Porsche Claims It Can Cut In Half Tesla’s Charging Times

OCT 5 2018 BY MARK KANE 104

Porsche sees its competitive advantage in ultra-fast charging.

In one of the most recent interviews, Klaus Zellmer, president and CEO for Porsche Cars North America, stated that the upcoming Porsche Taycan will separate itself from the competition through ultra-fast charging (to 80% in 15 minutes – “which is almost the same if you fill up your gas tank and have a cup of coffee”).

Of course, a lot depends on Porsche’s own charging infrastructure (at dealers) and progress of Electrify America’s network, but if everything goes as promised, charging time could be cut in half compared to Tesla, or by even more compared to other new models (like the Jaguar I-PACE etc.).

Only time will tell whether 350 kW charging power at up to 800 V is really achievable (especially in a wide state-of-charge window) and how batteries will withstand such fast charging.

Porsche aims to lead in ultra-fast charging, because even long-range cars can’t go too far at high speeds or with consistent sporty driving. Detlev von Platen, Porsche’s executive board member for sales and marketing said:

“It doesn’t make any sense to drive fast and then wait two hours to charge batteries,” von Platen said. Achieving an 80% charge in a quarter of an hour is an “argument for us.”

Source: Fortune

Categories: Charging, Porsche, Tesla

Tags: , , ,

Leave a Reply

104 Comments on "Porsche Claims It Can Cut In Half Tesla’s Charging Times"

newest oldest most voted

When does a Tesla take “two hours to charge” at a Supercharger? Charging a 100kWh battery from 20 to 80% needs a total of 60kWh (80-20). A Supercharger can deliver 120Kw. So the charge can be completed in about 30 minutes. Sure, 15 minutes is faster than 30, but comparing with the mythical “two hours to charge” is BS.

Tesla starts to taper around 40% and is down to 50 kW by about 60% SOC.

It’s a really big deal if Porsche can maintain something closer to 350 kW up to 80% SOC.

Have you ever taken a Tesla to a super charger? I have and what you say is a lie.

There are some cases where DoggyDog might be right, but these are RARE cases. It depends on temperatures (hot connector, cold battery), battery state of health, blah blah. But of course Porsche will have the same exceptions when things go slowly. And at those nominal power levels, the slow exceptions might not be so rare. But for now, Porsche is all talk. I doubt their batteries will put up with that fast charge level for more than a few dozen cycles without compromising the battery capacity. And they might get away with that, since almost no one really cares about charging that fast except to brag.

Can’t imagine why anyone would give this comment a thumbs-down. So far as I know, it’s well informed and completely correct.

Porsche gets the high energy charge rate because their battery packs are 800V instead of 400V. So the C rate (charge rate) might be the same, but twice as much energy could be delivered.

It’s a good plan, as the limitations in the battery chemistry and heat produced scales with current.

I don’t know what the costs and difficulties with 800V vs 400, there must be some downside otherwise everyone would do it already. Also the inverter on the charging side might be more complex—commercial power can typically supply 480V 3 phase AC, and rectifying to DC is one matter, but upping the voltage and rectifying might be significantly more expensive—or the charger has to step down directly from distribution voltages like 12 kV, meaning more expensive installation & siting requirements.

Doubling the pack voltage does *not* magically double the charge rate. The Voltage of the individual cells is the same — and so is the C-rate needed to achieve a particular charge speed. Charging speed differences all boil down to cells optimised for power vs. energy.

Higher voltage is only about thinner connectors, and lower contact forces required at the plug.

Agree, the battery cells have a charge rate determined by current and chemistry, and if you consider charging to be fraction of ions moved from one side to the other the pack voltage is not the issue.

What I mean is that the total energy delivered externally can be doubled, at the same net current and charge rate of the cell.

800V pack is two 400V in series. Charge at the same current rate, twice the energy delivered to time to the pack (not each cell) as externally you supply 800V. Alternative is to charge two 400V packs in parallel, requiring twice the externally supplied current and a higher cost. 350kW is easier at 800V than 400V.

Why would twice the voltage instead of twice the current reduce costs? (Aside from smaller connectors, as I already said…)

The main limitation is and remains the C-rate of the cells, which is independent of the pack voltage.

What Doggy says is only true when others pulled in next to us.

Did you ever taken Tesla to supercharger after driving at 200+ km/h for whatever time it can keep up? Try it and you will see how long it takes to cool down and charge at least to 80%. NCA batteries are finicky thing.

