Notices
992 This Forum for the turbocharged non Turbo 911
Sponsored by:
Sponsored by:

2020 NEXT GENERATION 992 SPY PICS & RELEASE

 
Old 01-28-2018, 10:54 PM
  #931  
urbanscribe
User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fairfield County, CT
Posts: 171
Default

The average US car is used on average 3.6% of the time. You can deliver 4 times the seat-miles even In Wyoming with one quarter the cars.

Of course that's in 30 years when it's all played out. In our life times we will see on/off autonomous to get onto 95 or urban centers.

We're safe for a while but let's not fool ourselves that most who spend the US average 9000$ a year on personal cars won't be running to replace their already bland transportation for on demand TaaS.

We live in a (great) cocoon but we share the infrastructure with much bigger forces at play.

Let's enjoy those cars while we can which is likely a while.
urbanscribe is offline  
Old 01-28-2018, 10:57 PM
  #932  
urbanscribe
User
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Fairfield County, CT
Posts: 171
Default

Stout.

Reminds me how fuel cells have been, remain and will be for a long time the automobile technology of the future...
urbanscribe is offline  
Old 01-28-2018, 11:01 PM
  #933  
Noah Fect
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Noah Fect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,599
Default



Originally Posted by 911-TOUR View Post
I, for one, don't think this is going to happen. Autonomy means going where I want, when I want. Perhaps some folks will be happy to operate with an "uber-like" on-demand service, but many (I dare say most!) will not. Three times in the last 18 hours I've had an errand come up that couldn't wait. Twiddling my thumbs waiting for an on demand service to handle a 10 minute errand would have been infuriating.!
The thing is, though, with Uber, you frequently need to twiddle your thumbs for only about two or three minutes. Thumb-twiddling went out with the taxi cartels.

And that's before the concept really becomes ubiquitous in society.

My guess is that within 15 years, maybe 20 at the outside, owning a car will be comparable to owning a horse. Privately-owned cars will not vanish entirely, but they will be reserved to those who are passionate about them and have a place to exercise them and the means to look after them. And if you drive one into a major metro area, you're going to encounter strange looks at best and legal problems at worst.

Noah Fect is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 12:24 AM
  #934  
Papa Fittig
User
 
Papa Fittig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,026
Default

Originally Posted by stout View Post
Uh, I live in the place it's supposed to be coming from, but I don't know it is going to happen or is even happening already. Don't get me wrong: I am not saying I am right, or that it is not happening. Nor have I missed the various headlines from governmental bodies on new legislation, the tech sector, or the marketing on innovations from automakersóbut I find it remarkably difficult to say "it is going to happen" (especially on a stated timeline) while the tech is still-half-baked and several serious questions remain unanswered. I mean, we are dealing with a remarkable existing network of roads and a truly massive existing vehicle fleet...

I think autonomous cars are coming in one fashion or another, but I am not sure it's going to look like any of us think it will. I am also skeptical about the timeline. Maybe I will be proven wrong, but I think we have more than a few years left. If I had to guess, I'd probably say 10-20 years minimum and maybe more like 15-30 years before people aren't allowed to drive their cars...if and only if there are viable solutions for rural and semi-rural areas.
I sure hope you are right and your timeline skepticism will prove correct. Just living close to Google/Goodle X and seeing tens of self-driving cars everyday makes me aware of the progress technology made.
Here is ex Google self-driving tech division car.

I saw literally hundreds of them on public roads.

Take a look inside:

and this Google division is now a Waymo company. Here is from them:
"4 million miles self driven. We drive 25,000 autonomous miles each week...We continue to drive every day on public roads. Now, weíre inviting residents in Phoenix, AZ to join the first public trial of our self-driving cars"
It is happening Pete, it really is. And it isn't a bad thing. It is just a transforming technology and better be aware and act accordingly. This is perhaps the biggest change since a horse to car transition.
Papa Fittig is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 01:24 AM
  #935  
Dewinator
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Dewinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,053
Default

Originally Posted by urbanscribe View Post
The average US car is used on average 3.6% of the time. You can deliver 4 times the seat-miles even In Wyoming with one quarter the cars.
I see this sort of fake math a lot but it doesnít take into account the fact that for cars that are driven regularly, maintenance and lifcycle costs are much more closely correlated to miles driven than vehicle age. Letís take a look at the other cost factors:

Initial investment: would be much lower for taas if not for the fact that there are millions of cars already out there. So no big advantage.

Insurance: liability also tends to vary with miles driven. Much lower for autonomous cars of course, but this applies whether the vehicle is sold or the transportation is sold.

