JSF101

Agree with all of the below. You have to wonder when the "up the ante horsepower" with every model is going to end. And when the "amazing sound" of the NA motors will cease as well.
Much rather have lightweight and amazing sound than 525hp, 550hp, 575hp, etc Guess we'll see shortly whether GT4/Spyder still have the amazing sound and stay lightweight
seems kinda funny that I've had a Boxster (200hp, momentum car), Cayman S (295 hp, momentum car), Spyder (320hp, momentum car) and now GT4 (385 hp, momentum car)….you can never have enough horsepower!
the trend is in the opposite direction and I don't think it will be long before no more lightweight, no more amazing sound...it's called electric!

n4v4nod

watch the press conference... he states three defined areas where Porsche will focus:

hf1

I just don't get it. Isn't going lightweight one of the best ways to go "green" and "planet-friendly" which seems to be all the rage with current trends and regulations? What better way to "save the planet" than to have LESS mass to move around? Isn't it counterproductive (nay, retarded?) to make ever heavier cars with ever more HP which then have to be choked with particulate filters and make them sound like vacuum cleaners to make them "planet-friendly"? What am I missing?

Suitcase

I'm in total agreement. Many years ago I was an auto emissions engineer. I always believed the environmental move forward was lighter vehicles combined with smaller more efficient internal combustion motors. Manufacturers have been trying to make electric cars work for a hundred plus years. So far it hasn't.

Fast forward the last decade. In response to global warming the public and politicians have legislated, especially in Europe, for automobile companies to become electric car companies. Many executives at Porsche have said to me, "we have no choice." Meanwhile, Porsche has "bet the farm" on the success of what is still an unproven technology in the real world. Are people really going to wait around at a communal table drinking coffee for a half hour while their car charges? And what about the charging station 150 miles west of Des Moines? Who pays for it? And the cost and environmental impact of the electricity to charge the car? And the toxic production of batteries? And the disposal of the batteries? And the value of your 5 year old car when the battery costs more than the car is worth? Meanwhile, lightweight composite materials keep stronger stronger and cheaper.

Over the years I've been asked "what is the greenest car in the world? Prius? Tesla?" I would tell them there is only one answer. A Porsche 911. No one ever throws one away. No one ever throws a part away, not even a broken part. It's far "greener" to drive your 12 year old 996 than to junk your 7 year old Tesla for a new one. The cost to the environment (and your wallet) of manufacturing and then re-manufacturing any product with a shorter life cycle is far more detrimental to the environment than a more sustainable product. But this is not the way it's going. Think of the battery degradation in your phone over two years. Last August I decided late on a Saturday to drive my 25 year old 964 Speedster across the US for a PCNA Cocktail party the following Thursday in Pebble Beach, California.. No special prep. 1/2 qt. of oil, check the tires, RainX on the wind screen and I'm ready. Early Monday I'm in the car in West Palm Beach and I'm at the party on Thursday. Two 1350 mile days. 137 mph as indicated on my radar detector. To me, this is green. Think of the true environmental cost of all the cars I didn't need to buy over 25 years. I hope that my 981 Spyder is still going strong and is serviceable in 25 years. I suggest that we consider that Quality = Sustainability = Green.

Marine Blue

You’ve hit the nail square on the head. This has been my biggest issue with modern sports cars since the mid 2000’s. Why can’t manufacturers focus on reducing weight rather than adding electronic wizardry. If we only care about the numbers then the manufacturers are definitely headed in the right direction, If however we focus on the experience, the current generation of cars leaves lots to be desired.

ekam

Because of ever increasing crash safety as well as emission standards that cause vehicles to gain weight.

More airbags, more particulate filters, etc etc...

https://newsroom.porsche.com/fallbac...388-16349.html

Same reason why nobody can drive with their arm resting on the driver's door in their 981 anymore because the door height keeps getting higher because of crash safety.

unclemat

Hasn't seen this posted.

fast1

Classic example of cognitive dissonance. The majority of "soccer moms" are ardent proponents of "green" policies, yet their vehicle of choice is a 5K+ lb SUV. One of my neighbors is an ardent supporter of AOC, yet she sees no contradiction in driving a 6700 lb Silverado.

fast1

Although 8 year warranties on electric car batteries is the standard, the replacement cost is substantial. The current list price of a Chevy Bolt EV HV battery pack is $15,734.29 and the part number is 24285978, and then there's the installation cost. That's nearly 50% of its MSRP. So how much will buyers be willing to pay for an electric car when it's near its warranty expiration?

hf1

Yep, as suspected all along...

Electric Car-Owners Shocked: New Study Confirms EVs Considerably Worse For Climate Than Diesel Cars
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-...te-diesel-cars

Closertotruth

This really shouldn’t surprise anyone. Nuclear is actually the most “green” energy but most folks find that hard to believe.
https://quillette.com/2019/02/27/why...ve-the-planet/

Gravs

It's quite hard to know who to believe. This may be biased in some way. I have to say that it doesn't 'feel' right that batteries as the way to go. They're so heavy and are so expensive to make (although they could be 95% profit for all I know). I prefer the idea of methane or some sort of fuel that burns without significant emissions. Seems to make more sense. If every car was suddenly battery powered tomorrow think of all the batteries, all the chargers, all the power stations etc etc etc we'd need.

Nuclear reactor cars yes.

Marine Blue

The manufacturing process to make batteries is highly energy intensive which is the biggest issue. Recycling these batteries is also energy intensive. By the time you take all this into consideration gas engines are still more efficient although it took nearly 100 years to get there. So perhaps with time battery technology will improve assuming we continue down that path.

Hydrogen would be a great alternative for the environment but that process is also heavily underdeveloped.

MidEngineRules

BMW was leading the way in hydrogen ICE development, but EV took a stronger foot hold and I can only imagine they've abandoned their efforts at this point. The problem with hydrogen is that you need a nuclear reactor to produce the fuel. Don't think the US and other nuclear states want to see nuclear reactors producing hydrogen fuel all over the world.

I agree with going lighter with cars as important, but we would need to increase public safety first. Speed limiting big rigs to 62 mph (like in Germany) would be a good start.

Zeus993

But wait!

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/autos/news...1DZdKvNthDCVgA