daveo4porsche

I'm perfectly happy with my Model S for around town acceleration and handling

I'm look for porsche fit and finish and tightness for handling, and I"m hoping for some Porsche Brakes (on the rare occasion that I need to us them)...I agree with Archimedes - Porsche should be able to differentiate itself here and Tesla is a standard that can be easily exceeded...

the one area however the Germans lack dominance is software - and based on my recent infotainment experiences with my 991.2 GT3 the German's have a very very long ways to go in this department vs Tesla.

Archimedes

You think that the only thing that differentiates a 911GTS from a Corvette GS is the motor and transmission? The chassis, brakes, looks, interior, reputation don't factor into how a consumer views those two cars differently?

I'd argue the thing that least differentiates those two cars is the motor, as the GS motor is a beast.

MaxLTV

My thought is that I really wanted to like Model X, and I did not for many many reasons, then I really wanted my wife to like it, and she did not, for another set of reasons. So I ordered a Cayenne. It's more money than Tesla and slower, but still much better, at least using my criteria. I love Tesla and Musk is my idol, but there are many things about a good car that they did not capture. Most of the current crop of electric cars fail to capture it fully either. If Porsche does that, I'll pay more.

groundhog

There are some very interesting points made in this thread but there are some fairly serious misconceptions.

First and foremost, from an engineering POV an electric motor is very, very simple - therein lies its beauty (relatively low maintenance and long design life) and its downfall (little room to manoeuvre from a design and packaging perspective).

In a nut shell the performance of an elelectric motor is defined by the the electro motive force that it can generate (hence torque) governed by the area of the coil, the strength of the magnetic field and the number of turns in the coil - thats it. This in turn very much limits the design e.g. to make more power you need to add weight through more turns, bigger area, more magnets (larger, stronger field etc). Basically the electric motors become large quickly. Super imposed on this are the limitations of battery technology and stability (look up Li in the periodic table H, He, Li) there are no step changes out there. The best hopes are in terms of weight reduction through better packaging and limited increases in energy density.

To put it simply the motors are relatively large and quite heavy (little room for improvement - basic physics is what it is) and there is limited optionality with battery technology. Thus the skate board model is what we are stuck with for large scale manufacturing e.g. the "battery" pack distrubuted low through the centre structure and in the case of a single - motor high - performance vehicle a relatively large and heavy motor stuck between the rear wheels - the skate board model if you like.

The packaging and layout therefore limit what can be done with suspension, particularly in the rear (other than if cars become very wide or limit motor size and go back to torque multiplier gearing - a longitudinal motor, centrally placed linked to front a rear diffs is a good option for a very high performance two seater) and regenerative braking is a norm for EVs. So what does this mean for the 2.150 tonne Taycan - it means it must, as some have suggested (quite rightly) be considered more of a Tesla/Sedan type vehicle and not a sports car. This is the right way to view the vehicle - if buyers are looking for a Carrera replacement in terms of driving dynamics they will be sorely disappointed, very much so if they are track rats.

To illustrate this further lets have a look at calculated cornering speeds for a Carrera Vs Taycan - the physics is simple in the force generated by a car during cornering is F = mass x velocity squared/corner radius. Below are the results of max corner velocity in MPH for a variety of corner radii (dynamic mu calculated from stopping distance of a Model S and stock Carrera).

Radius (m)---Taycan----------991 Carrera
40---------------41.2-------------48.1
80---------------59.3-------------67.1
120-------------72.7-------------81.6
160-------------83.8-------------95.1

As you can see the differences are substantial - weight kills performance cars - thats why so much effort goes into reducing weight.

As the OP correctly pointed out the price point will be critical because the differences will be small (in a like for like scenario) although the marketing effort will be huge. In my view Porsche need to be careful marketing this type of product to its sports car market (especially repeat buyers).

daveo4porsche

hmmm - but Porsche has disclosed the Taycan will be an AWD model with dual motors if I remember correctly - that lessens the need for one "big" motor and splits the loads between the two axels - it also offers great potential (as already demonstrated with the PXXD Tesla's for some wicked awesome near perfect traction and stability control) - torque vectoring applications are no longer a wicked demonstration of mechanical prowess, but boil down to a matter of software - and I've yet to see this "large" EV motors you speak of - while they are not small - they are much smaller than equivalent internal combustion engines if you compare similar amounts of torque and horse power…

as far as how with this product be presented - I agree 100% it's a sports sedan - not a sports car - and while hopefully will look different/better than the Panamera - I think it will be similar in performance - but benefit as as sedan from the lower center of gravity (lower than a 911 according to Porsche) and signature instant torque electric motors provide - the goal is not a 911 - the goal is a better sporty 4 door sedan for $85k base price - that puts them in the mix

groundhog

It doesn't really change the equation except in low grip environments where traction may find additional grip. Heavy is heavy you can't disguise weight from physics (or engineering).

Agreed, it will deliver the performance of the Panamera . At 85k in the US it will be great, at 270k in Australia it will not sell. At 120k it might.

wogamax

It seems a few take the function of an electric drive train, and try to spin it as something negative, or limited and undifferentiated. I don't know how much track driving you've done, but a skateboard, or putting battery weight behind the axle (ala 911) is a flexible virtue, not something we're "stuck with". Your criticism goes over-board. Romaine Dumas wasn't "stuck with" his ID R, any more than Porsche "sticks" people with flat-sixes.

Porsche's "effort" is to sell cars, not reduce weight. Otherwise, Panemeras, etc., wouldn't be crossing 5,000 pounds. I get the point, on the track, but think we should shed some perspective on how much weight-creep there's been.

