Porsche Taycan at fire sale prices because of Tesla Model S

  • Thread starter Thread starter 101101
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 16
  • Views Views 2K
1

101101

Well-Known Member
Taycan at fire sale prices because of Model S

Porsche keeps doing these silly comparison videos that make Porsche look bad. So once again because this is the only way to flube it they start off with a race where the Tesla is in the wrong mode echoing Top Gear. Then claim maybe they didn't push it hard enough- because they didn't on purpose because they were paid not to. So then in the second match they run it and of course the Tesla beats it through almost all of the quarter mile but comes out a .1 of a second behind in the quater mile probably because someone got paid to let off the pedal. Sounds a lot like the sht rag C&D bs. We've seen enough of this to follow the bribed formula. But we also saw the Tesla accelerates quicker in the midrange. And the Tesla has a ultimate higher top end by 1 mph but after 130mph Porsche is quicker to its lower top speed.

But I think if they would have done the first run the right way Tesla is quicker both quarter mile and 0-60. I think that's the obvious truth as the Tesla is lighter and more powerful and Rimac and the new Tesla Roadster show the Porsche gearbox approach is lame. My guess us what they did is try it a million times and figured out a hot run immediately after and go easy on the Tesla pedal and then Porsch can then win. Kind of stuff like in the end of the film Gladiator. We know the Tesla is quicker 0-60mph. Totally obvious. Quicker mid ranger higher top end too. In their test the Porsche managed to stop half a car length sooner. And wrong Carwow- 0-60 is the number that counts not quarter mile. As for braking both use Brembos (Tesla rebranded) but Porsche has wider tires. This is some BS MP3 destroys BMW M3 in every way. But they try to manufacture issues with sound bites. But I think we can be sure BMW quality still sucks as much as its performance. At the present rate Tesla will drive Porsche and Ferrari from the market.

But lets lay this out so we can see why Taycan is at fire sale prices. See Porsche thought it could sell the top Taycan for 204-220 or almost double a Model S.But it can't because:

The Taycan is

heavier

Iess poweful
down by 100hp, down by 30% on torque

Much less interior space

Has less than half the range and misses the mark Elon called a useable by 1/3 where S exceeds it by that much.

And Taycan has radically inferior self driving tech

And it is pretty clear the S charges about 2x as quick as Taycan (despite all the Porsche blather about 800v) S is at 26.6 min to add 402 miles on V3 (S gets 225khw out of V3) Where Taycan can add about 159.3 in 22.5 miles. This is not linear and it will probably take a lot longer than 26.6 min to cram in the last few S miles. But it seems S might can add Taycan's full sweet spot of 159.3 miles in 10 min 56 sec or more than 2x as quick as the 22.30 mins it takes Taycan. And easily fit Taycan's full range of 192 miles in 12 min 45 seconds in its own sweet spot.

And still even at fire sale prices people test the S and then don't buy the Taycan because you look foolish when you spend a lot more for a performance car that doesn't peform. Where are Taycan's records at Laguna? Model 3 and S have them. MP3 even beat Taycan at a recent EU endurance race.

But lets be honest, Tesla is already more than Porsche ever was or ever will be as a maker of trinkets for people who want to flaunt their status. Porsche is not a serious company. VW is another matter but its also a legacy firm trying to live down a history of being on the wrong side of things. Here is where Porsche and VW deserve credit. For the range you get out of it for a while its a very solid driver's car for a long winding road and surely one of the best Porche's ever made. Standing in Tesla's shadow, Porsche adds to the glory of Tesla.
 
Car & Driver has a good comparison of the top end Porsche Taycan versus the top end Tesla Model S. As Esprit1st wrote, "They are different cars." The Porsche fairs quite well against the Model S except in price. It is, as 101101 wrote, quite expensive, some $85,000 more. ($101,190 versus $186,350) I will not be buying either one anytime soon.

The Taycan had almost the exact same range in Car & Driver's testing. More amazing was that the Taycan, even with more weight and less power, matched or accelerated faster than the Model S. It also charged faster. The Taycan's fit and finish was typical Porsche perfect.

