Porsche bites back at e-car proponents Porsche has criticised e-car makers for dangling what it claims are unrealistic visions and vaporware in front of the car-buying public. Wolfgang Dürheimer, Director of development at the German sportscar maker, described such moves as “frivolous” in a recent interview with German motoring site Motorzeitung. Dürheimer hinted …
Typical, they went for a 911. The 924 was far more aerodynamic, and has almost complete balance on each quarter, even the 944 and 968 would have been a better choice for the same reasons.
Perhaps it's because the Porsche fraternity can't get it up without a 911, never mind the mechanical brilliance of the other models, if it doesn't look like a clapped out old beetle they don't want to know.
Paris....because I fancy a blowjob in the back of my vectra.
So - the Porsche guy rubbishes the competition but has some praise for the Porsche restorers who have turned their hand to making an electric Porsche. Surely, that's what one might expect from a Porsche spokesman?
Given that the German government has given a big "Nein" to Porsche's request for an enormous government loan, it is hardly surprising they aren't promising much in the way of whacky new technology. They'll be chuffed if they don't end up as part of Fiat or owned by some Russian oligarch.
The basic facts are these:- electric motor >2x efficiency of IC motor; liquid HC fuel approx 10x energy capacity of batteries.
Now, simple arithmetic will show that it IS possible to create a battery electric vehicle of whatever type you like, but you will need to design and package it differently to an IC vehicle achieve best results.
It's not rocket science - look at the Tesla, it works and it's based on a repurposed IC chassis design. Imagine what might be a done with a clean sheet effort.
"Dürheimer hinted that the leccy car industry still faces several key challenges, including the creation of decent charging systems, and the development of smaller and lighter batteries."
Well, duh. Obstacles? You don't say? Wow, we better cancel the whole thing, then. It's a good thing Henry Ford and others didn't proceed with the silly notion of non-horse, non-steam propulsion when they ran into obstacles. Oh, wait, that's right, they didn't stop, they continued, overcoming the obstacles. And now Porsche is a multi-billion dollar company because of that determination.
You're not getting the point of a "technological demonstration" are you? Yes the company may fancy the idea of selling conversions but that isn't set in stone and what they are showing is simply that they can and they chose a model everyone will recognize. It's called good marketing you might want to look that up sometime. Nor does Ruff desiring to get into the electric conversion business and using a 911 as an example preclude it from converting any model Porsche it desires.
So far as you examples go, I'll give you the 944 and maybe a 968 as a good option. But a 924?? Why not just go to the bottom of the shit list of Porsche models and say the 914. BTW yes I've driven all the above models and yes the 911 is still top of the mark. There is a reason you can buy two or three 924's for the same price as a 911 in the same model year.
Maybe Porsche are just sorry that they jumped on the 2 tonne 4wd bandwagon just before it drove off a cliff ?
Didn't they make sportscars once ? You know, light-weight , nimble, etc.
(think 356, 912, 914, 911 RS : and that's just the rear-engined ones)
How many cayenne v8 turbos are they selling now ?
A complete bargain, all the city types will be falling over themselves to get this.....
yeah right!
The idea of a sports car is to go fast and look good [to hide the fact you are very dull in reality].
Isn't the "hey look at me" as you scream past the hordes of devout Christians and horse box towers on the country roads dependant on the car making a noise?
I think if you can afford £160k for a battery car you can also afford the same model in petrol too. + the petrol.....
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
