Next generation Porsche Macan will be full EV only.

[edgy]

I am not sure how to feel about this! 

http://www.carpoint.com.au/news/2017/porsche/macan/porsche-macan-to-go-all-electric-107964 

 

[tazzieman]

I am not sure how to feel about this! 

Oh it'll still be "sporty" , whatever that means these days!

[ANF]

It will not sell in the numbers they want, hope they have a back up plan.....

[Macca]

, hope they have a back up plan.....

Hope it is this ; 

http://www.motoring.com.au/porsches-new-928-on-hold-104117/

 

[ANF]

Hope it is this ; 

http://www.motoring.com.au/porsches-new-928-on-hold-104117/

 

That sounds pretty dead to me..... I hope they know what they are doing.... 

[edgy]

Oh it'll still be "sporty" , whatever that means these days!

I've had some time to think about it, and this makes me want to buy a Cayenne Turbo while you still can. 

[Airhead]

The world has gone to hell in a hand basket!!!!!

[Cars And Coffee Byron Bay]

Tell em they're dreamin

[tazzieman]

911s are in Nathan Buckley territory too http://www.motoring.com.au/porsche-macan-to-go-all-electric-107964/

Days after the interview with Manager Magazin, Blume was also interviewed by Automotive News Europe. In that interview he insinuated that the iconic 911 must walk a fine line between its prized heritage and the perception it’s an anachronism in a world well aware of the threat posed by climate change. It apparently won’t go full electric in the same sort of timeframe as the Macan, and in fact the mooted plug-in hybrid 911 is postponed at the very least.

“Maybe depending on how big the battery is and the electronic system, you might have to give up the two seats in the rear and we are sure this is not a 911 anymore.”

Krickelberg said it wasn’t only the space the system would eat up, but the weight it would add that concerned Porsche.

“A hybrid system means you have two engine systems; a combustion engine and an electric engine; two storage systems, a fuel tank and a battery,” he said.

“Therefore you need space and weight, additional weight. We are, to be honest, not sure because this is a 911. So we haven’t made a decision, although we work on it.”

When is a 911 not a 911? C'mon Porsche , admit it - the icon is in terminal decline. 

Edited 11July, 2017 by tazzieman

[ANF]

I think the point is fast approaching where us enthusiasts can only look back and not forward anymore....

[tazzieman]

EVs will all eventually have the same boxes of tricks & morph towards the same shape, so how will folk decide what to buy? In a world with a burgeoning sex robot industry , it's probably better to live in the past 

[LeeM]

The world has gone to hell in a hand basket!!!!!

Hand BAG with a soy latte and veggie burger more like it

[Coastr]

So stick with one engine, geniuses!

All the worlds 911s running together at full throttle would equal the emissions output of one container ship idling in a port for a minute.

Yet this idiocy continues apace.  It really is the fun police hunting down their targets, and nothing more.

“A hybrid system means you have two engine systems; a combustion engine and an electric engine; two storage systems, a fuel tank and a battery,” he said.

“Therefore you need space and weight, additional weight. We are, to be honest, not sure because this is a 911. So we haven’t made a decision, although we work on it.”

[Simonk]

Is there an expectation that every household will eventually have one or two power posts in their driveway to charge their cars? Are people that park on the street going to be running extension chords out their front doors.   While councils push condensed living in the suburbs, forcing more cars onto the street, will they be installing charging polls along the street. People won't always be able to park out the front of their house so how are they going to plug in each night. I know run times and charging times are getting quicker but it would seem a 3 hour trip to the snow in the Macan might leave you getting the bus back home. I can't see Grollo installing 1,000 charging stations in the day car park at Mt Buller...

[Coastr]

I'm pretty sure this will turn out to be 'aspirational' and won't actually happen.  Back when the Audi R8 was launched there was fanfare about an all-electric version.  In fact most of the articles written featured the electric version.  Same with the AMG SLS.  Where are those cars now?  Back in storage, their job of stealing PR and headlines complete.

the next gen Macan will have a petrol engine, take it to the bank.

If anything is ripe for an electric version it is the Boxster.  The smallest cars with the least load carrying capacity are the best choice for electric models.

[tazzieman]

It will be like choosing batteries at the hardware store. Depends how much you are prepared pay for the brand.

[Airhead]

This might force the issue.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-26/uk-to-ban-sales-of-petrol-diesel-fuelled-cars-from-2040-reports/8744076

 

[Simonk]

This might force the issue.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-26/uk-to-ban-sales-of-petrol-diesel-fuelled-cars-from-2040-reports/8744076

 

Manufacturers are moving a lot faster than 23 years. At least this gives plenty of time to develop the correct infrastructure or have workable technology by then.