The Model 3 had better ergonomics and excelled in roominess & price.

https://www.caranddriver.com/review...an-turbo-s-vs-2020-tesla-model-s-performance/
 
Ah ,no! Taycan has less than half the EPA range 192 vs 402miles. You can site utter rag C&D as a credible resource- talk about paid liars. And op covers how Model S is faster. And Model S at 225kwh
should in practice on V3 with a 2x range battery pack will charge about 2x faster than Taycan. Litterally
recover Taycan's full range within its sweet spot or about 12 min 45 seconds. Again not linear curves but Taycan Turno S by Musk's standard doesn't even have threshold useable range- its how you get to its current fire sale prices of 14Ok. Worse for Tayacan is the new S plaid will crush it even harder. Porsche has only on choice to rebrand Mate Rimacs vehicles as Porsche because its not cutting it.

But thr goal by the peanut gallery is always to make it seem like a fossil fuel retail chain element like a legacy ICE maker can still slow down the transition to EVs.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've owned enough cars in my 71 years of life to know that the EPA estimated range/mpg is just that, estimated. Car & Driver's test isn't the same as the EPA test loop. The Taycan battery is only slightly smaller, 93.4 kWh, than the Model S, 100 kWh. We know from the many years that Tesla has been building EVs that the Model S battery holds up with time. Some of that may come from a conservative battery management system which during repeated hard accelerations keeps the battery from overheating. Perhaps the Porsche accelerates more consistently because its battery management is less protective.

For the $186,350 that would buy one top end Porsche Taycan, a person could buy the long range Model S and two Model 3s! (Not that I can afford either choice.) Car & Driver declared that the Model S as the winner over the Taycan. So if Car & Driver's findings are because they are paid liars, then Elon Musk must have paid them off.

101101 said:
You can site utter sht rag C&D as a credible resource- talk about paid liars.
Click to expand...
 
101101 said:
Ah ,no! Taycan has less than half the EPA range 192 vs 402miles. You can site utter rag C&D as a credible resource- talk about paid liars. And op covers how Model S is faster. And Model S at 225kwh
should in practice on V3 with a 2x range battery pack will charge about 2x faster than Taycan. Litterally
recover Taycan's full range within its sweet spot or about 12 min 45 seconds. Again not linear curves but Taycan Turno S by Musk's standard doesn't even have threshold useable range- its how you get to its current fire sale prices of 14Ok. Worse for Tayacan is the new S plaid will crush it even harder. Porsche has only on choice to rebrand Mate Rimacs vehicles as Porsche because its not cutting it.

But thr goal by the peanut gallery is always to make it seem like a fossil fuel retail chain element like a legacy ICE maker can still slow down the transition to EVs.
Click to expand...
Not exactly sure what you're going on about, since you didn't include any links, but the EPA numbers aren't gospel. It's been shown by any number of outlets, including InsideEVs, that the Porsche Taycan easily exceeds its EPA rating and it's not especially easy to reach them in a Tesla.

A good example of the differences in range abilities came to us last week courtesy of Lucid Motors. To demonstrate the range abilities of its Air prototype, it did a test with a Tesla Model S and A Porsche Taycan Turbo S. The upshot is this:
  • Lucid Air: 456 miles (Estimated EPA Range: 517 miles)
  • Tesla Model S: 355 miles (EPA Range: 402 miles)
  • Porsche Taycan: 236 miles (EPA Range: 192 miles)
 
Car & Driver also has a story on how Porsche voluntarily lowered the expected EPA range for the Taycan. Apparently Porsche did not get quite as much range on their test track as the EPA did. Also, although the Porsche battery has a 93.4 kWh gross capacity, it actually has only 83.7 kWh usable capacity. The Lucid Motors test results are interesting and provide additional data.

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a32255511/porsche-taycan-epa-range-voluntarily-lowered/
 
Tesla fought the EPA to get them to rate the Model S correctly. It resulted in a few extra miles to get over 400- seems EPA left a door open to keep Tesla from a milestone if iver 400 miles and got caught and looked paid for. It was certainly the right call for Tesla to fight EPA on that and it shows the opposite of pro Tesla bias. Its fud articles trying to question Tesla range driven by efforts to slow evs and legacy failing so bad at trying to catch up.

The Lucid claims are laughable. We're supposed to believe the EPA is wrong on Tesla and Porsche but right on Lucid? Lucid has a clear conflict of interest to begin with.

