortable and 5) eco AC mode in summer is not always ideal.

I have also stopped using range mode on langer trips.

the couple of extra miles are charged within minutes.

if necessary to arrive home I have used it.

In my expenrience what makes a bigger difference is reducing speed or increasing cabin temperature in the summer.

The difference turning the air con up a bit makes is incredible.

Sponsored

 

[W1NGE]

The difference turning the air con up a bit makes is incredible.

It could be worse (in Winter) given all UK Taycans have the HV heat pump as standard (when it works of course!) as without it your range would take a further hit.

Historically, Range Drive mode has offered more 'perceived' range on AWD model as the front motor was used in preference to the rear and being less powerful used less energy. When the major software rollout came last year for MY20 - MY22 this was further tweaked and now the rear motor is predominant in this mode. What we all thought we had learnt as early adopters went out the window and now Range Drive mode is close to pointless as the range extension is a few short miles depending.

AC as we all know is the KILLER on any EV.

 

[captainhoo]

Hey. Took a road trip in the last few days. On the way there, the car was happy to limit to 90 when I selected Range Mode - even on A roads not motorways, and even when I selected it while driving below 60 mph. On the way back on the motorway - even when cruising along at 70mph - the car would set the limit to 60 mph whenever I turned the dial, and drop the speed. Both instances +90% charge.

There has to be some tigger/cut off point that makes this decision. I just can't for the life of me figure out what it is!

I drove from Wales to Scotland a few weeks ago. If you changed to the range mode using PCM or the mode switch, full range mode kicks in with speed restricted to whatever you had set it to (mine is set at 70 mph), if you chose a destination from satnav, you will get a few options and you chose one of those range optimised options, speed is restricted to 90 mph. (You get a small disclaimer when selecting the range optimised option!).

I echo some of the other responses though, the biggest difference comes from the AC setting as you will most likely be driving on motorways and 70 may not be ideal for overtaking.

By the way, in the UK, you can now charge in many Tesla superchargers. Just download the app and setup for charging a “non Tesla”.

Have a safe trip

 

[or1]

Purely anecdotal.
I went on a long mountain drive on Sunday and was really cutting close to make it home without charging. The nav directed me to a charging station 5 miles from my home to charge for 10min. I didn't like that option thought I could make it, so I shut down the nav and my range boosted 22 miles giving me the range I needed. Just to test it, I turned the nav back on and my range dropped 17 miles.
It was an interesting case study, plus I dropped 6,000' of elevation in 50 miles and charged the battery for half of the drive. ?
Someone smarter than me may be able to tell you how much processing power the nav uses.

Could be battery heating as prep for charging? It takes a lot of energy, and maybe maxes if the charging station is close.

 

[f1eng]

In the long wait between order and receipt I had plenty of time to play with the range calculator on the web site and look into the influence of the various settings.
I expected A/C and high speed to hammer efficiency - basic physics - and it is the same with an IC engined car.
It seemed to me that everything else made fairly small differences so I tried range mode once for a mile or two and didn’t think the downgrade in ride was worth the extra range on country roads and haven’t done it since.
Luckily for me the car initialises in my preferred state

I do use sport and sport+ a bit but for most roads around here normal is a really good compromise. Porsche know what they are doing

 

[thebuttonmonkey]

I drove from Wales to Scotland a few weeks ago. If you changed to the range mode using PCM or the mode switch, full range mode kicks in with speed restricted to whatever you had set it to (mine is set at 70 mph), if you chose a destination from satnav, you will get a few options and you chose one of those range optimised options, speed is restricted to 90 mph. (You get a small disclaimer when selecting the range optimised option!).

I echo some of the other responses though, the biggest difference comes from the AC setting as you will most likely be driving on motorways and 70 may not be ideal for overtaking.

By the way, in the UK, you can now charge in many Tesla superchargers. Just download the app and setup for charging a “non Tesla”.

Have a safe trip

Thanks! We're Sussex to Harrogate so not quite as far, but will need every bit of range. Likely a stop anyway though, so y'know.
Interesting about the sat nav. I downloaded the Tesla app and it was just product pages. Maybe I need to log in to see the network, will check again.