Driving at 124+ MPH for an extended period of time? Talk about an outlier example! 🙄

Ok, THAT has some truth. Basically, starts slow until batteries cool down.
However, what he describes was NOT the case.

I observed Tesla S90 (or was it P90) using Chademo, and it tapered to 42.0 kW at 80% at 70F temperature. It’s funny that SparkEV with 18.4 kWh battery was charging 48 kW at 80%. Beyond about 75%, SparkEV would be charging at higher power than even Tesla S (or P) 90!

We can’t find the Porsche, and we can’t find its charger.

Porsche has NO game. Let’s start there.

It’s too bad we indulge debates that don’t exist.

Whether you like it or not, Tesla does have stiff competition in the wings. Just because the car isn’t out yet, doesn’t mean that everything Porsche has to say is all bluff. And in the event they are able to carry this out, what would you have to say then? Viewing your tone in your comment, it’s safe to say you’re probably still think Tesla is better based off of bias rather than actual comparison…

Unless Some NEW Battery Or Charging Breakthrough Or Both Has Happened By Porsche. ….lmao… Charging At Those High Rates Will C00K Those Batteries & Render Them Useless In No Time At All .

SparkEV charged 80% in 20 minutes and far more abuse than most Tesla or Porsche, discharging entire battery capacity almost daily due to short range and sometimes multiple DCFC to 80%+ per day. Yet after 3 years and 32K miles, it only degraded 9%. If Porsche has SparkEV-like batteries, their claim is plausible.

But Teslas only degrade 5% after 5 years…

That’s FUD. It’s very well possible to optimise a battery chemistry for high charge rate. You’ll have to sacrifice some energy density, but that may be an acceptable pay-off.

Yes, it means I’m going to be happier at race tracks, but with the per KWh weight increases that become necessary to salvage equivalent range to an ordinary Tesla, you kind of start losing on both fronts. (it becomes heavier for the track, and needs more batteries for ~200 miles of range. )

I think many people are getting bogged by the consequences of maximizing for “power density” versus “energy density”. When there’s an actual car you can buy, and charge, maybe that will be time to go over why your range wasn’t what you hoped for, or what you’d otherwise think ~90KWh would provide.

Taper around 40% – Accurate
Down to 50kW by 60% SOC, closer to 80kW at 60% SOC

The real story is they can do something better than Tesla has been doing for 5+ years? Color me not impressed. By the time they actually release it and install stations that can do it, what is Tesla doing THAT day? Then you can brag if you are ahead. For years everyone has been talk and zero action.

More Model 3s sold in September (USA) 2018 than BEVs and Plug in Hybrids by all other brands COMBINED. That’s leading and industry and igniting a revolution in an industry. This lead may cause even more antics in other companies trying to gain some attention back. We will see who paid attention and took action first, or I doubt we will see some of the companies long term.

I would say it depends on your battery size. Our 100kwh does not tapering until 50%. I am still way over 50kW at 60% state of charge. Maybe by 70-75% SOC. The bigger battery makes a huge difference!

Absolutely. Even the smallest battery isn’t as bad as the OP says.

You do know that there are already 350kWh 800v stations available right? IONITY have already started building them in Europe and Electrify America have already started building them in North America. By the end of next year there may well be around 800 350kWh stations worldwide (compared to Teslas 1400 “legacy” 😉 120kWh stations).

There is no car available yet though, you are right with that.

How many of these 350 kW chargers* are there which are actually open to use by the public?

I remember an article bragging about how there were two actually installed and available for use. Was that followed by a large-scale rollout, or are there just a token few at widely scattered locations?

*Not “350 kWh”! Please!

You’re right, it’s 80 kW at 60%, below 50 kW at 80%. I misread the chart:

“what is Tesla doing THAT day?”

Good question. Musk and Straubel talked about v3 Superchargers a couple quarters ago. They said ~200 kW was the upper limit without wrecking their batteries.

I don’t think Porsche will make a dent in Tesla’s market share. But if they actually deliver 80% in 12 minutes it will take away bragging rights, which are important to Tesla branding. I’m just glad to see Tesla finally get some real competition.

Which makes sense with Porsche as they are at twice the voltage, so the charge rate is half for the same energy. 350 kW/2 is 175 kW on a 400V battery.