Registration/tax/fees: Ultimately the government needs these revenues to maintain the roads, so if private registration went way down the taxes on the service vehicles would have to go way up to make up for it, making it a wash.

Maintenance: again varies with miles so no change.

Energy cost: actually less if youíre driving your own car, because it stops and turns off where you do and therefore drives less empty miles.

Cleaning/etc: clearly much more for the autonomous taas vehicles because people arenít going to care about them and are going to leave trash in them, get them dirty and generally treat them like crap. Consider how much more time is spent cleaning hotel rooms per hour of occupation than your home? Yeah taas would be exactly the same way.

Parking: Ok hereís the big killer lifesaver for the idea of taas. Yes you could dramatically cut down on the space required to store vehicles, allowing cities to be yet even more densly populated, disgusting and more miserable. Yay.

At the end of the day, selling transportation as a service is another stupid wild-eyed scheme that will have some urban takers but not change the greater fact that except in the densest urban areas, having your own car is simply the most efficient and effectively way to get around.

Self driving cars will of course be the next big thing, and itíll be super cool to be able to have Siri take you home from the bar if you have one too many, but people with the means to do so will continue to purchase their own vehicles for the foreseeable future. Taas will be a thing but no more likely to kill the personal vehicle than hotels are to kill the personal residence.
Dewinator is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 04:07 AM
  #936  
Noah Fect
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Noah Fect's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 1,599
Default



Originally Posted by Dewinator View Post
Taas will be a thing but no more likely to kill the personal vehicle than hotels are to kill the personal residence.

If anything, it'll be the other way around. Ask any hotel guy what he thinks about AirBnB.

As pointed out elsewhere in the thread, most privately-owned cars are parked someplace doing nothing 95+% of the time. Those who own their own self-driving cars will be incentivized to rent them out on demand via an app. You have to admit, it'll be nice when cars turn into an asset instead of a liability.

This is probably why Uber has a higher market cap than GM, Ford, and most of the S&P 500...

Last edited by Noah Fect; 01-29-2018 at 12:55 PM.
Noah Fect is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 06:16 AM
  #937  
K-A
Super User
 
K-A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,181
Default

Originally Posted by STG View Post
Porsche is in the business of trying to convince us what we should be buying.

BMW managed to screw things up. History is full of examples.

Mission E?? No thanks. I'll pass. They have a lot of $$ going into this thing. They'll market the hell out of it. If it flops, they're screwed.

By the way, will look more like a Panamera. Don't expect the white futuristic one they showed a while back.
Interestingly, almost 2 years ago, I participated in a Porsche research event (conducted by Porsche). Got to see tons of concepts, ideas, and even the production version of the Mission E (no real cars though, all renders). I'm not "supposed" to say what I saw, but I'm sure it's not revealing a lot when I say it had a HUGE prevalence on EV's (likely the whole thing was to see how warmed up we'd be to the EV concepts). I'll just say that now that it's been put out there, mixed with what I saw..... the 718's being phased out make sense (with a replacement). I've always thought that turbos in their modern implementation (think: since they actually started being used to better MPG) are a bridge between N/A and EV's (still combustion, but strive to provide power like EV's, especially with rapid shifting DCT's moving so efficiently, you'd think it was an EV). And 4 cylinders to me are more pointless now than ever, as they don't provide that soul/sound and character some of us cherish from ICE cars. The 4 cylinder turbo like the one in the 718 feels so much like an EV in its torquey and effortless acceleration (despite some turbo lag), yet it loses the auditory quality (arguably the only thing about an ICE car now, or soon, that reigns supreme over where EV's are or will very soon be). So, what's the point? To me, if it's between a 4 cylinder, I'd rather go EV. I'm frustrated enough with the purported homogenizing the GT3 to another turbo; I'm at the point where if it's between a flat six turbo, or EV, I'd just throw my hands up and accept automotive soulless oblivion and go EV. But that's just me. And who knows if I like the 992 and change, or more likely compromise my tune. Right now I just don't like the direction. I simply and personally prefer ICE cars to feel like ICE cars (flaws, loudness, lack of relative torque, and all). But this "ICE to feel like EV" movement, to me, just drives home how we're in this last bastion of ICE that's trying to be what will inevitably replace, and easily outperform it. I guess best way to put it is that it's about "charm" over logistics.



Originally Posted by phow View Post


993? Are you referring to the next 911 after the 992? The 993 is already an existing 911 version (1994-1998).


My bad, I just typed the next number without thinking. I meant whatever the successor would be.

