Q. Taycan model and battery degredation?

[Fish Fingers]

I read on here recently about things that 'age' the battery.

One of them was constant fast discharges (acceleration) iirc.

So it got me thinking, if different models used the same battery and are driven typical to their potential (TS>T>4S>RWD) will this have an impact on battery degredation?

Or put another way. Would a 10 year old (typically driven) Turbo S, likely have less battery capacity than a RWD at similar mileage, all else being equal?

Just out of curiosity.

Sponsored

 

[B61]

From what I heard, fast charging has the most impact on battery degradation, but i’m not an engineer, so I can only listen others.

 

[whitex]

There are many factors which affect the battery life. Charging speeds, discharging speeds, operation and storage temperature, duration of time at particular state of charge (mostly important around very low and very high SoC), battery age, and of course the number of complete charge-discharge cycles. Tesla for example in some of their older cars ended up limiting charging speeds (above 50KW), max discharge speed (launch modes), and maximum SoC (reduced range as they reset what 100% means to lower SoC) - all to increase the life of the battery to keep it from catching on fire and/or failing during the 8 year warranty. They also started limiting the warranty mileage (used to be unlimited miles) as that is directly related to number of charge-discharge cycles.

All that said, when properly managed, the Tesla batteries are actually holding up better than most people expected. The EV's with large degradation you hear about like the early Leafs, didn't have advanced environmental controls such as active heating/cooling of batteries.

 

[daveo4EV]

+1 for @whitex comments…

fast charging is the biggest factor that a consumer can impact on a vehicle battery, next would be charging to above 85% and leaving the vehicle sitting for long periods at high/low SOC values…I would expect little to any difference in terms of AWD vs. RWD…

fast charging at 50 kW has less impact than at 270 kW - but is still harder on the battery than normal home charging…

charging frequency and how fast the battery was charged are the major factors that affect battery life.

I would venture that after:

• charging speed
• charging frequency
• target SOC%
• how long @ X SOC% car is allowed to sit

all other factors are largely outside your control as an owner - the Porsche BMS (Battery Management System) sole purpose in this world is to manage the battery - so there is a lot of software between you (the owner) and the actual raw battery that is designed to prevent you from having an impact…basically this isn’t your 12V Radio Controlled toy device charging where you're attaching 12V clamps to the postive/negative battery posts - there is at least one computer and 10’s of thousands (or more) lines of code between you and the battery and porsche controls it “for you”…basically you only have the illusion of control…but honestly the battery is going to do what it’s going to do regardless of what you as the owner does…

 

[whitex]

Or put another way. Would a 10 year old (typically driven) Turbo S, likely have less battery capacity than a RWD at similar mileage, all else being equal?

My educated guess here is that if the Turbo S and RWD had the same battery and you drove them identically (so max speed and acceleration limited by RWD capabilities) in identical environment, the battery wear would be the identical (ignoring manufacturing variations which could go either way). Now, if you take advantage of Turbo S higher power and launch it often, you will wear out the battery more.

I can share some experience with Tesla batteries. A while back I did an experiment driving 2 Tesla Model S's. We had a top performance model and the non-performance model (but still AWD, not the RWD) on a road trip together, one following the other convoy style (so no performance leaving the base car behind). After about 60 miles, about 75% highway, the reported energy consumption (Wh/mile) between the 2 cars was nearly identical, even though the performance car had bigger motors and a bigger battery (which made it slightly heavier, but the non-performance had an extra passenger to might have equaled the net weights).

All that said, I still have both cars. I drive the performance harder than my wife drives her (I use more Wh/mile), but while I floor the car on highways often, I never use launch control (honestly only tried it once). Hers is newer too, but so far the degradation curve seems to be closely correlated to the mileage on the car. The non performance car is newer but driven more mileage so almost caught up to the performance, and both have ~1.7% degradation at around 40K miles (even though the performance is almost 2x the age of the non-performance). They are both driven in pacific north west of the USA, so mild climate, both have been garaged and charged to 90% nightly since new, both almost never used DC charging, so similar operating environment.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that I would not assume that a used RWD will have lower degradation than a used Turbo S, as there are many other factors which will affect it more than the trim difference. I would think outside of extreme usage (buying a Turbo S from a drag racer), the primary factor would be mileage, then climate where it was driven, then age. Again, this is just my (somewhat educated) guess.

Sponsored