But as most deployed DC chargers are 400V, the Porsche would need some more complex electronics & switches to convert a pack from 800V to two 400V packs in parallel and then switch back—or it would only be able to fast charge at the minority of 800V stations.

The high voltage is a big win for charging and lower heat generation but no doubt there are extra expenses. Can inverter electronics drive 800V motors inexpensively?

If they pull it off, it will be impressive.

You don’t need higher voltage for higher charging rates. It just alleviates the need for larger connectors.

stop lying boris

u do not own a tesla if you are claiming that.
I have seen that our tesla does not slow down until at least 60%.

It doesn’t. He also never mentioned Tesla, the media did.

When did Tesla was ever mentioned in the 2 hours argument ?

Driving fast?
Does he know about speed limits…

As evident from daily experince in Germany where there are lots of Porsche vehicles on the road, speed limits do not apply to those. Either that or the Porsche drivers are not educated correctly about the meaning of “speed limit”. They appear to think one has to go at least 50% faster than it says on the signs.
Ridiculously low fines for breaking the speed limit in Germany do not really help against speeders who can afford a luxury car.

My dad told me the number on the sign is per axle when I asked him about why his speed didn’t correspond to the speed signs. Nowadays you have to be a bit more careful with all the speed traps around.

German cars, autobahns, free speed limit….

Germany has the Autobahn.

80 mph limit is not unusual in the Western US. There’s an 85 mph limit not far from me.

Of course it’s unusual.

According to the chart in the article linked below, there are only 6 States with speed limits as high as 80 MPH, including just one (Texas) with 85 MPH speed limits.


When they will make Porsche in numbers, at same price, with a real super charger network, with real batteries in real production cars, then they can claim that they charge twice as fast.

Until then, it’s just a theory on paper.

With the expected rising of batteries capacity, is very important develope fast charging systems faster as possible. Not only for that you can charge your car in 15 minutes, other problem is when 2 people were waiting to charge their cars before you. If they expend 10 minutes average, is ok. But it they need 30 minutes each one…

Turns out having multiple chargers installed does a nice job of reducing this as well. And the people have to move their cars immediately for this theory to hold true. Will these other companies be willing to fine their customers for sitting at charging locations? Will they know if they are sitting at a charger plugged in/not plugged in?

I completely agree with your numbers, but there is a lot of human action that causes this thought experiment to have issues in the current environment. It’s a bold move by Tesla to fine their own customers for sitting at chargers, but of course the vast majority of owners aren’t jerks so the majority of owners support a form of punishment for said jerks.

Yes,I like Tesla’ss system,you can motivate people with small charges, my supercharger is full, of Teslas getting free juice while the 3 that must pay is extremely rare.

I noticed when we went to the 100 kWH battery pack that the charge time on our mobile charger does take longer. Especially on the new mobile chargers that they sell now. It limits me to around 20 mph and 0-283 can take a really long time. Time to install the wall charger.

Totally true, but unrelated to the actual discussion of L3 charging.

I am surprised by Tesla going to 32A from 40A on the mobile plug as well. I charged a Model X 100 at my home (no SCs in ND) and I had him use my cable multiple times to reduce his charge times my hours. Surprisingly a dual inverter Tesla charging at its max rate (L2) is about 40% of the speed of the slower L3 (50kW) stations. Yet here we are discussing the next level of L3. Progress!

“Level 3” is not a charging standard. There will probably be a charging standard developed for DC charging at 800 V which will be a different standard from DC charging at 400 V. Until that happens, it’s less confusing to refer to AC Level 2 only in North America (does not apply in most of the rest of the world) and 400 V or 800 V DC fast charging. If you want to distinguish between low-power DC charging in North America, that would be DC Level 1 with DC Level 2 being more powerful.

