Does anyone have any knowledge of the cost differences in scheduled services for a cayenne ehybrid vs non hybrid? I had read that the because the hybrid was more complicated that it was more expensive having services done.

 

I'm driving a Cayenne TSE and I haven't seen any hybrid specific maintenance on regular schedule. It's complicated but none of the parts related to hybrid drivetrain has wear and tear disadvantage. In long run (~10-15 years), you might need some maintenance on the battery but otherwise it's pretty much the same.

 

Thanks I wasn't sure if there were some parts of the hybrid system that has to be serviced in addition to the normal mechanical parts of a ICE and drive line. I understand that long term battery issues will be a problem.

 

there is nothing specifically on the hybrid that requires additional maintenance - there is in fact "fewer" parts on a Hybrid - no starter motor, no alternator, and many of the other vehicle components are electrical vs. hydraulic so that they can operate with the ICE motor shutdown…

any assertion of "hybrid" complexity is mostly FUD and lacks concrete evidence.

mechanically they are actually simplier - however the software is vastly more complex vs. an ICE - but the complexity is mostlyl in the "running of the vehicle" vs. the mechanical assembly complexity - operationaly Porsche's hybrid software is pretty well sorted at this point and most (all?) owners find the vehicle's handling of two separate power sources "brilliant"…

there is no scheduled maintenance for any "hybrid" component and the battery has an 8 year/100,000 mile warranty beyond the normal 4 year/50,000 mile warranty for other components.

however like _ALL_ cars if you get a "bad one" it will suck and Porsche is not immune to producing the occasional lemon, hybrid or otherwise…

 

people keep banting about the word "complicated" for the Hybrid - but honestly I disagree - replacing the transmission torque converter with an EV motors attached to the drive line is actually elegant and simple…

the software of course is complicated - but the actual mechanical design of the Porsche hybrid I would argue is simply different but not "complex" - after the swapping of the transmission element - the rest of the vehicle's drive train is IDENTICAL to the non-Hybrid drive train of a complex AWD modern SUV…

people keep saying it's complicated - but I lack any evidence of complexity - in many ways the Hybrid simplify's some elements of the vehicle…

can anyone characterize actual complexity in the Cayenne Hybrid's mechanicals? (again ignoring the software complexity of managing the hybrid system).

I'd love to have actual data/facts about what is complex vs. just FUD…

 

The statement does not make sense at all: PHEV cars have "fewer" parts (or less complicated) than ICE cars.

You need to find a publication that shows the above statement is correct (just post a link to show your statement is correct).

 

factually the Cayenne hybrid lacks

• starter motor
• alternator
• hydraulic belt driven elements normally on the motor - substituted electrically driven components so they can operate on 12V/400V power only…
  • the car must be (and is) fully operational on EV power only - that means NOTHING can require the ICE motor to be running for normal driver operation - so it's effectively a fully functional EV with an ICE motor "on demand".
• solid state HVAC components that can heat/cool the passenger cabin on EV power only…

What does Porsche's design "add" to a Cayenne (the sole new mechanical element is listed in orange below - all other "additions" are solid-state electrical modules for command/control/power distribution)

• big battery 14-25 kWh across various generations
• wire harness to route all the power/control
• on board solid state battery charger (AC/DC converter)
• EV motor on the drive line "in front" of the transmission - actually contained inside the bell housing of the transmission
• high power DC power distribution module
• charging port on the driver's side
• different location of the 12V "starter" battery - starter in this context is to "wake up" the main computer
• thousands of lines of software code to manage the EV motor and ICE motor

additiional mechanical complexity is factually absent - the "additional" components (of which there are few) are solid state electrical "boxes" that lack any maintenance elements or mechanical complexity…

the Cayenne Hybrid design uses a ZF sourced transmission that adds an EV motor attached to the transmission drive line in place of the torque converter - EV motors are not complex mechanically once manufactured - famously EV motors have only one moving part (rotor vs. stator design).