[tazzieman]

This might force the issue.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-26/uk-to-ban-sales-of-petrol-diesel-fuelled-cars-from-2040-reports/8744076

Doesn't say you can drive a classic though ;<) Although the next generation wasting electrons on snapchat will be "offended" if you do.

[Philbee]

La la la la la la la la la ...... Not listening!

[Coastr]

Just to let you know LA was going to 'ban' petrol cars by 2005 or something - hence the gm ev1 was created.  If you can sit through the dirge of 'who killed the electric car' it has the story.

Basically politicians like making announcements knowing full well they will be retired or dead when the time comes.  Cars will still be mostly petrol in 20 years time just like they were 20,40,60 and 80 years ago.

As commented in the other thread 'ya cannae change the laws of physics'

 

 

[Cars And Coffee Byron Bay]

This might force the issue.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-07-26/uk-to-ban-sales-of-petrol-diesel-fuelled-cars-from-2040-reports/8744076

 

surely Sir Humphrey was advising the Minister?       (ref Yes Minister)

[Coastr]

The more things change....the more they stay the same

Back when a 993 was the latest and greatest thing and bill Clinton was chasing interns around the Oval Office the California air resources board was busy mandating zero emissions vehicles standards...

 

Instead of creating a single vehicle emissions standard, the LEV regulation deviated from prior regulations by creating four different emissions performance levels that would meet the program’s requirements, including the ZEV category (Collantes, 2006). Therefore, the original 1990 ZEV mandate was an important component of the larger LEV program, and was designed as a technology forcing policy. It required progressive increments in the sales volume of EVs; two percent of new vehicle sales by major manufacturers, companies with total sales over 35,000 units annually, were required to be ZEVs by 1998, and 10% by 2003. Even though electric vehicle battery technology was relatively immature, the mandate was intended to accelerate the development and deployment of these types of vehicles (Collantes, 2006).

at the time the adults in the room were trying to tell them, but were shouted down as naysayers and vested interests:

However, in workshops organized by CARB (California Air Resources Board), most automakers strongly opposed the ZEV proposal. Chrysler argued during the public hearing of September 1990 that the ZEV program would fail because the “technology-forcing” standards could not bring forth the innovations needed in the required timeframe. CARB believed based on past experience with emission control technology that such advances were possible. To pursue adoption of a regulation, CARB’s staff usually prefers to have support from at least one major auto manufacturer. The 2 percent ZEV quote in 1998 seemed feasible to CARB at the time

 So we see the same thing time and time again - a government body decides to legislate that water will run uphill, and the media breathlessly reports it as a new reality that will just happen because a person in a building wrote it down on a piece of paper.  The CARB has a half-billion dollar annual budget and has been pushing this for over 30 years and is so far behind it's own targets it's a running joke.   The UK decides it is going to achieve a 100% target in 20 years when california has struggled to get to 2% 20 years after it's initial target.  The Californian market is one of the most important in the world.  It has no chance of meeting the new targets of 15% by 2025.  All this despite billions of dollars thrown at infratructure, handouts for early adopters, allowing ZEV (and ULEV) cars to use the carpooling lane - all approaches which are not remotely scalable.  And all this is done in an area where air pollution is easily visible by the person on the street.  While the UK is a polluted filth-hole it doesn't generally have a problem with smog from vehicles because of the weather.  Getting the citizens to pick up their rubbish however....

I don't know where this type of idiocy springs from - i swear governments nowadays are filled with mush-headed conspiracy theorists who soak themselves in the far corners of the internet where people tell each other that 'GM has the technology for cars that do 1000 miles per gallon, but they won't release it because they will make more profit!'  

So relax and don't worry about being forced to choose between electric car a and electric car b.  While electric cars are going to be a more important part of the transportation mix - something I think is a good idea, particularly for congested cities (noise and air pollution) - there is 0% chance that these kinds of mandates are going to be a reality.  So the marketing positioning from Porsche and Volvo and the others is just that.  Roll out an electric for the cameras and the headlines, then quietly sell 100x more conventionally fueled cars to the public, who can do the sums just fine.  If called on the original statement from 5 or 10 years ago (which they will not) they would just answer 'unfortunately the technology has not advanced sufficiently yet'

AKA 'you cannae change the laws of physics' as already stated.  Maybe that will be my new catchphrase.

Edited 26July, 2017 by Coastr
formatting...formatting

[ANF]

[LeeM]

 @Coastr Damn mate, that was awesome! Bravo