For perspective Lucid's supposedly super low cd-lowest ever sedan claimes only to roughly match a 6ft2 off the the ground full size pick up Cybertruck in range by surely just adding more heavy battery in same launch period if their vaporware is lucky. Guess they just pegged to CT to seem remotely credibly but now its, oh the EPA finding this result? Oh but its EPA range after they just discredited EPA range. Is it supposed to be more believable because EPA is suggested to be biased against non Tesla competitors?

Key is Top Taycan at 192 miles, its as far below useable threshold range (Musk's stated threshold) as Model S is above it a large margin in both directions. There might have been some historical ICE Porsches with its range. Its funny to how much the range drops in the top Taycan over the lower trims, going backward there to.

Lucid's claim to fame and its source of credibility is its link to early Model S design through its key person. But this was not like the Cascadia lead coming to Tesla its going backwards.
 
Its so incredibly obvious. Porsche thought it would sell Taycan for $204,000 maybe $220,000 with monogramed lugage. It thought it would pedal super premium like its used to but that has worked out about as well as Apple trying to introduce a iPhone 13 for $1500 with a 4hours of battery while under performing Android.
Before Taycan is even through its first year its been discounted approx 40% when EV is up otherwise. They weren't going to sell that many but they are clearly having a lot of trouble because the product is fundamentally outdated and non competitive even in its launch year. If it was that over priced iPhone it would have been knocked from $1500 to $900 first year is far from over and its almost half off. Its lower priced lower performance Taycan sibling gets better mileage- like an iphone with a 5 hrs battery life and its getting squeezed into its cut rate sibling's space. Now its buyers weren't going to bring a class action against Porsche because they don't want to look stupid or cheap but they can't be amused. Porsche is a company that is said to understate but its WLTP games vs EPA vs the reality of the competition doesn't look good. This is more compromised than the first Mac where the profit oriented fool from Intel on the Apple board in the last minute cut the Mac's memory in half when all its ground breaking desktop publish apps were developed to run on 2x the memory.
 
Soon enough there will be privately owned, production cars to take to the track. I'm content to wait. BTW, I'm quite satisfied with our Std Rng Plus Model 3, we're not really shopping for a replacement.

Bob Wilson
 
101101 said:
Its so incredibly obvious. Porsche thought it would sell Taycan for $204,000 maybe $220,000 with monogramed lugage. It thought it would pedal super premium like its used to but that has worked out about as well as Apple trying to introduce a iPhone 13 for $1500 with a 4hours of battery while under performing Android.
Before Taycan is even through its first year its been discounted approx 40% when EV is up otherwise. They weren't going to sell that many but they are clearly having a lot of trouble because the product is fundamentally outdated and non competitive even in its launch year. If it was that over priced iPhone it would have been knocked from $1500 to $900 first year is far from over and its almost half off. Its lower priced lower performance Taycan sibling gets better mileage- like an iphone with a 5 hrs battery life and its getting squeezed into its cut rate sibling's space. Now its buyers weren't going to bring a class action against Porsche because they don't want to look stupid or cheap but they can't be amused. Porsche is a company that is said to understate but its WLTP games vs EPA vs the reality of the competition doesn't look good. This is more compromised than the first Mac where the profit oriented fool from Intel on the Apple board in the last minute cut the Mac's memory in half when all its ground breaking desktop publish apps were developed to run on 2x the memory.
Click to expand...

So, by fire sale, you mean Porsche is selling lower-spec cars for lower prices (which every car company does)? Because to me, fire sale means they've cut existing prices on a product.
 
Domenick said:
So, by fire sale, you mean Porsche is selling lower-spec cars for lower prices (which every car company does)? Because to me, fire sale means they've cut existing prices on a product.
Click to expand...

Indeed, pretty much every car company offers low-price base models of every car line. Of course they love to sell you the high-end version with more bells and whistles and a higher profit margin, but they'll take a lower-price sale over no sale at all.

Oh hey, even Tesla does that! https://www.edmunds.com/tesla/model-3/
 
Domenick, not at all. They were thinking they would sell that top Porsche for over $200k, like 204k to 220k with monogramed luggage etc. They are way, way down on what they can sell the full featured top model for because it is simply not competitive against the Model S. Its critically flawed on range. I don't buy that it has any great quality advantage- its a VW (the money for quality goes to endlessly enriching non contributing VW shareholders- its always compromised.)
The 4S which is cut down which they announced later is about trying to cover up the fire sale prices which surely produce losses for them but is a much better value but its true competitor is the 40K cheaper MP3 which still out performs it overall.
 
