Keith Tanner said:If you want to see the hornet's nest, you want to check out the Sony EV thread...
It didn't seem like a hornet's nest if you avoid the one troll?
Keith Tanner said:If you want to see the hornet's nest, you want to check out the Sony EV thread...
It didn't seem like a hornet's nest if you avoid the one troll?
Keith Tanner said:The 924/944 were based on a VW platform, no? The fact that you can put Super Beetle parts on a 944 makes me very happy. And the Cayenne and the Touraeg are platform buddies. Or are those the crossovers you reference?
Porsche is planning on sharing a platform with Audi for electrics. I guess it depends on how much you separate Audi from VW, but they are the A in VAG :)
I do find the "make it super cheap!" requests interesting for both a Porsche and an EV. There is obviously still a large number of people who think the only reason for an EV is to be as cheap as possible to buy and run, and the 944/Boxster category has defined the bottom of the Porsche price range for a generation. Why would they go cheaper for an EV? They're not aiming to take the oh-so-desirable Bolt/Kona/500e market. This theoretical car would sit in an interesting spot in the market, an electric Porsche for people who would otherwise consider a Boxster. Like the way the Model 3 is for people who would otherwise consider a BMW 3 series. Or 4, or whatever BMW calls their sporty sedans this week.
I mean, yes, that's what I was saying. The 924 et al are the last time a Porsche sports car was badge engineered from elsewhere. Honestly, I said 40, but that was more than 40 years ago, and even then, there was no non-Porsche product, even if the project started at VW. AFAIK, the sports cars since... 928, 959, Carrera GT, 918, Boxster, Cayman, and everything that ever wore the 911 badge was exclusive to Porsche. The 2nd gen Panamera sits under some Bentleys. The Cayman and Macan share with a bunch of VAG crossovers.
My point was that engineering a sports car out of a platform that underpins non-sports cars has informative precident from the Audi TT.
It was the Cayenne I didn't see - I consider it an SUV instead of a crossover. Really, every current Porsche except the Boxster and 911 is a platform share. The stay an as well, I suppose. But it has been a long time since one of the sporty cars was shared, that's true.
I love the idea, however for "regular" folks that cant have a daily driver and a "novelty car" I just don't see the reality of full time, one car EV ownership yet. When they get to 3-400 mile ranges and can be a genuine option instead of a combustion engine Ill begin to entertain the idea for such cars. Yes, they seem great for people that commute 20 miles to work and have a second car for road trips or live in a city etc.
I don't fly...anywhere. I live in NC, Ill be driving the quick 10 hours to Daytona next week, I drove to San Diego in 2.5 days for my brothers wedding, turned around and came home, my family is all in Connecticut. I want to be able to make those trips with an EV, right now its not possible and its not possible to have 2 cars. I feel like part of the point to owning an EV is not just the "look at me I have an EV" but because of morals for reducing consumption of fuel. However, when a car is only going 140 miles, you're putting a lot of stock in airlines if it happens to be your only car. Seems counter productive.
I think we are at a turning point and the day will come, maybe in 10 years when they can be a day to day full time viable option and for the record, I look forward to that day. For now, things like the Chevy Volt, Kia Niro and such have my attention.
Keith Tanner....an EV Locost? Seems like a fun project. What do you think?
Hopefully I'll see some of you at the 24. Ill be there early Thursday a.m.
Hmm ... I didn't think about the TT. I could definitely see a platform shared between the TT and a similar sized Porsche model. And maybe, just maybe, a Scirocco version from VW.
I disagree about the non-viability of an EV as an only car, but that subject has been hashed out many times. The Porsches would be the hardest if constant cross-country driving is the goal, as they are the least efficient EVs on the market. But Porsche sports cars have never been at their best as an only car.
I”m not sure about an EV Locost. The attributes of an electric are at odds with what makes a Locost fun instead of annoying. I would love an EV version of my old Cadillac. That’s what Cadillac was basically aiming for.
In reply to JStrobel80 :
Nobody buys a Porsche 914 (or Boxster, or Cayman) to be their only car. They're always second, "toy" cars. An electric one sounds perfect to me.
JStrobel80 said:I love the idea, however for "regular" folks that cant have a daily driver and a "novelty car" I just don't see the reality of full time, one car EV ownership yet. When they get to 3-400 mile ranges and can be a genuine option instead of a combustion engine Ill begin to entertain the idea for such cars. Yes, they seem great for people that commute 20 miles to work and have a second car for road trips or live in a city etc.