 

[thebuttonmonkey]

In the long wait between order and receipt I had plenty of time to play with the range calculator on the web site and look into the influence of the various settings.
I expected A/C and high speed to hammer efficiency - basic physics - and it is the same with an IC engined car.
It seemed to me that everything else made fairly small differences so I tried range mode once for a mile or two and didn’t think the downgrade in ride was worth the extra range on country roads and haven’t done it since.
Luckily for me the car initialises in my preferred state

I do use sport and sport+ a bit but for most roads around here normal is a really good compromise. Porsche know what they are doing

Yup, I couldn't imagine using it on the country roads round here, they're in such a state. The lower ride would have me fearing for the skid plates!

 

[mystermykee]

Purely anecdotal.
I went on a long mountain drive on Sunday and was really cutting close to make it home without charging. The nav directed me to a charging station 5 miles from my home to charge for 10min. I didn't like that option thought I could make it, so I shut down the nav and my range boosted 22 miles giving me the range I needed. Just to test it, I turned the nav back on and my range dropped 17 miles.
It was an interesting case study, plus I dropped 6,000' of elevation in 50 miles and charged the battery for half of the drive. ?
Someone smarter than me may be able to tell you how much processing power the nav uses.

Nav directed you to charge because of the minimum charge required at destination you have set. As for the change in range having nav active vs not, your guess is as good as mine. I would think there's always a range calculation done when starting a route and again after stopping it.

 

[TDinDC]

I really wish someone would do testing to isolate each of the relevant details over the same route on the same day (as much as possible) or at least under the same conditions so that we could all make sensible decisions without speculating. Anecdotal experiences are so risky in reaching conclusions on the materiality of the impact of specific variables, because even if you take the same trip, one trip might be subject to greater wind that you don't even notice, which could impact range more than the factor you attributed it to (e.g., AC). Imagine if you could determine the specific impact of various drive modes, lighting settings, ride heights, AC/Heating settings, use of various accessories (e.g., Audio, Porsche cooled beverage transport, roof box -- including Thule vs. Porsche performance and Thule bars vs. Porsche bars), and tire size/brand/pressures.

Maybe not material enough to matter, but I would be interested to see impact with as many other variables removed from equation.

 

[f1eng]

I really wish someone would do testing to isolate each of the relevant details over the same route on the same day (as much as possible) or at least under the same conditions so that we could all make sensible decisions without speculating. Anecdotal experiences are so risky in reaching conclusions on the materiality of the impact of specific variables, because even if you take the same trip, one trip might be subject to greater wind that you don't even notice, which could impact range more than the factor you attributed it to (e.g., AC). Imagine if you could determine the specific impact of various drive modes, lighting settings, ride heights, AC/Heating settings, use of various accessories (e.g., Audio, Porsche cooled beverage transport, roof box -- including Thule vs. Porsche performance and Thule bars vs. Porsche bars), and tire size/brand/pressures.

Maybe not material enough to matter, but I would be interested to see impact with as many other variables removed from equation.

That is why I spent time on the Porsche range calculator.

There is pretty well no chance even a fastidious owner or youtube jockey could do an acceptably well controlled experiment to be definitive.

The range calculator doesn't have an exhaustive list of influences - no roof boxes for example - but I imagine the changes parameters they do include, and there are lots, they do have good data for.

Knowing how much I lost due to choosing wheels I liked the styling of was why I started looking, and wanting to know the effect of the different A/C settings and whether I would be better to take my preferred scenic routes over the faster sat-nav recommended routes on journeys I do often.

Things like tyre differences and pumping losses on wet roads are probably impossible to get worthwhile data for. Pumping losses are huge in wet racing so that is the significant influence I am in the dark about.

 

[TDinDC]

That is why I spent time on the Porsche range calculator.

There is pretty well no chance even a fastidious owner or youtube jockey could do an acceptably well controlled experiment to be definitive.

The range calculator doesn't have an exhaustive list of influences - no roof boxes for example - but I imagine the changes parameters they do include, and there are lots, they do have good data for.

Knowing how much I lost due to choosing wheels I liked the styling of was why I started looking, and wanting to know the effect of the different A/C settings and whether I would be better to take my preferred scenic routes over the faster sat-nav recommended routes on journeys I do often.

Things like tyre differences and pumping losses on wet roads are probably impossible to get worthwhile data for. Pumping losses are huge in wet racing so that is the significant influence I am in the dark about.