Light, first off, most everyone knows what you mean by “L3” – some manufacturers still call fast charging ‘Level 3’ – which was a semi sensible nomenclature until SAE arbitrarily changed it. To me they are little kids constantly changing their minds. But the old terminology is hanging around simply because it makes more sense than the new nonsensical stuff. Not surprised at all by Tesla derating the ‘mobile’ cord to 32 amperes – and putting the ‘adapter’ down the cord a bit to prevent overheating the building wiring – the old 40 ampere things were relatively dangerous as they made a perfectly fine Nema 14-50 receptacle get HOT, even at the Tesla Service Center! Tesla did 2 things with the 40 to make it less dangerous : 1). If a voltage ‘dip’ was noticed, it would decrease the current to 32, then 24 amperes. 2). More importantly, they put a fusible link in the adapter so that the thing would shut down before the garage caught fire. Those current 32 ampere things may be SLOW, but they are the safest Tesla Charging Cord to date. And they should be much more reliable since the 40’s only had a 30… Read more »
This is a false mapping to gas stations. There is only one situation where this mapping is accurate: long distance holiday travel. The mapping to gas station is false because there are numerous recharging opportunities for every EV outside of the realm of long distance travel. One can charge at home, at work, at the grocery store, the mall, the movies, and on and on and on. Because EVs can be charged wherever and whenever they are parked. This problem overall will be solved simply by placing more charging stations in more places. Or more importantly to place shared public charging stations where one station covers multiple parking spots. As for long distance travel, the same solutions that gas stations use for ICE will work for EVs: multiple stations per exit. I believe to make it more convenient that having a charger service multiple parking spots would be helpful. Then one can park, plug in, and head to the facilities or food until the EV gets its charge. It’s likely that the strategy once there are enough stations will be to charge to first or second taper, somewhere between 70-80% and moving on. While that may add an extra charging… Read more »

“…. I’m going to ask how much does this all cost?…”

That just about guarantees you’ll always find a free 350 kw charging facility at your Porsche Dealership.

That is until they get their first Electric Bill and they throttle the thing down below 100 kw like the stuff the Nissan Dealers pull with their fast chargers for the Leafs.

Ok, but how long before they carpet Western Europe with those 350 kW chargers? Can they answer that?

At The Rate They’re Going., “It Will Not Happen In Our Lifetime”

Stations live: 11, currently building: 21; 400 planned online by 2020.
Plus all the other CCS fast charging networks that are supposed to be built.

To put that into perspective – There are around 400 Supercharger stations in Europe, with around 100 likely to be added next year, almost all of them being much lower power 120kWh stations.

So theoretically in 2020 there will be 400 350kWh stations for CCS cars (almost everyone but Tesla) and aound 500 120kWh stations for Tesla. Not including any other CCS/CHAdeMO stations built by networks that aren’t IONITY or Tesla.

This is why Tesla need to introduce CCS to the Model Y and any updated S/X, or else they will have issues in future. The supercharger system worked when EV infrastructure wasn’t as prevelant, but it may become their Achilles heel in future.

It’s safe to assume Tesla will add way more than 100 new stations in that time frame — and most of them should be v3. (I suspect they will also be upgrading many existing stations to v3 — but the timeline for that remains to be seen…)

It’s perfectly possible that Tesla will start falling behind at *some* point — but that likely won’t be in the next few years; and I doubt it will be anything like an “Achilles heel” even then.

it seems another opened for the weekend: status now:
Stations live: 12, currently building: 20

Thanks for answering the question I posed upstream. 🙂

Well we here are in a good spot. Fastned has pledged to always install the latest and fastest chargers. 14 of their locations already have 175 kW chargers.

and those are all upgradable. The individual chargers as well as the numbers of chargers at the stations they are opening now.

Charging times are not an issue with Tesla. Tested with an S60.

Better be fast because it could quickly become quite a pain to charge once there are more EV around, Imagine a 8 spots charger and fews cars inline in front of you, you could easily have to wait 2 hours to get your car charged

When A Battery “Fast Charge” Breakthrough Happens …(Tesla Will Be 1st to Have it)…Only Then Will We Charge Super Fast!….Until Then, We Have The Existing Vast “Tesla Fast Charging Network” ….. Which “N0 0ther Auto Maker Has”. It’s Still A “TESLA” 1st. & Only …&….Works Just Fine !

Don’t forget that 90% of charging happens at home.
For the remaining 10%, you generally only care about one-way miles for time. If you are on vacation, then what’s your hurry? If you are traveling over 500 miles and time matters then consider flying.

You are going to sell a lot of cars by telling buyers they would need to spend their vacation sitting at chargers with kids asking every 5 seconds “Did it charged yet?” “Is it going to charge soon?” “Is it close yet?” “Can we leave this lousy shopping mall now?” “Can you buy a faster charging car?” /s

Or.. I told you not to buy an EV. Our next car is going to be an ICE…

What’s acceptable to first adopters is not necessarily acceptable to the mainstream public.

If saving a few hours during a vacation is that important to you, then by all means rent a gasmobile for the vacation.

