Real consumption / range / efficiency thread … post your Macan EV performance 📊

[PaoloPix]

I have some doubts about the calculation of my monthly consumption
the app says that in April I have an average consumption of 19.1 KW/100Km
but if I divide the sum of the daily consumption by the sum of the Km the result is 21.9 KW/100Km

Sponsored

 

[Daniel]

Same for me : April 17.8 app 18.9 PCM data +6% (@PaoloPix + 15%)
But: March 17.3 app and 17.18 recalculated PCM data ???

with my Taycan, the total consumption (continuous odometer) was very false (optimistic); perhaps same thing with the Macan ...

Please note: if actual energy consumption becomes negative during a trip, for example, in the mountains during a long descent at the start of the trip, this negative value is not displayed, and the trip consumption ignores this regeneration energy.
Only the "consumption from charging" value takes regeneration energy into account.
I've often observed this during a round trip to a ski resort.

 

[CandianPorsche83]

I have also meticulously calculated my own range data (i 'm a nerd and like data and numbers) and noticed slight differences. Could be rounding but not sure but is also the reason i mostly never rely on any of the forecasts/summary that Porsche provides.

 

[CandianPorsche83]

To add further, perhaps the new software update will fix these discrepancies as one of the end result of the update is to:

“Optimized battery capacity calculations to improve range, charging power and SoC display.”

 

[Yves]

So today I did a trip Antwerp - Amsterdam - Antwerp
-Departed with 100%, 9C slight headwind, average speed 85km/h 20.2kwh/100km consumption, spend 36% so had 64% left.
- Returned with 64% at start, 20C, slight wind in the back, average speed 61km/h (traffic jams), 17kwh/100km, spend 32% so had still 32% when back home …

Whenever I could, I drove 125km/h in BE and 105 in NL … anyway if I calculate and did no mistakes, the total usable battery is around :
18.6*3.42/68*100 = 93.5kwh … not bad as there is like a 3% heat loss in the battery …

It also means the real range in ok conditions of a 20 inch Potenza tire Turbo is for this kind of driving around 500km’s … so if you go 130km/h 350km should be in the cards (10% buffer )

PS at the start it showed 540km range but that was with warmer conditions GOM and no head wind I guess so actually pretty close …

 

[Throb]

All the people in this thread reporting their consumption just referencing what's reported in trip computer:

IT MEANS NOTHING!

Unless you're going to report *actual* consumption, manually calculating energy consumed, distance travelled etc., then it's pointless. It's as pointless as taking the trip computer in an ICE car as the truth, when the only way to know is to brim the tank and manually calculate, also. I hope nobody here is a scientist.

Also beware that Tesla supercharger and Porsche Macan are not a good match, the max charge speed is around 130kwh. This seems to be a common issue the dealer told me.

All other chargers did not give any problems.

As has already been pointed out, it's not an issue. Your car worked as intended. Here is a link explaining...

https://christophorus.porsche.com/en/2024/410/dossier-macan-charging.html

"Bank charging comes into play if the selected station operates with 400-volt technology, with an intelligent software effectively splitting the 800-volt battery into two batteries with the same voltage thanks to built-in high-voltage separators. Both batteries can then be charged at the same time with up to 135 kW at a 400-volt charging station without additional HV booster"

 

[Yves]

All the people in this thread reporting their consumption just referencing what's reported in trip computer:

IT MEANS NOTHING!

Unless you're going to report *actual* consumption, manually calculating energy consumed, distance travelled etc., then it's pointless. It's as pointless as taking the trip computer in an ICE car as the truth, when the only way to know is to brim the tank and manually calculate, also. I hope nobody here is a scientist.




As has already been pointed out, it's not an issue. Your car worked as intended. Here is a link explaining...

https://christophorus.porsche.com/en/2024/410/dossier-macan-charging.html

"Bank charging comes into play if the selected station operates with 400-volt technology, with an intelligent software effectively splitting the 800-volt battery into two batteries with the same voltage thanks to built-in high-voltage separators. Both batteries can then be charged at the same time with up to 135 kW at a 400-volt charging station without additional HV booster"

I do not agree with this, there are also charging losses you cannot accurately measure all of this is giving an indication (as long as there is no software reading out all the stats …). While I do agree that a trip of 10km is not meaningful … a trip of, in my case 342 km and 68% consumed, gives a good indication of consumption and battery size … is it 100% correct, no, for that you need to drive to zero, will the error be big, I don’t think so … or the indication would be very none linear, which I did not find to be the case, except for the last 10% that lasted longer than indicated, probably to urge people to charge …

 

[Throb]

I do not agree with this, there are also charging losses you cannot accurately measure all of this is giving an indication (as long as there is no software reading out all the stats …). While I do agree that a trip of 10km is not meaningful … a trip of, in my case 342 km and 68% consumed, gives a good indication of consumption and battery size … is it 100% correct, no, for that you need to drive to zero, will the error be big, I don’t think so … or the indication would be very none linear, which I did not find to be the case, except for the last 10% that lasted longer than indicated, probably to urge people to charge …

Why can't you measure charging losses? If I start with 100%, travel 1,000km over several legs, then charge back too 100%, I know exactly how many kWh of energy it has taken to travel 1,000km. That takes into account charging losses.

