Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Transportation Power

Porsche Can't Add Wireless Charging To Macan, Taycan EV Because the Inductive Plate Doesn't Fit (thedrive.com) 64

Porsche's wireless charging system will not be available on the Macan Electric and Taycan because the inductive charging plate cannot physically fit between the front suspension on those models. Dr. Maximilian Muller, Porsche's high voltage engineering lead, told The Drive during a visit to the company's Leipzig facility that the Cayenne Electric's larger dimensions create the necessary space for the charging hardware beneath the front motor. The Cayenne Electric is wider than both the Taycan and Macan Electric. The larger vehicle forced Porsche to design different suspension geometry even though it shares the PPE platform with the Macan Electric. The changes create additional packaging constraints that prevent retrofitting the wireless charging system into existing electric models.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Porsche Can't Add Wireless Charging To Macan, Taycan EV Because the Inductive Plate Doesn't Fit

Comments Filter:
  • by Fly Swatter ( 30498 ) on Monday October 06, 2025 @05:35PM (#65707872) Homepage
    That comes in the form of a cord and is more efficient.
    • I think the idea is ultimately to put the charging into roads.
      • by saloomy ( 2817221 ) on Monday October 06, 2025 @06:07PM (#65707976)
        Also a stupid idea. It's inefficient no matter what. The right solution is a conductor that pops out (or up) automatically from the ground or from the parking spot. I have felt that a robust connector should either shoot up from the road, or to make it more maintenance free, down from the vehicle. Using magnets for inductive charging is inherently inefficient, when compared to beefy copper conductors and nothing will change that. We are too lazy to manually connect and disconnect it, so just make it automatic and robust.
        • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

          There is galvanic isolation with AC charging, so there are always magnets. Wireless charging uses the inductive power transfer for galvanic isolation. AC charging also needs PFC and the inverter driving the coil for wireless power transfer also does PFC during it's normal function without any extra switches.

          So it's not as bad as you might expect.

        • I recently evaluated a 200W wireless charging system. I thought it would be like 50% efficient, but, it was 90%. I was very impressed! It totally changed my mind as to if this was a "good direction" for charging.
          • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

            I recently evaluated a 200W wireless charging system. I thought it would be like 50% efficient, but, it was 90%. I was very impressed! It totally changed my mind as to if this was a "good direction" for charging.

            Even if it is 90%, that's still an 11% increase in power consumption. Now consider a car. If you are driving two or three hundred miles per week, that might be 50 to 100 kWh per week. At California prices, that could mean an extra $2.50 to $5 per week, or $130 to $260 per year.

            This is not a small amount of power loss we're talking about anymore.

            • I tend to prefer no connectors to connectors. 90% of failures occur with connectors.
              • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

                That's why both vehicles and chargers are typically designed to let you quickly change out the charge connector. At least on Teslas, it's something like a half-hour job to swap out the charge port, and Tesla Mobile Service can do it without you even bringing in the car. And commercial-grade EV chargers typically have cords that are field-swappable. (Whether cheap consumer-grade chargers do or not, I couldn't say.)

                • Disclosure: I used to be a Musk fan, until he became stupid. However, that does seem sensible for teslas, and I hope other manufactures figure that out. I have fixed some expensive stuff where it was just the plug, and it was complicated, and expensive. That just seems stupid. On another point, there needs to be galvanic isolation, that costs about the same as wireless, and does the same thing. Wireless charging is just different circuitry with a bit of a coiled wire. Not much different than a tran
                  • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

                    On another point, there needs to be galvanic isolation, that costs about the same as wireless, and does the same thing.

                    Yes and no. A transformer does have a gap, but it is a really small gap. Unless you have some robot arm that moves up and touches the underside of the car while it is parked, which, being a moving part, would be a frequent point of failure, possibly even making it very difficult to move the car without causing damage, you're going to have a very *large* gap, measured in inches.

                    The difference in minimum ground clearance between a Model S and a Cybertruck is 3.9 inches. That's a LOT of difference. To make

                    • OK, those seem like valid points. When I design systems I look at it end to end and make a BOM, check out the efficiency, and do cost/benefit analysis. I admit I am talking out of my ass about this.
                    • by dgatwood ( 11270 )

                      To be fair, I mostly am as well, just with my cynic hat firmly in place. :-D

            • Do people who care about an extra 200 per year buy Porsches?
              • Accumulating wealth often means not spending it grotesquely. Thats a fast way to become poor. This is small, but small wins add up
        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          Wireless EV charging has been in use for years in Europe. Taxis use it so they can charge while waiting for passengers. Apparently efficiency is over 90%.

          It's mostly redundant now though because even cheap EVs have enough range that they don't need to charge during a shift.

      • by thegarbz ( 1787294 ) on Monday October 06, 2025 @07:19PM (#65708132)

        That is incredibly dumb. While a fixed wireless charger (i.e in a parking spot) can achieve close to 90% efficiency vs a plugged in charger, charging in roads while moving is insanely inefficient.

        • by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

          There are some test areas in Germany where they have a pantograph for trucks. It seemed like a decent idea at the time, but batteries got so big and so cheap so quickly that it's basically redundant now. The batteries go longer than humans are allowed to - in the EU there are limits on how long commercial drivers can go without a break.

          • Pantograph is a completely different thing. They are quite efficient.

            That said, honestly though you are on point. Every idiot on the road who thinks they should be doing a canon-ball run needs to be forced to drive a car that forces them to pull over for 10min every 2 hours. We have enough evidence that driving for longer than 2 hours puts performance equivalent to that of a drunk driver, and we have enough evidence that 90% of people think this basic rule doesn't apply to them and overestimate their abilit

      • I think the idea is ultimately to put the charging into roads.

        Parking spots would make a hell of a lot more sense. As in all of them.

        We can’t even keep the asphalt intact. The fuck are we thinking putting a high voltage rail underneath every pothole? Enough of that taxpayer sucking drivel. That’s how you end up with $100 billon dollar California high-speed roads to nowhere.

      • by DrXym ( 126579 )
        Doubt it would work unless the car is stationary and the charger pushed up against the car. And if that's the level of effort maybe there should just be a plug that rises up and charges without using any induction.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    That's a lot of words just to say "We fucked up and didn't think ahead".
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 06, 2025 @05:37PM (#65707880)

    Don't you lose a lot of electricity and generate a lot of heat in the transfer, leading to people paying almost double the electricity for charging the vehicle?

  • faceplant.....
  • I canna change the laws o' physics, Cap'n!!!

  • 2013 Boxster (Score:2, Informative)

    by roman_mir ( 125474 )

    I enjoy my 2013 Boxster, take the roof down, release clutch, engage the first, switch gears, enjoy the ride. I respect that Porsche found a way to stay in business selling SUVs that I will never buy because it 8s a travesty, but this goes too far. I don't want even to think about an EV Porsche, never mind drive one or charge one... this entire story is one f up after another, all piled up on top of each other....

    • I enjoy my Hyundai EV, get in, hit the Start button and Drive button and just take off: fast, quiet, smooth. I've owned my share of cars and that Hyundai is easily the most comfortable to drive, despite the sub-premium plasticy interior. We also own a few IC cars including a 996TT, which is a fun drive but serves a very different purpose. The Porsche SUVs are positioned in the same group as that Hyundai EV, not in the group of the 911s. Who cares that those SUVs are sold under the Porsche label? They s
  • by chas.williams ( 6256556 ) on Tuesday October 07, 2025 @08:56AM (#65709116)
    While you try to get the charging plate centered over the induction coil.

Help! I'm trapped in a PDP 11/70!

Working...