When do you think Porsche will deliver a 3,800lb / 80KWh EV? Tesla's reputation on actual race tracks lags, but they sure seem to put in the "effort" on weight. Enough, that others seem to be carrying around a narrative.

Archimedes

The new Panamera Turbo seems to get around the track pretty darn well IIRC.

MaxLTV

It's ironic that you mentioned misconceptions in the opening of a post and then offered a bunch of those. How did you end up with this speed table? It does not seem to make any sense, putting it mildly. Weight distribution has very small impact on cornering, and more even distribution between front and rear plus lower center of gravity actually benefit total cornering grip. So given the same coefficient of friction of tires and mass, an electric-layout car would corner better. Of course, there is a mass issue, but higher mass generates not only higher inertial force but also higher friction force, and those cancel out perfectly resulting in the same cornering speed until/unless tires get overwhelmed. Now you can't just assume that tires will get overwhelmed and drop their coefficient of friction with added mass - with wide enough tires, the drop of coefficient of friction from added load is negligible. For example, 4600lbs E63s has almost the same cornering grip as 911 C2S (1.01G vs 1.04G in C&D skidpad tests), and E63s is actually an example of an undertired car - Taycan can have wider or bigger diameter tires.

Amnd I would even start with the misconceptions about layout. Batteries are in the floor close to the center of the car because it's the best possible location. If it was better to put them elsewhere, they would have been elsewhere - batteries can take almost any shape and place in the car. It's not like a giant lump of metal that needs to be mechanically connected to the wheels. They are much more flexible. And electric motors are lighter than gas-powered ones, especially when you take into account weight savings on transmission and exhaust, intake and charge cooling systems for turbos. So even if they are tied to a specific location, it's still an improvement in layout options.

manitou202

Groundhog,

Your cornering speed calculations make way to many assumptions. Here is some real world data from Motor Trend:
Panamera 4S --------------------------------1.01 ----------------------------------24.0
Panamera Turbo ----------------------------1.01 ----------------------------------23.9
718 Cayman ---------------------------------1.03 ----------------------------------23.7
718 Boxster S -------------------------------1.10 -----------------------------------23.1
991.2 Turbo S -------------------------------1.04 -----------------------------------22.9
Alpha Gulia Quatro ------------------------0.97 -----------------------------------24.2
Corvette Z51 --------------------------------1.11 ------------------------------------23.9
Mustang GT --------------------------------1.00 -------------------------------------24.0
Subaru BRZ --------------------------------0.90 -------------------------------------26.2
BMW 330i -----------------------------------0.88 -------------------------------------26.1

I added the BRZ and 330i to show that when compared to "good handling" daily drivers the Panamera is much closer to the sports car crowd. These numbers clearly don't tell the whole story either, but at least they are a metric to use based on real data.

groundhog

my cornering calculations are classic physics and engineering calculations. The calculated Vmax is for constant radius turns with zero banking. The dynamic coefficients of friction were calculated from stopping distance under full braking from a constant speed (and are thus conservative)

No assumptions were made other than as disclosed.

MaxLTV - in terms of tires it comes down to the dynamic coefficient of friction generated at the contact patch (e.g. the same tires on two different cars can yield different dynamic coefficients of friction) and the reality is simple when you have to package 700kg of "battery" it has to go in the middle and in effect becomes the floor of the car. Its the only low cost option, likewise with direct drive motors they are either placed between the front wheel or rear wheels and in some cases between both (e.g. AWD).

The range of mu(d) for the Model S D series ranges from 0.908 to 1.001. (so for a 160m radius curve that equates to ~83mph to 88mph tops assuming the reported weight of the Taycan, still well below the Carrera) - however this is the simplest form and based of one off stops. As you repeatedly corner or brake the dynamic mu with heavy cars tends to decrease at a faster rate than light cars - e.g. tires going off more quickly. Yes, I know this can be partially solved by ever larger - stickier tires, however that will impact on rolling resistance and thus battery life.

With EVs if you want more torque and hence power you have to add more weight - bigger motors (because of more turns, more area, larger magnets) - the corollary of this is you need more batteries and more cooling (due to draw down rates) - the dog eats its tail.

Instead, if you look at a constant radius test you find something like the 991.2 GTS pulls 1.05g, the 991.2 GT3 1.11g and the 981 GTS 1.04g - the Panamera ranges from 0.97 to 1.01 in the Panamera Turbo S - for reference the Audi S4 pulls 0.99g and the Hyundai Veloster turbo pulls 0.95g.

The motortrend is a good test - but keep in mind it is a figure 8 test thus the diagonals reward the high power to weight ratio cars, thus the turbo posts the quickest time followed by the 718S (you can't really consider the BRZ as it was deliberately fitted with Prius tires).

To the gentleman that asked about track time - not that its relevant to physics/engineering calculations - short answer is plenty and currently involved in three competitions (one club, one state and an upcoming national level)

The Panamera is a good sports sedan and thats what the Taycan will be - its nothing like a Carrera replacement. However non of this addresses the OPs points e.g. EVs are largely the same (like for like) a position I completely agree with, and if this is the case the success or failure of a model may well come down to its price point. If the target price point is the Panamera (270k where I live) it will fail (where I live) - if its priced like a model S in the US it will succeed.

In my view they will have to price it to sell, moreso as the playing field has been reset.

Drifting

Ccpecot

groundhog

True, but for some perspective - 991 Series II GTS ~350k, Series II GT3 ~400k, Series II GT3 RS ~ 500k, GT2 ~790k - so when owners of multiple sports cars and serial sports car buyers are chewed off the brand has a problem (here) and that will impact on next gen vehicle sales over here. I agree the US is a different ball game, large market = cheap cars.

Ccpecot