large capacity battery and battery charging systems…

but mechanically the hybrid design employed by Porsche is actually quite mechanically "simple" and lacks complexity - the software however is complex, but that's not mechnical complexity and therefore lacks a maintenance and wear based complexity component.

what element of the Hybrid do you feel is complex? Adding an eV motor to the transmission bell housing and then using software to control the EV motors adding/harvesting power to the input drive train seems pretty simple to me mechanically…

again what is complex?

https://www.whichcar.com.au/car-advi...stem-explained

elements in "red" in the photo below are the new Hybrid components - most of which are electronic non-mechnical elements - the ONLY mechanical element "added" to the Cayenne hybrid is the EV motor in the transmission - the rest is control modules that are solid state elements and mostly control modules and since the original Cayenne have demonstrably lacked any actual failure/reliabilitiy issues…

the Cayenne Hybrid design is mechnically simple, not complex and lacks any consequential change in mechanical complexity or maintenance - now the software to manage all of this is yes very very complex…but largely sorted at this point in time.



this document discusses BMW's PHEV design (which is almost identical to the Cayenne) and actuall discusses how the design actually simplifies are lot of elements with minimal addition of new components…it specifically calls out the lack of chain/belt driven engine components being absent since you now have electrically driven substitutes whicih are less complex and more reliable "freeing" the ICE motor for pure mechanical drive line power…

https://x-engineer.org/bmw-phev-powe...-architecture/

 

the maintenance plans porsche sells cost the same for the hybrid variant.

 

yes - and that's because there is nothing additional to maintain on a Hybrid - because the Hybrid is mechanically very very simple and lacks any major deviation from the pure-ICE design

any assertion of "hybrid" complexity lacks facts, parts inventory, or actual experience and is FUD

the Hybrid design employed by Porsche Cayenne lacks mechanical complexity and relies solely on the dual nature of EV motors to be a power source or generator source and puts it's faith in thousands/millions of lines of software code…to harvest the "benefits" of a hybrid drive train…

that's not to say there are not complex Hybrid designs in the world, just that Porsche's approach is not one of them - there are other Hybrid vehicle designs that are quite complex - however that is not Porsche's or BMW's approach…

 

NOTE: there are in fact more complex hybrid designs in the world - some of them are vastly more complex and may in fact have maintenance requirements - the reason for this additional complexity is chasing optimal efficiency of all that is possible from a hybrid drive train.

It's important to note that Porsche's design while efficient, pays quite a few penalties in terms of optimal efficiency by running all the eV power through a transmission, transfer case, differentials etc…

it's pretty clear to me that Porsche chose a conservative hybrid design for several reasons:

• simplicity
• reliability
• compatibility with their assembly line process
• limited supply chain impact
• limited number of differences between ICE and Hybrid
• commonality of design

Porsche's approach is not optimal, but it is reliable, straight forward, simple, and consists of relatively few changes/alterations from the ICE design - the Cayenne Hybrid has vastly more in common with the ICE Cayenne vs. it's actual differences - where are are changes they are either substitutions (electric compressor vs. belt driven compressor for example) or simply additional electronic "brain" to control the system

they are after all built on the same assembly line as the ICE Cayenne, and share greater than 97% of the parts from the supply chain…

more optimal hybrid designs would require more complexity than the Cayenne demonstrates - also most of those approaches once you pursue them decide to forgo the entire complexity of the ICE motor/transmission in favor of a larger battery to achieve range goals and you end up with a full EV…

Porsche's approach to their hybrid driver train lacks any factual or demonstrated complexity and is only subtly different vs. the ICE design - for this achievement Porsche is leaving some efficiency on the table, but I for one given the product requirements feel Prosche made exactly the correct set of tradeoffs given the reality of modern product requirements and the goals for a mass produced SUV.