Giving up the convenience, time saved, and lower cost of charging at home the other 95% of the year just so you can save a few hours on a once- or twice-a-year vacation is pretty short-sighted, if not downright stupid.

“No not yet kids but the entire reason we can afford this trip is I saved $5k on gas so would you like it if I had the old car but we’re weren’t going to WallyWorld ?”

Except for folks who don’t. There’s a poster floating around describing a 600 mile trip from South Florida to middle Georgia they take twice a month 6 months out the year. Anything slower than the 9 hours it takes them to do it in an ICE now is unacceptable. It includes a 5 minute gas spot. Because there’s no EV that can currently do the trip the same way as ICE, then EVs are worthless for everyone.

The problem is that the corner case people tend to convince folks who are on the fence that it won’t work for them too.


Your last sentence, about the influence of corner cases, is something I’ve been fighting for years with friends, neighbors, and relatives re:EVs. I keep telling people I know with 2 or more cars in a household that they can replace one of them with an EV, charge it in their garage overnight, use their other cars for long distance, and save a lot of time and money on maintenance and refueling. (These are all people I know, so I’m acquainted with their circumstances.) In literally every case they stick with ICEv, largely out of a fear that they’ll suddenly need to drive their EV 1,000 miles in a day and it won’t be up to the job. Of course, they’ve never had to make an emergency trip anywhere near that far in the past, or could use one of their ICEvs. (This is exactly how my wife and I do things. I’ve driven an EV since early 2013, and my wife has an ICEv, currently a Rogue. We push miles toward the EV for the lower operating cost, and it works extremely well for us. But even using our situation as a real world example doesn’t sway people.) This notion… Read more »

Yep. Same mentality that causes people to buy a Suburban, just in case they have to haul 7 adults, even though 99% of the time they are driving solo. Or city dwellers “needing” that pickup truck.

All we can do is keep trying to educate without being too pushy. Amazing how few people, even well educated, have even the slightest clue about electric cars. “wow, it regenerates electricity when you break!”

I managed to persuade my spouse at our last car purchase that we didn’t need six seats (couple with no children), then 3 months later we almost had to hire a second vehicle to take 6 of us on a trip… It happens, but at the same time is it worth it – I still stand by my my decision that day to day we didn’t need 6 seats, but I had to admit it would have been useful…

Stuff like this happens, it’s just the weighting on how often you may need it relative to the rest of the time that is a very personal choice. Just because you put less weighting on it than others, doesn’t mean your opinion is “right”.

While I agree with you (I’ve been trying to persuade my parents to get an EV as their second car, but so far haven’t found one cheap enough), the argument against can be more compelling that you make out. What if that 1,000 mile trip was a once in a lifetime trip to see a dying relative. How would you feel if you couldn’t say bye to your Mum/Dad after they had an unexpected health condition because you were stuck halfway there charging your EV? May sound far fetched, but I know two separate people who have had to make trips like this in the last year. Yes, they could take that trip in the ICE (and probably would) but there’s still the possibility, however irrational, that they couldn’t for one reason or another (the ICE was in the shop or otherwise out of commission for example). Most people don’t want to change their lifestyle to suit a different technology, people don’t want to switch to a sedan from a CUV because they’re the onnly EV’s that can go a decent range for example. These issues are joint, people need to understand the realities, but technology also needs to improve… Read more »

“How would you feel if you couldn’t say bye to your Mum/Dad after they had an unexpected health condition because you were stuck halfway there charging your EV?”

That’s what rental cars, airlines, etc., are for. I’m sure there are some remote locations where rental cars aren’t easily available and no airport is nearby, but in most cases in the U.S., at least, rental cars and airlines are available when needed.

How long does it take to drive 1,000mi? 6hrs? 10hrs? Your person has 3hrs to live, the ICE didn’t get you there in time either. You can argue these things any way you like to make your point. If there are ubiquitous chargers like there are gas stations, and it takes <30 min to recharge 300mi, that's going to be adequate to the most use cases. Bigger batteries means less stops and faster charging on a mph basis.
The problem at the moment is chargers are not ubiquitous. The problem is not that they don't charge fast enough. Tesla has already proven people are Ok with a 20-40min charge. Everyone else has also proven that L2 charging when you park at the grocery store is perfectly acceptable and well.

When people present such ridiculous corner cases as an argument, these are not truly the *reasons* why they reject the change — these are just a *rationalisation* for their rejection.