 

[Yves]

Why can't you measure charging losses? If I start with 100%, travel 1,000km over several legs, then charge back too 100%, I know exactly how many kWh of energy it has taken to travel 1,000km. That takes into account charging losses.

Only if you know the exact capacity of the battery, and to my knowledge there is no software that accurately measure this … there are hacks but they are just that, and you need an OBD reader + app…

 

[Throb]

Only if you know the exact capacity of the battery, and to my knowledge there is no software that accurately measure this … there are hacks but they are just that, and you need an OBD reader + app…

I guess my question should have been "who cares about charging losses?"

If I drive 1,000km, start and end at 100%, and add up how many kWh I took from the grid, that's all that matters. Those figures include charging losses.

For example, let's say by calculating at each stop what percentage of battery had been depleted I calculate the car consumed 250 kWh of energy, I would get a consumption figure of:

(250/1,000) * 100 = 25 kWh/100km

However, if I add up all the energy I took from the grid and it comes to 280 kWh, then the actual consumption figure is:

(280/1000) * 100 = 28 kWh/100km

The first figure is the efficiency of the car once the battery has been charged, but the second figure includes losses and is the *only* accurate figure as to the true consumption of your car.


I have a database of fuel economy over the many cars I've owned and/or driven over the last fifteen years. It's quite sizeable and I've been refining it over the years to make it as accurate and scientifically perfect as possible. I'm also doing it for EVs, now, and a month ago I was able to run my Macan Turbo over it. The figures are interesting to compare with other EVs I've owned, including an i5 and Taycan GTS, and cars I've borrowed including an Audi Q8 e-tron. When I get chance I will post the results.

 

[Yves]

If you wanna know what you spent all needs to be counted, even charging losses …
But I wanna know, what is the real capacity of the battery and what is the real expected range under different driving conditions.
So for me it’s important to know how the car behaves under changing temp/wind/speed and have a real understanding of real range versus indicated.
I guess we all have our own needs and priorities
All things a side of looks and driving capabilities, for me range is important, not from a pure consumption perspective …

 

[Petzi]

I guess my question should have been "who cares about charging losses?"

If I drive 1,000km, start and end at 100%, and add up how many kWh I took from the grid, that's all that matters. Those figures include charging losses.

For example, let's say by calculating at each stop what percentage of battery had been depleted I calculate the car consumed 250 kWh of energy, I would get a consumption figure of:

(250/1,000) * 100 = 25 kWh/100km

However, if I add up all the energy I took from the grid and it comes to 280 kWh, then the actual consumption figure is:

(280/1000) * 100 = 28 kWh/100km

The first figure is the efficiency of the car once the battery has been charged, but the second figure includes losses and is the *only* accurate figure as to the true consumption of your car.


I have a database of fuel economy over the many cars I've owned and/or driven over the last fifteen years. It's quite sizeable and I've been refining it over the years to make it as accurate and scientifically perfect as possible. I'm also doing it for EVs, now, and a month ago I was able to run my Macan Turbo over it. The figures are interesting to compare with other EVs I've owned, including an i5 and Taycan GTS, and cars I've borrowed including an Audi Q8 e-tron. When I get chance I will post the results.

could you please explain why you think that the statistical data that macan is providing is false? eg “the consumption last month has been x the distance driven has been y the result is x kWh/km”. and as your method is more scientific than Porsche's please provide the results for us to compare. thank you!

 

[Throb]

could you please explain why you think that the statistical data that macan is providing is false? eg “the consumption last month has been x the distance driven has been y the result is x kWh/km”. and as your method is more scientific than Porsche's please provide the results for us to compare. thank you!

I'm a nerd when it comes to driving data. These are the figures after every charge. There are some outliers where I've only driven for a short distance between charges, but the indicated consumption can be anywhere between exactly correct to nowhere near.

 

[Throb]

If you wanna know what you spent all needs to be counted, even charging losses …

Which is what I do, but effectively you end up with two consumption figures. One figure which shows the consumption of the car as it consumes the energy in the battery. And another figure which also includes the energy lost while charging.

 

[Petzi]

I'm a nerd when it comes to driving data. These are the figures after every charge. There are some outliers where I've only driven for a short distance between charges, but the indicated consumption can be anywhere between exactly correct to nowhere near.

very nice & neat. but is it not obvious that the “indicated” consumption is near always the same (or within statistical error) as the “actual” when the distance is bigger than 50 miles?

i do not see any proof that your calculations are more accurate than the ones the car computer is doing. there are a lot of variables that are not accounted for like is the odometer correct ? is the charger correct? where is the data in the “battery level” column coming from? most significant why is a computer supposedly sometimes right und other times wrong and you are always right? my experience with computers is that you can trust that they repeat the same calculations always in the same way.

anyway i really do not care and i am to lazy to calculate the sum of the two columns. but i bet that difference is not significant for operating this vehicle.

Sponsored