Next gen (second generation) Taycan platform is "locked" and coming late 2027

[MissionE]

EU car factories will make more and more ICE behind the curtains of the magical word 'hybrid' (mild-hybrid, full hybrid, t-hybrid, k-e-x-y-z whatever kind of hybrid) otherwise this EU industry collapses under the pressure of Asian BEVs.
The world is still very interested in ICE from traditional EU auto makers (especially in the sport and luxury segments) but definitely not for BEV.
EU factories are turning back to ICE now faster than a blink of an eye.

So what we’ll likely see is the majority of electrical adoption, with the olde dogs doing what they do best, building ICE driver’s cars. But even then once the Aerial revolution matures, we’re looking an an even different shift.

Sponsored

 

[MissionE]

All I am saying is that based on info we have, there will be no panamera EV, and in my opinion, a taycan that shares platform with an ICE panamera will be a shit EV.

For now, panamera EV existing by 2030 is just speculation. There is no credible source, info or mules or anything to indicate that it’s a real thing.

But so is the assumption that they will share a platform, also speculation.

This is a nothing burger of a thread

Personally I think combining the Taycan and Panamera into a new model [960] would be the best scenario. Now, what powers it is up to them, but it seems a plausible place to concentrate their EV tech if they’re going back to ICE/Hybrid for the rest of the range.

 

[MissionE]

For what? Just to be the first?

No, because EU regulatiors were cramming demands down their throats.

 

[prj]

No, because EU regulatiors were cramming demands down their throats.

The ban is from 2035. As I said, they could have done one more ICE generation without any issues with the regulators.
Audi has a new ICE Q5 to go with the Q6, they could have easily done both an electric and an ICE Macan. Wasn't even needed to do any serious RnD, as the Audi platform was already there and being developed.
With the Macan being the best selling car not doing this was a pure internal "political" / "greenwashing" decision, not regulatory pressure, as evidenced by the fact that the new Q5 exists.

718 would have needed more RnD, but still I think that especially in case of the 718 the demand for a gasoline variant far outstrips the demand for an electric one.
The way to do it was to start development of the electric one somewhere in 2028-2030 to be ready for 2034. With better and lighter battery tech.

No, it was overeagerness, to do everything first. To be ahead of the regulations, and it cost their CEO his job.

 

[MissionE]

The ban is from 2035. As I said, they could have done one more ICE generation without any issues with the regulators.
Audi has a new ICE Q5 to go with the Q6, they could have easily done both an electric and an ICE Macan. Wasn't even needed to do any serious RnD, as the Audi platform was already there and being developed.
With the Macan being the best selling car not doing this was a pure internal "political" / "greenwashing" decision, not regulatory pressure, as evidenced by the fact that the new Q5 exists.

718 would have needed more RnD, but still I think that especially in case of the 718 the demand for a gasoline variant far outstrips the demand for an electric one.
The way to do it was to start development of the electric one somewhere in 2028-2030 to be ready for 2034. With better and lighter battery tech.

No, it was overeagerness, to do everything first. To be ahead of the regulations, and it cost their CEO his job.

Any CEO who is trying to run two different companies deserves such anyway.

Macan is in an iffy spot https://www.carscoops.com/2026/01/porsche-macan-ev-backtrack-new-gas-suv-2028/ but I don’t see how the tides wouldn’t have turned the other way anyway. But I think that’s your point; that if they just waited another lifecycle, their ev positioning would have been spot on.

 

[d00d]

So what we’ll likely see is the majority of electrical adoption, with the olde dogs doing what they do best, building ICE driver’s cars. But even then once the Aerial revolution matures, we’re looking an an even different shift.

Flying cars?
I've been looking at this eVTOL to get from house to island.
Only 20 miles range at current battery densities, even with head wind over the 15 miles it would be enough, company backed by one of the Google founders.

https://www.pivotal.aero/

 

[prj]

But I thibk that’s your point; that if they just waited another lifecycle, their ev positioning would have been spot on.

Yes, that's precisely my point. Nothing was preventing them from waiting one more cycle.
Their customers really like ICE cars.
After another cycle the electric tech would have been much more ahead, and also the customers would be much more used to the idea that switching to electric is inevitable.

There was no reason to hurry and go so hard on BEV. Nobody else of the luxury car makers did.

 

[MissionE]

Flying cars?
I've been looking at this eVTOL to get from house to island.
Only 20 miles range at current battery densities, even with head wind over the 15 miles it would be enough, company backed by one of the Google founders.

https://www.pivotal.aero/

I’d invest in Joby. Like right now. Unlike AI, this is a major disruptor that will do just that virtually overnight.

 

[MissionE]

Yes, that's precisely my point. Nothing was preventing them from waiting one more cycle.
Their customers really like ICE cars.
After another cycle the electric tech would have been much more ahead, and also the customers would be much more used to the idea that switching to electric is inevitable.

There was no reason to hurry and go so hard on BEV. Nobody else of the luxury car makers did.