Noticed Insideev has this nice splash article denoting that Model S has exactly 2x the range of Taycan. And then to try to explain that away the usual suspect shills are brought in for the content of the article. Anyone really believe at highway speed Model S gets half the advertised range of the most stringent of the 3 global test? But in the case of the Taycan it is exactly as advertised or a little better when Porsche always has the habit of quoting and stating the results of the more fluffy inflated global tests to make Taycan look better? This is climate change denial level bs. It would be easier to believe the Taycan only got 100 miles at highway speeds than the S range is cut in half from findings of the most stringent test. More likely the S gets at highways speed what is claimed. Because when people go to test the range of S its on highways at highways speeds on long trips and we know people can hypermile it and maybe get double the EPA range. A lot of this is to try to make FUD that electric cars only have half their advertised range if you drive a few miles an hour over 65mph.

The difference in this comparison is simple. Tesla has more efficient motors, more energy dense batteries (the S is lighter by a good bit even though it carries a lot more- Porsche never advertises its embarrassing interior volume only its frunk and trunk which are half the S's- interior volume may be even less half the S's) S has better motor control software for efficiency and S has lower rolling resistance (it doesn't have the super wide tires although they are wide) and it doesn't have a transmission which adds weight and efficiency losing friction but also doesn't gain the advantage of an overdrive against an electric,

The Taycan could never be a halo car for Porsche especially when priced at a Roadster level for the Roadster was already demonstrated with lots of people riding in it experiencing its power years earlier and that when Taycan is launching up against the actual launch of the Roadster and the Plaid S and it couldn't even beat the regular S and sometimes gets thumped by the MP3 on pro tracks- it was never going to be an electric Halo car even as ICE Porsches are being quickly forgotten. Then look at the Quantumscape line of bs its Gates infected (take a look at Terrapower- delayed by a decade because it was getting close and all his other green-washing- his involvement is like Chevron buying up sodium battery research its defensive to protect his natural gas interests) and the QS battery is supposed to be a VW exclusive. Why? Would that be like Cruze? Then half a decade away the QS battery is going to have a 50% kwh per kg improvement? And although its is ready now it is going to take half a decade to get into cars? And while the average historical rate of improvement of Lithium ion might be 13% this might be 14% across the half a decade to its introduction? But this is supposed to give VW a breakthrough edge against Tesla? And then you realize a 50% gain in this case (because there is no basis given) might only be allowing Taycan in 2025 to finally have the Model S's range. After Dieselgate VW shouldn't be in the position of lying to the public. It never should have been. Business needs to be purged of the con men. Hope VW realizes that the IDEs are only going to take away from gas cars not Model 3 or Teslas. Porsche better have a Rimac ready to be imported and re-badged soon. But that is as funny as re-badging a Ferrari as a Porsche.

VW business model is obsolete (a BMW or GM profit for non contributing parasites first model can't work as it cheapens out your products and makes you un-competitive and is just wrong,) and on parole ICE relic with huge ICE sunk costs can't attract or keep people with the requisite passion, insight and ability and it doesn't have them in the first place and it doesn't have relevant IP. The treatment of Diess (although should have understood surveillance capitalism isn't the right way and shouldn't have argued for ICE subsidies but shows how smashed VW was) shows how such people are treated. The big families always want can kicking placators to keep their ponzi going.

This is all Porsche should have said: Taycan was our first attempt and in many ways it is the best Porsche we've ever done and it is a historic vehicle but its also far from the mark. We can and will do better. But couldn't say that alhough Diess tried because that would have signaled the birth of a serious EV company not just an ICE company trying to run a newcomer into the ground so it can go back to ICE.

See the Nedelia article on insideevs on i3 demand loss equals need for increased production. BMW is getting purged from the US the way GM has been from the world but oh BMW is increasing output of the i3 for falling off the cliff demand. We'll tell the Americans its selling just fine in the rest of the world because they have surely noticed BMWs are rapidly disappearing in former BMW land- but it has nothing to do with fallen BMW quality or BMW rejection of EVs no its all covid or some other excuse and its certainly not Tesla. BMW failing to improve the i3 was like GM abandoning the EV1- two companies should be merged if GM could only get on the right side of CARB.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top