I don't fly...anywhere. I live in NC, Ill be driving the quick 10 hours to Daytona next week, I drove to San Diego in 2.5 days for my brothers wedding, turned around and came home, my family is all in Connecticut. I want to be able to make those trips with an EV, right now its not possible and its not possible to have 2 cars. I feel like part of the point to owning an EV is not just the "look at me I have an EV" but because of morals for reducing consumption of fuel. However, when a car is only going 140 miles, you're putting a lot of stock in airlines if it happens to be your only car. Seems counter productive.
I think we are at a turning point and the day will come, maybe in 10 years when they can be a day to day full time viable option and for the record, I look forward to that day. For now, things like the Chevy Volt, Kia Niro and such have my attention.
Keith Tanner....an EV Locost? Seems like a fun project. What do you think?
Hopefully I'll see some of you at the 24. Ill be there early Thursday a.m.
I don't think your driving habits are the norm and as such manufacturers won't be gearing there design criteria at your demograhic.
dyintorace said:nimblemotorsports said:DId someone say retro cars are dead now? VW is supposed to produce the EV van again..and not super expensive.
I sure hope this one makes it to market. We'd seriously consider one to replace my wife's i3 when the time comes.
If you like the I3, it's no wonder you like this.
In reply to dculberson :
I agree with you completely. Im saying EVs as a whole, even a Nissan Leaf, if that's your only car its very limiting. I guess my argument was more towards the whole picture, not just the 914 EV. I look forward to the day when I can use an EV in a manner like a combustion engine car.
Also, for the record, Im definitely not against them, I think the 914 EV is an amazing idea. Thanks for the discussion :)
It would be an interesting experiment to log your actual daily use and see how it would align with an EV. I suspect that, other than random and rare cross-country blasts, it would work just fine. I’ve done 300 mile city-to-city trips in one without any hardship and I know that driving to Las Vegas from here (500 miles across Utah and Nevada desert and mountains) would be the same trip in an EV as it is in my diesel truck with a trailer on the back. There are certainly situations where it would present limitations, but they are pretty unusual in reality.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
Agreed. For my normal commute to the office and general life at home, an EV would cover nearly all of my driving needs.
Right now, however, an EV would be difficult. Every 2-3 weeks I commute 350-400 miles (depending on the route) from home to a client site and live in a hotel. Although I could adjust the drive to make it shorter and be able to stop at a couple of charging stations, charging the car at the hotel would be a challenge as none of the client-approved hotels have charging stations at this time and there are few of them in the immediate area (I've looked).
In that case, does it make more sense to fly and rent a car or use taxi/Ubers? A 400 mile trip is time-intensive and not free. IIRC the federal mileage rate is roughly 50c/mile to cover maintenance and fuel, so using that we're looking at $200 plus 5 hours of windshield time each way where you're not doing anything worthwhile.
JStrobel80 said:In reply to dculberson :
I agree with you completely. Im saying EVs as a whole, even a Nissan Leaf, if that's your only car its very limiting. I guess my argument was more towards the whole picture, not just the 914 EV. I look forward to the day when I can use an EV in a manner like a combustion engine car.
Can't say I agree. People have been using their EVs in a manner like a combustion engine car since the Leaf debuted back in 2011. I dailied an early 'short range' EV from 2015-2018, and multiple family members of mine have as well. Our cars were small five-door hatchbacks (Leafs and a Soul) and we all found them to be surprisingly practical for nearly all of our daily driving needs.
Current-gen EVs are faster, more comfortable and have more than double the range than the car I leased. For example, my mother in law swears that her Tesla Model 3 Performance is the best car she's ever owned. It does everything she needs as her only car. It makes her driving easier in DC traffic, yet at the same time is an autocross monster straight off the showroom floor.
The big road trips my family takes every year in our minivan are from Atlanta to Orlando or Washington DC. I have kids, so these trips have to include multiple stops to get out for meals and potty breaks--so stopping every few hours to high-speed charge an EV would make no difference to us. Given that EV trucks are now on the horizon, there are fewer and fewer use cases that EVs can't fulfill.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I think you're probably right, MOST average daily use Im sure it would work. I generally drive about 90 miles a day for work and most weekends I take a 3+ hour trip to see things, like Asheville, or Road Atlanta etc. So Im sure it would work out.
While Im camping in the West Campground of Daytona next week, ill keep an eye out of EVs and talk to the owners to see what realities they deal with. Ill report back after that!
In reply to nderwater :
Thanks for the insight, I appreciate it. This is all good info and allowing me to be less ignorant on the realities of EV ownership haha. Ill keep looking into it and talking with more people that own them.
Keith Tanner said:In that case, does it make more sense to fly and rent a car or use taxi/Ubers? A 400 mile trip is time-intensive and not free. IIRC the federal mileage rate is roughly 50c/mile to cover maintenance and fuel, so using that we're looking at $200 plus 5 hours of windshield time each way where you're not doing anything worthwhile.
