Porsche Taycan Forum banner

41 - 50 of 50 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
I don't necessarily want to answer for the other poster, but if I was answering that question, I would say that for any car purchaser, when spending a lot of money on a high-end car, when the manufacturer implements meaningful changes shortly after introducing a new model, it has the effect of diminishing the residual value of the one you just purchased. This is a typical "planned obsolescence" model many consumer product companies use to force customers to keep upgrading and buying more product (e.g. smart phones). But with an expensive automobile, that would be a pretty un-customer friendly approach when it is critically important to the brand to maintain and build customer loyalty. So I don't believe it has anything to do with an early customer begrudging a subsequent customer for getting something better. Rather, its is those early customers hoping to maintain the value of their expensive investment a bit longer.
Very well said. I wouldn't be happy if they have a Turbo S next year with better range, I'd actually be dissapointed. But think about it, each cycle the cars get faster and more fuel efficient, just the way it is. If they stroke us and the cars that are coming later this year have better range than the launch cars, that would be bullshit. I'm still gonna take my launch car as soon as it arrives, I've waited long enough and it will be what it will be.
Another concern for me would be why are they changing a design so fast? did they use less then optimal suppliers and components on a high end car? Because batteries and systems haven’t really changed that much in that short of a time. Also the entire test/engineer/refine cycle takes time. Tesla throws out changes left and right before they are fully proven in the name of being “nimble” but that is one of multiple reasons where I don’t trust their engineering. Like the stupid gull wing does that had endless trouble for a long time and wouldn’t stay closed at speed because the engineering was half baked and not fully tested.

This goes doubly for battery systems for me.
All of these comments cover my thoughts as well.

I'd like to believe I'm buying a product where the engineering has been rigorously scrutinized and validated because this launch is so important for a major brand like Porsche. Any indication that the product has not been well engineered gives me pause.

For value purposes, I'd like the car to at least have two model years before a succeeding iteration impacts the value of my car. I know with time the tech will of course get better, and that's expected. The coming years of electrification are going to bring some exciting cars our way and maybe something else will catch my eye in several years and it will be time to move on.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
I agree! I guess we should all expect the price of manufacturing, and thus the sales price, of EVs will follow the same downward curve as we've seen with solar PV panels and many types of batteries, as well as most technological advances. Then society will experience an inflection point when manufacturing efficiencies and advanced technology make wide-scale EV sales possible, driving even more demand for EV charging networks, parts suppliers, more efficient batteries, etc., all creating a virtuous cycle.

The early adopters, like us, will always be paying a premium for new technology because we can afford it and we think it is cool (think first adopters of cell phones 30 years ago). And it is these early adopters that pave the way for mass market acceptance in the future. For that reason, I don't mind realizing that my Taycan v1 will be outdated and relatively more expensive that what the future may hold. I win now. The future wins......in the future!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
Right. And who knows, even if the Taycan V1 becomes outdated eventually, if I love it as much as I expect I will, the Taycan may stay with me for many years. I owned an Audi for 12 years once. I'm excited to really live with the car and see what I think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
The early adopters, like us, will always be paying a premium for new technology because we can afford it and we think it is cool (think first adopters of cell phones 30 years ago). And it is these early adopters that pave the way for mass market acceptance in the future. For that reason, I don't mind realizing that my Taycan v1 will be outdated and relatively more expensive that what the future may hold. I win now. The future wins......in the future!
This, exactly. I have actually bought most of my BEVs both because I liked them AND I wanted to give a vote of confidence as an early adopter to the manufacturer (two recent examples are the Jaguar I Pace and now the Taycan). I know I will pay more, car will depreciate and hopefully improve rapidly, but I am happy to be able to afford and be the early adopter hoping the manufacturers keep going down the path (rather than killing off a promising vehicle).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
I'd be more than happy to see new battery pack hardware as soon as its available and ready for use, be it June 2020 or sometime later. This notion that somehow there is a "whoa don't make a change before date xxx so I don't have to deal with diminished value" is laughable. Every car depreciates, every car has a point where it takes a depreciation spike. If you're concerned about "timing the spike" then don't buy cars that are pushing the front edge of technology like the Taycan is; I think its a huge mistake for Porsche to try and "tamp down" the rate at which improvements are released because some owners here are still delusional about modern cars being "an investment". All of the EVs have unacceptable limitations for at least some use cases, we need improvements faster not slower...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
107 Posts
MassDriver: I think this false idea that EVs all have “limitations” is the main thing holding back EV adoption in the states. EVs are great for a vast majority of drivers and simply not well suited for some. I’ve had EVs from the first Leaf with very limited range to now ones that can do 240 miles. What we need is a functioning and government driven charging infrastructure for trips, not a new battery that gives 20% more range. Because someone will still say “300 miles is not enough for me” and there still would not be a useful charging infrastructure.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
73 Posts
MassDriver: I think this false idea that EVs all have “limitations” is the main thing holding back EV adoption in the states. EVs are great for a vast majority of drivers and simply not well suited for some. I’ve had EVs from the first Leaf with very limited range to now ones that can do 240 miles. What we need is a functioning and government driven charging infrastructure for trips, not a new battery that gives 20% more range. Because someone will still say “300 miles is not enough for me” and there still would not be a useful charging infrastructure.
I agree with you. That said, with the current very capable range figures, I doubt I'll use even half the range on a daily basis -- many others could drive an EV if they thoughtfully considered what their real range needs are. I've spoken with others shopping for new vehicles and when talking about EVs they just put their hands up and say they don't want to deal with it. I think the first-generation of limited EVs soured many people from considering one and may ultimately delay adoption for those people because they think there's no way the range will work. I'm a bit more radical and believe it's an imperative for all of us to make small changes in our lives where we can in order to reduce our carbon footprint, but in the interest of maintaining my friendships, I don't push the issue.