Originally Posted by Papa Fittig View Post
Not to sound too negative, but these were steps taken by Porsche towards the 991 era dawn.
991.1 is as far as I went along with them (with exception of GT3 Touring, which I still would love to have). Not sure if I will be interested in new 911 gens they planning going forward. If I wanted an electric motor I'd go Tesla. Esp. if they give me a real roadster.
And perhaps I am too old, but to me there is nothing wrong with exhaust pipes hanging below the bumper..
Agreed. I'm too emotion driven when it comes to cars. I simply don't want a Porsche EV. I look at the Porsche design, tach, I need a screaming motor to feel the experience that makes it worth why I'm spending money on it. The Mission E looks awesome, but I just don't feel myself excited about it.
K-A is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 03:17 PM
  #938  
PantsFire
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
PantsFire's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Location: The High Peak
Posts: 367
Default

Originally Posted by OC 991 View Post


Come on guys...
It's got the hood and (integrated) fender flares of a GT3RS (sans vents/grills).
And you get to have the hips of the GT3RS (again sans vents).
You get the design previously exclusively reserved for an upper echelon (best of best) model... what's not to like!?
The GT3RS is an exaggerated 911, I like it but it's not subtle in any way so I'm not sure about the 992 at all, hopefully the mule is just that and the finished product is more refined, more balanced.
PantsFire is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 04:05 PM
  #939  
Highway2Hell
User
 
Highway2Hell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Winter Haven, FL
Posts: 45
Default

I keep looking at this post every day. I'm hoping to see more refined photos starting to coming out. I'll quote what I said in another post: "Just not sold on the looks of the 992 at the moment. The 992 looks more like a female body builder on steroids. Big arms and legs with lots of chiseled edges instead of those smooth feminine lines!"

It looks like it moves pretty good on the track on some of those YouTube videos.
Interior might be the biggest change. But..., at least there are no "fried egg" headlights.
Highway2Hell is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 06:19 PM
  #940  
911-TOUR
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
911-TOUR's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: At the outer marker...
Posts: 1,195
Default

Originally Posted by Noah Fect View Post
The thing is, though, with Uber, you frequently need to twiddle your thumbs for only about two or three minutes. Thumb-twiddling went out with the taxi cartels.
Maybe in certain places. But where I live - inside of Houston proper (not a suburb) - Uber is *at best* an 8-10 min wait, and usually more like 15. Here, in my locale, there isn't enough demand to keep drivers circling looking for fares (especially on a Sat/Sun). They all head for the airport or park-n-ride drop offs. Maybe I'm a chowderhead, but about the only thing on-demand services work for in my experience is replacing taxi cartels (more cheaply).

cheers!
911-TOUR is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 09:50 PM
  #941  
RRDnA
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Posts: 375
Default

The best selling vehicles in the US are, its a rhetorical question..................has anyone asked the guys and gals that drive them what sort of future they want?

The move to EVs and driverless cars will be generational for many reasons including technical, infrastructure related not to mention household budgets and income.

For many the move to government mandated/controlled driverless cars will represent a huge loss of freedom, freedom to travel, freedom of association etc.

The willingness of people to share their personal information, willingly and of often unknowingly in the age of the internet is breathtaking.

Non of this has anything to do with the 992 or Mission E - Porsche will move with the market and if the market demands EVs Porsche will make them. They will be some of the best performing, best handling vehicles in the world, they will demonstrate the abilities through motorsport e.g Formula E.

Will I buy one, probably not but another generation will.
RRDnA is offline  
Old 01-29-2018, 11:45 PM
  #942  
chuck911
Super User
 
chuck911's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 4,518
Default

Porsche has not "moved with the market". The market emphatically does NOT want turbo's. When has anyone ever seen any automotive reviewer extolling the virtues of turbocharging? Where were all the people clamoring for smaller turbo'd Porsches"? Nowhere. Only with the Turbo and GT2RS does the turbo get any respect, which even then its not really the turbo but the POWER of these cars- including the powerful brakes and handling. No. Porsche is emphatically NOT following the market. Porsche is following the REGULATORS of the markets. In fact, technically, they are not even following the regulators- they are OBEYING and COMPLYING with regulations. Completely different thing. It is not because of markets that there is hardly even a few kilo's weight difference between an S, a GT3 and a GT3RS. There is hardly any difference because every car made must comply with so many safety regulations there is hardly any room for variance. The original 911R was hundreds of pounds lighter than the 911S. The new 911R is, what? 8 pounds?

Huge loss of freedom? That is hardly news.