Debatable. Most of my coworkers who come up here for meetings and whatnot do fly, but it doesn't really save much time and it's definitely more expensive than the ~$250 it costs for mileage and tolls. When I'm here it's only $4 for my drive from the hotel to the site. Plus, I can bring whatever I want with me without airline restrictions - important when I'm here for 3 weeks at a time. I'll bring bikes to go riding on the weekends and skis in the Winter (if we ever get any snow around here...). Plus a guitar, books, food, etc. And I'm in NH (no sales tax) so I can buy stuff to take home.
Flying still pretty much kills the entire day by the time I drive to the Philly airport (1 hr drive, two hrs early), fly to Boston or Manchester, get luggage, get to the rental car, then drive an hour to the hotel. Since the client doesn't want to pay me OT, then my travel days are billable hours. Since 9/11, I absolutely detest flying. All of the pointless security B.S. makes it more trouble than it's worth to me. So if I have to go somewhere that is within a day's drive (sometimes more), I take that option.
In reply to Ian F :
I agree. Before I decided to stop flying, anything within 6ish hours isnt worth flying. In a world of constantly being attacked by work emails, calls, to do lists etc, its nice to get in the car and drive an easy 6 hours and check out. And...as you said, billable hours :)
Fair enough, it was worth asking. I flew to Vegas for SEMA this year instead of driving because it was considerably faster than driving 500 miles on empty 80 mph speed limit roads, then used the public/show transport options so I didn't have to deal with driving into the show and paying the exorbitant parking prices. Simply looking at alternatives. We've built our habits and expectations around the capabilities of the tools at hand, and changing those tools sometimes means reexamining those habits.
In reply to Keith Tanner :
I agree it depends on the situation. For SEMA I would probably fly as well if I was only going out there for that event.
The annoying part is I am literally about a mile away from an airport large enough to land any commercial airliner. But the one carrier that was flying out of here stopped service last year due to lack of business. And they only connected to Florida.
Hell... paying $12/day for parking near the Philly airport would be brutal although I have taken the train from my house to the terminal. Takes about two hours to do that, however, since it's not a direct train. Flying takes less time only when nothing goes wrong, which here in the Northeast is definitely not a given and even less so in Winter.
I don't see why anyone thinks the difference from 200-400 miles in range is significant. If you charge every day then there is an extremely low number of people who drive that much (200+) in one day without explicitly getting paid for it. And if you're talking about going on a road trip, what is the difference between stopping for basically a whole day every 200 miles, or every 400 miles? You're still stopping for more or less a whole day so often that you just WONT use it for that road trip. So going from 200-400 doesn't solve that issue. Faster charging solves that issue. Porsche is doing things in that direction, and if they make a 200mi car that can fully charge in 20 minutes, they will do a lot more to address 'range anxiety' than if they had a 400mi car that took 6+ hours to charge. The charging rate is far more important than the non-stop distance if you want to talk about long-distance driving.
In reply to Vigo :
Not to mention that you need twice as much battery to go 400 miles as you would to go 200 miles. That's twice the weight, cost, and space allocated to the battery in a vehicle.
Vigo said:I don't see why anyone thinks the difference from 200-400 miles in range is significant. If you charge every day then there is an extremely low number of people who drive that much (200+) in one day without explicitly getting paid for it. And if you're talking about going on a road trip, what is the difference between stopping for basically a whole day every 200 miles, or every 400 miles? You're still stopping for more or less a whole day so often that you just WONT use it for that road trip. So going from 200-400 doesn't solve that issue. Faster charging solves that issue. Porsche is doing things in that direction, and if they make a 200mi car that can fully charge in 20 minutes, they will do a lot more to address 'range anxiety' than if they had a 400mi car that took 6+ hours to charge. The charging rate is far more important than the non-stop distance if you want to talk about long-distance driving.
Note that the best selling EV in the world has a 200 mile range with a charging time of 20-30 minutes. I agree that charging speed is paramount for road trips - but a lot of people also think it's important for day to day use. That's because there's a change in how EVs operate versus ICE vehicles - the EV starts every day with a full charge, but it's pretty common to assume it works like a gas car where you run it down and then go to a special refueling location.
In reply to Vigo :
I'd say 100 miles range and 5 minute recharge. I'd tolerate a fuel-stop every 100 miles to save $10k and get faster car. If long drive was often, I'd not be using a 914 for that.
Half the battery weight and cost and space than 200 miles. And a car lighter and faster...what a 914 should be.
You'll need to log in to post.
