Macan Turbo – Better Efficiency in Sport Plus Than Normal?

[MMR]

Did the exact same 6-mile trip four times yesterday in my Macan Turbo Electric.

First two runs were in Normal (as I usually drive). Then I switched to Sport Plus for the last two to feel the difference in the ride — I’ve barely used Sport Plus in the two months I’ve had the car.

Switching to Sport Plus immediately knocked about 5 miles off the predicted range (as expected), but the actual consumption was better — 3.1 mi/kWh and 3.2 mi/kWh vs 2.7 and 2.2 in Normal.

Same 6-mile route, same day, so weather and terrain were effectively constant.

Ride felt noticeably sharper — throttle response, body control, everything tighter — but I didn’t expect it to be more efficient on paper.

Anyone got a technical explanation for that? Throttle mapping? Regen strategy? Something else going on?

Sponsored

 

[pm4s]

Tons of reasons. Will list a couple.
You did not alternate between runs meaning first 2 runs used more energy because car was not at operating temp (battery, cabin, etc.,), driver through repetition keeps improving, driving becomes much smoother, learns environment, braking/turning points, has to process less new info, weather might have been improving throughout the runs, getting warmer.
Was direction of travel the same in all runs or downhill at some of the runs?
Sport Plus uses both motors all the time opposed to Normal which uses the rear motor unless it needs the power/traction of the front motor so less efficient, at these low speeds the only thing it would have going for it would be the low ride height when extremely windy, again speeds are too low to make a positive impact.
Human factor involved, your average speed varies by 53% so without consistent traffic/driving pattern you can't expect same consumption. We only have average speed to go by, driving at 50% at 30mph and 50% at 90mph or 100% at 60mph have the same average speed but consumption will not be the same.
Without graphs of all parameters like "throttle", brake, speed, etc. you can't reach conclusion as you have lots of variables.
The more variables you eliminate you will get more accurate results, i.e. drive the same piece of highway road between 2 points after doing a couple of runs to let the car reach operating temp and driver to familiarize with the points, use cruise, reset trip meter at first point, alternate between runs, etc.
There are also phycological factors involved car in Sport Plus feels faster, sharper "throttle response", stiffer suspension, so you don't push it as much. Traffic alone alone (stop/start) can account for the difference.

 

[W1NGE]

Did the exact same 6-mile trip four times yesterday in my Macan Turbo Electric.

First two runs were in Normal (as I usually drive). Then I switched to Sport Plus for the last two to feel the difference in the ride — I’ve barely used Sport Plus in the two months I’ve had the car.

Switching to Sport Plus immediately knocked about 5 miles off the predicted range (as expected), but the actual consumption was better — 3.1 mi/kWh and 3.2 mi/kWh vs 2.7 and 2.2 in Normal.

Same 6-mile route, same day, so weather and terrain were effectively constant.

Ride felt noticeably sharper — throttle response, body control, everything tighter — but I didn’t expect it to be more efficient on paper.

Anyone got a technical explanation for that? Throttle mapping? Regen strategy? Something else going on?

I would doubt that it is more efficient all other things being equal.

Sport Plus uses energy to heat the battery in readiness for more spirited driving and so must directly impair consumption.

Try driving for a few days in that mode - set PASM to Normal to make it bearable and then see what your consumption looks like.

The guessometer is not that reliable - same on Taycan.

 

[MMR]

All fair points

I completely agree this isn’t a controlled test — short urban runs will always have variables. Traffic alone can swing things massively.

Direction was identical on all runs (out and back on the same 6-mile route), so no net downhill advantage. Weather was stable across the window I drove it.

The trips were spaced out far enough that the car wasn’t heat-soaked from the previous run, so battery and drivetrain temps should have been broadly similar at departure each time. It wasn’t a case of doing four back-to-back pulls where the later runs benefited from higher operating temps.

On the dual-motor point, that’s what surprised me. In theory Sport Plus holding both motors active and potentially preconditioning the battery should impair efficiency, not improve it — which is why the 3.1 mi/kWh caught my attention.

I’m not claiming Sport Plus is “more efficient” in general — just that on this short urban route it returned better consumption than the two Normal runs.

I do this run multiple times a week and have done for the past two months. In Normal mode I’ve never seen efficiency above 2.7 mi/kWh on it, so getting two back-to-back runs in Sport Plus showing 3.x genuinely surprised me.

Could it be that as the battery would’ve been slightly cold, Sport Plus brought it closer to optimal operating temperature, as it were short trips and not preconditioning for long the gain in efficiency outweighed the heating cost?

I’ll try more runs

 

[daveo4EV]

Did the exact same 6-mile trip four times yesterday in my Macan Turbo Electric.

First two runs were in Normal (as I usually drive). Then I switched to Sport Plus for the last two to feel the difference in the ride — I’ve barely used Sport Plus in the two months I’ve had the car.

Switching to Sport Plus immediately knocked about 5 miles off the predicted range (as expected), but the actual consumption was better — 3.1 mi/kWh and 3.2 mi/kWh vs 2.7 and 2.2 in Normal.

Same 6-mile route, same day, so weather and terrain were effectively constant.

Ride felt noticeably sharper — throttle response, body control, everything tighter — but I didn’t expect it to be more efficient on paper.

Anyone got a technical explanation for that? Throttle mapping? Regen strategy? Something else going on?

anything less than 100 miles isn't enough to really "flush out" what the ongoing efficiency is - there is too much "noise" in the system for short runs that can easily skew the efficiency measurements…

EV's are enormously consistent in terms of consumption across longer distances for the identical route/driving-conditions…

I'd find a longer route and then test the two different "modes" to see what happens.

 

[Wivenhoe]

Apologies for asking a basic question - was the heating on or totally off on all runs.

 

[MMR]

Apologies for asking a basic question - was the heating on or totally off on all runs.

HVAC off
But a valid question

Sponsored