“…you could easily have to wait 2 hours to get your car charged.”

It’s another of Darn’s EV-basher posts. What a loser! He should get a life.

No, dude; you’d have a hard time finding a case where any Tesla driver had to wait 2 hours to get his car charged.

Wait until there are many more EV in CA, the churning rate at the “pump” is going to be slow (compounded by those who left their car unattended during charging for a coffee or lunch)

SHOW US PRODUCT …..Cheap Talk is Cheap ! …lol

Interesting to see a manufacturer understand the importance and necessity of quick turnaround, similar to filling an ICE. I’m stoked that a company with global recognition like Porsche is taking this for action, I hope it continues to expand to other companies. Having 2 popular, respected brands leading the charge (no pun) will hopefully kick other manufacturers in the charge port.

If anything, insisting on gas station-like turnaround demonstrates that they do *not* understand EVs — or maybe they do understand them, but also realise that their customers don’t…

While we understand the Tesla semi has a huge battery, isn’t the “mega charger” supposed to charge even faster than Porsche?

Not faster, but with higher power.

Does Porsche not understand how regular people charge their cars? The gas station model is dead except for long trips. We supercharge our X at most 2X a month, and we have free charging. Why risk battery damage with increased heat, and why tax the electricity grid?

Because just because you don’t do it, doesn’t mean other don’t. Everyone has different usage cases.

At least half of my mileage involves trips of >300 miles for example, so fast recharging would be a major benefit for me.

Model 3 LR can go 300mi on a charge, so you would not have to charge at all during the trip, or you could “top up” 100mi in about 15min anyway. So your use case is already covered.

I don’t know about all this super-duper charging. I’d be concerned about dendrites developing too rapidly. That’s what kills batteries and can even cause fires.

It’s not like they are using untested technology for this…

He is completely correct. But I’ll believe it when I see it tested by Bjorn under various conditions, and when I see the final recommendation by Porsche on how often they recommend (or not recommend) charging at those speeds.
If they can really do 0-80% in 15 minutes without damaging the battery then they are well ahead of everyone else, but I’m doubtful.

My Model 3 takes 15 ~ 20 minutes to go from 20% to 80% at a Supercharger, barely enough time to get a snack and wash room break.

Model 3 is said to have a 75kwh battery capacity, so charging 20% to 80% should require 45kwh of charge to be added. The maximum supercharger speed that I’ve heard of is 120kw. If we maintained that maximum charge rate for the entire time, it would take 45kwh/120kw=.375 hours, or 22.5 minutes. So that should be the theoretical minimum charge time under ideal conditions. I haven’t supercharged my 3 yet (had it for 5 days :)), but I have heard that it does great at maintaining high charge rates (not tapering as early) compared to the other Tesla models. I don’t have any facts to back this, but I’m hoping that charge rates are going to eventually be increased on the 3. I’m hoping that they are testing internally at higher rates over the long term, and it will be unlocked when (1) they’ve scaled production fully to not worry about cannibalizing model s/x sales, (2) supercharger v3 hardware is out and ready to pump out higher current, and possibly (3) competitors go live with higher charge rates. I think it will be awesome if Porsche goes live with their super high rate, and then Tesla immediately responds with a… Read more »

The graph I posted above says 35 minutes from 20-80%.

Doesn’t impress me in the SLIGHTEST.

What will impress me is if Porsche comes out with a vehicle at HALF THE PRICE of a Tesla.