In my experience with the Tesla, rain, speed, and wind were, in that order, by far the biggest factors that impacted range. I hear everyone here talking so much about AC and, while it is a factor, it seems so minor in my experience, both in the Tesla and in the Taycan. The surprise in the Taycan is that speed doesn’t seem to exponentially reduce range the way it did in my Tesla model X, where anything above 70 would just drain range away incredibly quickly. I used to draft semis in the X. I haven’t needed to once in the Taycan. Not clear to me why there is such a difference when I look at aero stats for the two vehicles, but the difference in real life is material

 

[f1eng]

In my experience with the Tesla, rain, speed, and wind were, in that order, by far the biggest factors that impacted range. I hear everyone here talking so much about AC and, while it is a factor, it seems so minor in my experience, both in the Tesla and in the Taycan. The surprise in the Taycan is that speed doesn’t seem to exponentially reduce range the way it did in my Tesla model X, where anything above 70 would just drain range away incredibly quickly. I used to draft semis in the X. I haven’t needed to once in the Taycan. Not clear to me why there is such a difference when I look at aero stats for the two vehicles, but the difference in real life is material

Rain and the pumping losses in tyres clearing it out of the way are big.
We used to be able to have a simple lap time to fuel used per lap relationship in dry racing - handy when max fuel load was in the rules and each extra 10kg of fuel loses 0.35 secs per lap.
In the wet both the extra consumption despite the slow laps, and its inconsistency made planning impossible and not enough consistent rain running was ever done to get an accurate handle on it.

In terms of aero companies publish Cd data rather than what actually matters, which is CdA. I don’t have frontal area data for them but my guess is the Model X has a higher frontal area than the Taycan and also the single gear ratio meaning high speeds are both aerodynamically and mechanically inferior to a Taycan.

I hate the aero of big SUVs and a single gear ratio is cheap and adequate for typical round town motoring but not good for high speed cruising.

 

[B61]

It could be worse (in Winter) given all UK Taycans have the HV heat pump as standard (when it works of course!) as without it your range would take a further hit.

Historically, Range Drive mode has offered more 'perceived' range on AWD model as the front motor was used in preference to the rear and being less powerful used less energy. When the major software rollout came last year for MY20 - MY22 this was further tweaked and now the rear motor is predominant in this mode. What we all thought we had learnt as early adopters went out the window and now Range Drive mode is close to pointless as the range extension is a few short miles depending.

AC as we all know is the KILLER on any EV.

Exactly my thoughts.
After uPdate, Range mode is useless.
Before, I was using Range mode a lot, since i prefered front wheel drive.
Now, I’m mostly on Normal mode, with low chasis and Eco AC…

 

[f1eng]

I hear everyone here talking so much about AC and, while it is a factor, it seems so minor in my experience, both in the Tesla and in the Taycan

The Porsche range calculator shows about 11% increase in range from A/C normal to A/C eco with a 2% extra gain by switching A/C off altogether so their data makes A/C Eco a no-brainer IMO.
This is in Normal mode, I haven’t bothered with range mode so far but might if it meant I could just make it home

 

[TDinDC]

Rain and the pumping losses in tyres clearing it out of the way are big.
We used to be able to have a simple lap time to fuel used per lap relationship in dry racing - handy when max fuel load was in the rules and each extra 10kg of fuel loses 0.35 secs per lap.
In the wet both the extra consumption despite the slow laps, and its inconsistency made planning impossible and not enough consistent rain running was ever done to get an accurate handle on it.

In terms of aero companies publish Cd data rather than what actually matters, which is CdA. I don’t have frontal area data for them but my guess is the Model X has a higher frontal area than the Taycan and also the single gear ratio meaning high speeds are both aerodynamically and mechanically inferior to a Taycan.

I hate the aero of big SUVs and a single gear ratio is cheap and adequate for typical round town motoring but not good for high speed cruising.

Yes, and I had looked into CdA earlier. The difference in CdA for the Tesla Model X and the Taycan Cross Turismo are, surprisingly, not as different as one might expect. For Model X, Drag area = CdA = 0.24 * 2.59 m2 = 0.622 m2. For Cross Turismo, Drag area = 0.26 * 2.37 m2 = 0.616 m2

Sponsored