Their customers like ICE cars because that’s all they’ve ever know, perhaps. It’s not like they had anything to compare it to. And we can blame/thank Elon/Tesla as the real [or at lease a major] culprit for instigating the EV race. The regulators just piggybacked off that [and the climate movement.]

 

[69Mach390]

The ban is from 2035. As I said, they could have done one more ICE generation without any issues with the regulators.
Audi has a new ICE Q5 to go with the Q6, they could have easily done both an electric and an ICE Macan. Wasn't even needed to do any serious RnD, as the Audi platform was already there and being developed.
With the Macan being the best selling car not doing this was a pure internal "political" / "greenwashing" decision, not regulatory pressure, as evidenced by the fact that the new Q5 exists.

718 would have needed more RnD, but still I think that especially in case of the 718 the demand for a gasoline variant far outstrips the demand for an electric one.
The way to do it was to start development of the electric one somewhere in 2028-2030 to be ready for 2034. With better and lighter battery tech.

No, it was overeagerness, to do everything first. To be ahead of the regulations, and it cost their CEO his job.

2035 is a fake number likely to be adjusted and moved, the same as the 2035 ban in certain States in the US.

We are nowhere near on track for that deadline and frankly the technology isn’t on track either.

When they made up that date, it was so far in the future, there was hope that technology and the markets would “figure it out by then.” As it stands, we have no hope of that.

I know where I live is a very specific use case, but not entirely unique.

In Florida, at any given point in the summer, millions of people need to be able to evacuate 500-800 miles to Georgia in a 2 day span due to a major hurricane.

As it stands, and with current technology, that’s physically impossible with everyone driving an EV. You cannot (and honestly should never) have enough DC charging infrastructure to safely move that many cars that far of a distance at once.

The cost of infrastructure would be insurmountable and those chargers would be 99% vacant 364 days of the year.

And if you can’t safely evacuate the state, you cannot legislate mandatory EVs.

 

[prj]

Their customers like ICE cars because that’s all they’ve ever know, perhaps. It’s not like they had anything to compare it to. And we can blame/thank Elon/Tesla as the real [or at lease a major] culprit for instigating the EV revolution.

When your main purchase base is older and more traditional, then it's a fools errand to try to push the newest paradigm shift when it is still imperfect, while you have no reason to.

I mean the result is clear. A massive collapse in sales, margins, stock price and sacking of management.
This last second re-pivot into ICE does not really work because you need years to develop platforms. But we have only 9 years left until 2035.

People think that the Taycan was half assed and not ready, imagine what shit they will produce if they try to do development of 3-4 years in 1 year? I mean they have to until 2028, maybe 2029 latest to bring an ICE model to the market before it's too late.

 

[prj]

2035 is a fake number likely to be adjusted and moved, the same as the 2035 ban in certain States in the US.

Cool story, but this is not a problem in the EU.
You also have very much a doomer mindset.

Think back about what was 10 years ago in 2016. The average EV sold had a range of under 100 miles. Charging took forever.
In 10 years the range has at least doubled if not tripled, and the charging speed is much faster too.
What makes you think that in another 10 years it won't also be the case? Certainly if solid state batteries come to market en masse, then things will be very different.
BYD has technology to charge cars at 1MW already today.

Also the infrastructure argument is ridiculous. 99% of gasoline pumps are also not in use most of the time, and certainly nobody has their own gasoline pump at home!
And if you're wondering about power generation, then local energy storage is the solution (which is why I also really like stocks of companies, such as $ENS) and new cheap safe battery technology, such as sodium ion really plays into this (going into production at CATL already).
This will fix itself over time.

Now, I don't know what will happen in the land of the bald eagle, simply because there's like zero public transit there and distances are large, but over here in the EU charging is not really a problem anymore.

 

[MissionE]

When your main purchase base is older and more traditional, then it's a fools errand to try to push the newest paradigm shift when it is still imperfect, while you have no reason to.

I mean the result is clear. A massive collapse in sales, margins, stock price and sacking of management.
This last second re-pivot into ICE does not really work because you need years to develop platforms. But we have only 9 years left until 2026.

People think that the Taycan was half assed and not ready, imagine what shit they will produce if they try to do development of 3-4 years in 1 year? I mean they have to until 2028, maybe 2029 latest to bring an ICE model to the market before it's too late.

I’d say Porsche has long ago shifted from mature buyers.

And if a half assed car can win/break every performance award/barrier on the planet, so be it.

 

[Bognar67]

I’d say Porsche has long ago shifted from mature buyers.

And if a half assed car can win/break every performance award/barrier on the planet, so be it.

On the other hand reliability issues disturb these excellences next to the used prices. A half assed car hits back on this way.

 

[Dabz]

It's possibly worth noting that despite all the naysaying on this thread, the Taycan is consistently top of the "best EVs" lists in numerous places, so despite poor sales figures it's not a bad car. It's just a bad market (for high end, expensive, Porsche badged EVs).

Sponsored