The real news will be when people wake up and start realizing it. I am not all that encouraged.
chuck911 is offline  
Old 01-30-2018, 12:57 AM
  #943  
Papa Fittig
User
 
Papa Fittig's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Posts: 1,026
Default

Originally Posted by chuck911 View Post
Porsche has not "moved with the market". The market emphatically does NOT want turbo's. When has anyone ever seen any automotive reviewer extolling the virtues of turbocharging? Where were all the people clamoring for smaller turbo'd Porsches"? Nowhere. Only with the Turbo and GT2RS does the turbo get any respect, which even then its not really the turbo but the POWER of these cars- including the powerful brakes and handling. No. Porsche is emphatically NOT following the market. Porsche is following the REGULATORS of the markets. In fact, technically, they are not even following the regulators- they are OBEYING and COMPLYING with regulations. Completely different thing. It is not because of markets that there is hardly even a few kilo's weight difference between an S, a GT3 and a GT3RS. There is hardly any difference because every car made must comply with so many safety regulations there is hardly any room for variance. The original 911R was hundreds of pounds lighter than the 911S. The new 911R is, what? 8 pounds?
Huge loss of freedom? That is hardly news.
The real news will be when people wake up and start realizing it. I am not all that encouraged.
I am with you Chuck. However, to be honest Porsche just wants to play in NA market, which is [over]regulated. They have to comply and do not have much choice.
So when people wake up they better focus on the root cause of freedom loss. It is sad to see how my and your taxes create these regulations and if not kill all the innovation, sure push it in direction of innovating within or around those regulations. I am not very encouraged either.
Papa Fittig is offline  
Old 01-30-2018, 01:24 AM
  #944  
K-A
Super User
 
K-A's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Posts: 2,181
Default

Originally Posted by chuck911 View Post
Porsche has not "moved with the market". The market emphatically does NOT want turbo's. When has anyone ever seen any automotive reviewer extolling the virtues of turbocharging? Where were all the people clamoring for smaller turbo'd Porsches"? Nowhere. Only with the Turbo and GT2RS does the turbo get any respect, which even then its not really the turbo but the POWER of these cars- including the powerful brakes and handling. No. Porsche is emphatically NOT following the market. Porsche is following the REGULATORS of the markets. In fact, technically, they are not even following the regulators- they are OBEYING and COMPLYING with regulations. Completely different thing. It is not because of markets that there is hardly even a few kilo's weight difference between an S, a GT3 and a GT3RS. There is hardly any difference because every car made must comply with so many safety regulations there is hardly any room for variance. The original 911R was hundreds of pounds lighter than the 911S. The new 911R is, what? 8 pounds?

Huge loss of freedom? That is hardly news.

The real news will be when people wake up and start realizing it. I am not all that encouraged.
Good point in that itís NOT about what the market ďwantsĒ but what the regulatory market demands. Future gens will certainly ďwantĒ EVís, and a lot of that has to do with the computerization of cars rendering them into soulless applianceville to where young gens never really experienced the emotive magic of cars. In that regard, EVís will do what they need far better than ICE cars.

The 911ís changing power plants have nothing to do with market desire. They were selling more 911ís 2,3,4,5,10,11,12,13,14 years ago. The GT3 is literally being marked up $30K and everybodyís clamoring for them. You canít get one. Used GT3 prices defy physics. Reviewers call it the best thing since sliced bread. It probably sold more in the last few months of 2017 than the much cheaper Carreras. All of this specifically BECAUSE of its belting, ripping, snorting N/A power plant. yet Porsche will turbo it next gen. Is that ďmarket demand??Ē Of course NOT! Itís going against every signal the market is literally shouting at them. They will change it purely for political and logicstical reasons.
K-A is offline  
Old 01-30-2018, 01:40 AM
  #945  
Dewinator
Addict
Rennlist Member
 
Dewinator's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 3,053
Default

Iím pretty over being upset about whatever new fuel efficiency technologies or whatever are doing to cars. There are plenty great used ones out there if you want a loud clanky air cooled 911 just go get yourself a 993. I love how my 360 drives, itís more fun than the 991.1, itís way less sterile and artificial... but they have so many more problems, it burns 3 times as much gas, it wants to scrape on everything, every idiot has a stupid comment... so the 991 is much much better to drive every day.

The idea that there can be a perfect DD thatís also a perfect weekend car is just not realistic. The sooner you realize this and stop trying to do the impossible and just pick out your favorite daily and favorite fun car, the happier youíll be.
Dewinator is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 2020 NEXT GENERATION 992 SPY PICS & RELEASE


Contact Us - About Us - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

© 2019 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands

We are a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.
 
  • Ask a Question
    Get answers from community experts
Question Title:
Description:
Your question will be posted in: