Why no manufacturer is competing with the Tesla range

I made a mistake last week. I tweeted that, although I like the Porsche Taycan, I was disappointed that I could not exceed the scope of the Tesla Model S years after its launch. And although I maintain the opinion that the Taycan is not fundamentally changing the rules of the game, Audi took the time to explain to me what the non-Tesla EVs are doing.

Essentially, the diagrams they sent from the Audi E-Tron suggest that it is designed for great things, although somehow, it was compromised to ensure long-term durability.

Take, for example, the cooling system. The E-Tron monitors and cools the individual battery pack modules individually to keep them between 23-35 degrees C. If one of them has a problem, it can also replace a module without having to mess with the entire package.

It also has significant cooling dedicated to electric motors, including a waste heat pump that can use the heat of the engine for cabin air conditioning control.

Engine cooling is the weak link in Tesla's S model, and the engine temperature drop is generally responsible for power reductions under hard driving.

Therefore, more aggressive and redundant cooling systems add weight and reduce power, which partly explains the reason why the E-Tron travels 320 kilometers compared to almost 600 for the long-range Model S.

The other big part is the battery itself. First, the Model S has a larger 100kWh battery compared to the 95kWh package in the Audi. Obviously, a larger battery gives you more range, but it also costs more, weighs more and takes up more space.

Given the intensity of the shock structure surrounding the battery, it would probably be extremely expensive to expand the battery safety cell to accommodate a larger package.

However, a battery difference of 5kWh does not explain a range deficit of 280 kilometers. Cooling, aerodynamics and weight obviously contribute, but the most important factor is that Audi does not allow access to the full battery. The E-Tron automatically turns off 12 percent of its battery, leaving it with a usable package of 83.6 kWh.

This is because fully charging a battery is not good for your long-term health. Tesla also recognizes this, offering the option to electronically limit its load. But because many want to minimize anxiety over reach, many customers do not remove batteries.

Until now, however, Tesla battery packs have been better maintained than, for example, their transmissions. But the idea is to build in excess for the use case.

Essentially, traditional manufacturers encounter customers who are less likely to accept transmission unit failures, battery replacements and quality problems than early Tesla users, who usually take it as a small price to pay for a car of the future . And, without the kind of growth assessment of a Silicon Valley technology company, shareholders of, for example Volkswagen, are less likely to tolerate stratospheric collateral costs.

In addition, with the almost 600 kilometers, we are definitely reaching a point where the overall reach becomes significantly less important than the times and cargo infrastructure. In the United States, a reliable and expansive fast-charging network is still expected to really face Tesla Superchargers. The Volkswagen Group is building one, but it will take some time.

Meanwhile, don't expect anyone to exceed the Tesla range. Audi, Porsche and Mercedes are being cautious with their EV technology. By sacrificing a few kilometers of range to keep the engines and battery pack fresh and healthy, the goal is to provide EV levels of emission reduction without sacrificing the quality or durability of an internal combustion car.