had Porsche choose to pursue a more optimal hybrid design for the Cayenne - there would in fact be much more mechanical complexity and differences between the ICE and Hybrid version - but to date there is not and I for one believe the trade offs are exactly right for a vehicle I want to actually be serviced when I need it to be.

any assertion of Porsche Hybrid "complexity" is pure and simple FUD and lacks factual basis.

but for other Hybrid vehicles that may be true - we'd have to evacuate them…

the Chevy Volt hybrid design is in fact simpler than an ICE because it removes the "drive train" element of the ICE motor and is instead a pure EV with an onboard "generator" - but that is even simpler than the Cayenne's design and again leads to less maintenance and simpler mechanical complexity…

 

actually the battery is a 'will' or 'won't' problem - there is no middle ground - the batteries are mostly binary - they either work or they don't - there also is a lack of evidence that even over time these temperature managed LiON batteries fail in great numbers…

https://spectrum.ieee.org/ev-battery-life

_IF_ the battery goes bad after the 8 year/100,000 mile warranty - they are expensive to replace, but in line with any major drive train component that you may have to replace on a modern Porsche vehicle after 100,000 miles…

most batteries do not fail, but the ones that do are in fact a PITA.

 

this is factually untrue. There is no meaningful increase in complexity that leads to any service cost increases.

 

So why is PHEV more expensive than ICE, if they have fewer parts (or less complicated)?

 

Product pricing is divorced from costs unless you are a contract manufacturer. Porsche prices cars based on competition and their understanding of what the market will bear.

 

what he said and 1000's of other factors

in no particular order:

• Porsche's retail pricing has very little coorelation with COG/C2M (Cost of goods, Cost 2 Manufacture)
• postiion in the tirm hierarchy based on standard equipment and performance (real or imagined or marketed)
• Porsche is a premium brand, their pricing is divorced from cost of goods
• if it was purely cost of parts driven there would be no reason for the new 911 GT3 992.2 to be $40k more base price
• Cost of Cayenne based is $84.7k - 0-60 5.9 sec - Cost of Cayenne Base Hybrid $97.2 0-60 4.6 sec, etc…it's a different trim level with different performance characteristics…Porsche always charges more for Performance - they are famous for it.
• 25 kWh LiON batteries are not cheap
• the Hybrid 8 speed transmission is probably a bump in COGs but not signifcant
• Perceived market value
• What the market will bear
• where Porsche wants to place it in the trim ladder - this is an engineered product with engineered performance to "fit" into a given "slot" in their product line - they could push it one way or the other in the product line…
• I could go on and on and on…

_IF_ the Hybrid were mechanically complex vs. the ICE Cayenne Porsche would have no problem calling out additional service costs

• GT3 RS suspension components must be replaced after "n" miles of track usage
• CenterLock hubs must be replaced after "n" miles of track usage
• Porsche dealers are charging $2k or more for "Taycan" "service - which is literally nothing more than visual inspections of the car after 2 years - there is no actual maintenance required for Taycan because it's an EV and this is pissing off the dealers that get 70-90% of their lifetime profiles from vehicle service - not vehicle sales.

Assuming Retail price correlates with mechanical complexity for a luxury product in a premimum brand is a huge misunderstanding.

Pricing psychology in the area of the Market porsche is operating has very very little to do vs. actual costs. The fact that they cover their costs for the product they manufacture is based line pricing where even the cheapest porsche in the entire product tirm line probably would cover their costs for even their highest most optioned trim version of the same product. The pricing of their product is multi-faceted and meant to achieve various market goals. Not the least of which is market segmentation with in their own product line, and different perceived value entry points.

but the number 1 reason Porsche charges more for a Hybrid Cayenne than a non-Hybrid is because they can - and it's gone well for them so far so they will continue to do so. But it has NOTHING to do with any "greater" complexity. It has everything to do with Porsche maintaining a level of profitability that is the envy of the industry when they are "on their game".