We absolutely need an expanded charging network for those other times when you need more range. I'd also like to see the government fill in the gaps with chargers in rural areas and other places where the ROI on a new station doesn't make sense for the private sector. In the future, I think we are going to see access to charging stations as a sort of public utility/amenity because all personal transport will rely on it. When it comes to facilitating transport, government spend on charging stations would probably be a small fraction compared to overall highway and bridge spend.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2 Posts
MassDriver: I think this false idea that EVs all have “limitations” is the main thing holding back EV adoption in the states. EVs are great for a vast majority of drivers and simply not well suited for some. I’ve had EVs from the first Leaf with very limited range to now ones that can do 240 miles. What we need is a functioning and government driven charging infrastructure for trips, not a new battery that gives 20% more range. Because someone will still say “300 miles is not enough for me” and there still would not be a useful charging infrastructure.
Agree that the "urban" use case is largely solved with the current mix of battery and more destination charging (either fast charging near destination or slower destination charging say at work). The big challenge now is buildings/infrastructure coping with the power demands of a large # of vehicles charging at the same time and charging stall capacity.

The suburban and rural usage (I'll lump "trips from urban to cottage country" and "cross country runs" into rural) it become a bit tougher with two key questions
  1. Can I get from A to B in all weather conditions and elevations
  2. Can I get from A to B in a time roughly equivalent to whatever time allowance works for you (i.e. same time as an ICE, 20% longer than an ICE, same day, etc.)
#1 can be addressed by more battery range (an EV change), or by more chargers (add infrastructure). #2 can be addressed by more battery range and/or faster charging (an EV change (for some) + infrastructure). Increases in battery capacity bring the biggest dividends as they turn more travel into the "urban" use case, and gets you closer to a goal of "ICE time" by eliminating the need for charging stops.

I think at 4-5 hours of driving range (call it 500-600 "advertised" miles to allow for environmental conditions knocking off some range) + < 30 minute charging guaranteed (i.e. enough chargers that you won't be screwed if a few were broken), you'd have solved the vast majority of the suburban and rural use. One more generation improvement in battery technology and deployment of 800v charging infrastructure and we're there. That doesn't mean I won't own an EV in the mean time, but it does mean I won't own only an EV...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
O think that if they release a new hardware alteration the price of the few v1 produced Will go up and not down Over the time....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
48 Posts
Agree that the "urban" use case is largely solved with the current mix of battery and more destination charging (either fast charging near destination or slower destination charging say at work). The big challenge now is buildings/infrastructure coping with the power demands of a large # of vehicles charging at the same time and charging stall capacity.

The suburban and rural usage (I'll lump "trips from urban to cottage country" and "cross country runs" into rural) it become a bit tougher with two key questions
  1. Can I get from A to B in all weather conditions and elevations
  2. Can I get from A to B in a time roughly equivalent to whatever time allowance works for you (i.e. same time as an ICE, 20% longer than an ICE, same day, etc.)
#1 can be addressed by more battery range (an EV change), or by more chargers (add infrastructure). #2 can be addressed by more battery range and/or faster charging (an EV change (for some) + infrastructure). Increases in battery capacity bring the biggest dividends as they turn more travel into the "urban" use case, and gets you closer to a goal of "ICE time" by eliminating the need for charging stops.

I think at 4-5 hours of driving range (call it 500-600 "advertised" miles to allow for environmental conditions knocking off some range) + < 30 minute charging guaranteed (i.e. enough chargers that you won't be screwed if a few were broken), you'd have solved the vast majority of the suburban and rural use. One more generation improvement in battery technology and deployment of 800v charging infrastructure and we're there. That doesn't mean I won't own an EV in the mean time, but it does mean I won't own only an EV...
Yep, I’m gonna take the shot. Range will work for me most days - will be tight possibly 2 of the days of the week. For real rid trios I will take my gas cars. We shall see how this thing plays out.
 
41 - 50 of 50 Posts
Top