Porsche is surely not the right brand to hope for that…

Where I live it looks like 350kW chargers cost about $500,000 to install. A 150kW charger costs about $100,000 to install. Even if 150kW was half the price, I’d much prefer 2x150kW chargers than 1x350kW chargers. Except for the Porsche, every EV has about 100kW max charge rate, so all those EV’s are going to be sitting on that 350kW charger for an hour anyway. It might be great in the future, but if it takes 5yrs for EV’s that can do 350kW to appear then it was a bit of a wasted investment. The only thing it achieves, as wth lots of these things, is bragging rights (who’s swinging the biggest dick?). One thing I like about Tesla, they make a good product but they don’t seem to be out there really dishing on any other brands. Sure, Elon said it is a smack down to ICE, but that was one comment at the reveal, not an endless tirade against any other brands. Customers are a different story, and they seem to take great delight in 0-60 against all comers! So 1x350kW charger that is limited to current 100kW vehicles, or 2 (or more) x150kW chargers that are also… Read more »
Yeah a trip to the Porsche dealership in my locale was an eye-opening experience. No sign of beginning construction of the 2 – 350 kw charger facilities each dealership is supposedly required to have. They have those HUMONGOUS Porsche docking stations (easily 4 times the volume of a similarly shaped ‘GE Watt station’, that may be adjusted by the user to have either 100% (1300 watts) or 50% (650 watt) charging rate. They had 2 installed, 1 by the front door, and the other by the collision shop – presumably to test to see whether the PHEV Porsche products would take a charge. My empty BOLT, at the 50% rate, said it would take exactly 7 days to recharge fully. I too have a somewhat jaundiced eye to see whether Porsche will REALLY spend all this COIN for their ev products, since few people charge at a dealership anyway, and, historically the Germans haven’t spent too much at the dealerships. The VW dealership down the street takes the 120 volt ‘Occasional Use Cord’ out of the Trunk of the car (boot), and puts it in a fancy shoe box to demonstrate car charging. I see no big profit centers in… Read more »

“…and how batteries will withstand such fast charging.”

That’s the real question in my mind. Is 15 minute charging just a stunt, or is this something the cars will be able to do time after time after time, with no significant impact on battery life?

It’s possible Porsche has chosen a battery chemistry that is more optimized for fast-charging than Tesla’s battery chemistry. But generally that comes with a trade-off; either one of the chemistry’s other characteristics (such as energy density, battery life, or heat tolerance) are worse, or else they’re more expensive.

800V vs 400V. There are battery cells s optimized for faster charge/discharge rate as used in PHEV’s with higher cost per kWh, but I bet the voltage is the biggest difference.

Maybe the Tesla Roadster will be 800V? Would make sense as they have already claimed it’s a “double” battery pack (two planes of cells stacked).

Doubling the voltage is only going to help reducing the cord section for a same power transmission. It is an important part of course and in that regard 800 V is still rather shy since doubling it once more at 1600 V would be even better, but that doesn’t change the voltage at the cells level and moreover doesn’t imply a cell can charge faster. To achieve fast charging the cells need to be fast charging in addition to the cable being able to transmit higher power. Some cells are able to fast charge and it is interesting to have research going on in that field, apparently at Porsche as well. In the same time, if the voltage is increased to 800 V or 1600 V it becomes even more interesting to also have automatic charging like the Tesla snake charger or other systems to complete the picture of fast charging. Tesla has presented a patent with an automatic under the car fast charging system and doubling or quadrupling the voltage is obviously something they can do as well. They have not concentrated on that for now because they are more than busy rolling out cars in the tens of… Read more »

Voltage is not the important difference. It’s all about the cells type.

I’m not aware of any battery advances that would allow for higher power with no trade-offs other than cost. I’m pretty certain they will pay in lower energy density — which is apparently a trade-off they are willing to take.

(Cost will also be slightly higher as a result — but at this price point, it doesn’t matter that much…)

The design of the prototype – as shown – is absolutely great and therefore the press keeps using them. But we have already seen production versions of the Taycan and most of its sexiness has gone.

So many naysayers in the comment section, but who’s to say that Porsche can’t pull it off? The fact of the matter is Porsche has way deeper pockets to work with, has been developing this car for quite some time now, and has been pretty impressive in their hybrid game alone. Of course, only time and execution will tell, but I think they actually have a shot. I also think that some people on here are so biased in favor of Tesla, that anything that poses a threat to Tesla sales is automatically downgraded and debunked, no matter how good it is. As much as Tesla’s are awesome cars, I remain in favor of a wider selection of electric vehicles, and progress in what they can do. You can’t expect for mass amounts of people to adopt them when there has still been such a narrow amount of options ( and PLEASE withhold using the Model 3 as and example, since not everyone is in the market for one, even though it has been very successful).

No free lunch: if you charge fast, you hold less energy… hence the lesser range.

This is not really news: it’s been pretty clear for a long time that the charging speed will be the Taycan’s major differentiating point…

I have no doubt it’s doable — at the expense of slightly lower range, of course. While personally I’m not convinced it’s a worthwhile trade-off (over something like ~200 kW charging with higher range), some others will have different priorities. Surely it can help convince some people sitting on the fence about EV adoption — more options to cover different preferences should broaden the total market for EVs 🙂

80% is 15 minutes could shorten battery life if done too often.