[opinion] - hmmm…VW/Audi/Porsche may be in trouble…

[69Mach390]

Least we forget, Porsche sells ~34% of its cars in the EU (vs. ~30% in North America). The EU is talking about amending their strict 100% carbon tailpipe emission rule targeted for 2035, but not by much.

Based on the information below, manufacturers that want to sell in the EU need to find a way to get a (revised) 90% reduction in CO2 vs. 2021 across their fleet.

Conclusion -- If you want to sell ICE cars in the EU after 2035, you better have EVs too...

---------------------------------------
CO₂ targets for new cars and vans
These are EU‑wide fleet average rules for manufacturers, not per‑car caps.

• 2020–2021: Target of 95 g CO₂/km for new passenger cars fully applied from 2021.
• From 1 January 2025:
  • New cars and vans must emit on average 15% less CO₂ than the 2021 target.
  • This equates to 93.6 g CO₂/km for cars and 153.9 g CO₂/km for vans.
• From 1 January 2030:
  • New cars must be 55% lower and new vans 50% lower vs 2021.
  • This equates to 49.5 g CO₂/km for cars and 90.6 g CO₂/km for vans.

2035 and beyond – what changed
Original rule (adopted 2023, still in force until amendments pass):

• From 1 January 2035: 100% reduction in tailpipe CO₂ vs 2021 for new cars and vans, i.e. 0 g CO₂/km fleet average (effectively only zero‑emission vehicles).

Latest development (late 2025 Commission proposal, not yet fully enacted):

• The Commission announced plans to scrap the strict 100% reduction requirement and replace it with a 90% tailpipe CO₂ reduction target by 2035.
• Remaining emissions could be offset via low‑carbon materials (e.g. EU‑made low‑carbon steel) and the use of e‑fuels/biofuels, keeping some combustion and hybrid technologies in play.

Separate from CO2 are the NOx targets --

Euro pollutant standards (NOx, particulates, etc.)
Separate from CO₂ targets, the Euro standards control conventional pollutants:

• Euro 6 is currently the operative standard for new cars.
• Euro 7 was agreed in 2024 and is due to come into force on 29 November 2026, covering exhaust plus non‑exhaust emissions like brake and tyre particulates.
• By the end of November 2027, all new cars and vans on sale must comply with Euro 7 or be withdrawn.

Outside of completely banning a specific product…… the consumer will still decide what they want to buy.

The concept of government mandating sales of unprofitable vehicles (EV) while at the same time driving up the prices of ICE cars to the point where they are unaffordable is a doomsday scenario for both consumers and car companies.

Something will definitely have to give and the easiest thing to change is the law.

Sponsored

 

[snstevens]

Outside of completely banning a specific product…… the consumer will still decide what they want to buy.

The concept of government mandating sales of unprofitable vehicles (EV) while at the same time driving up the prices of ICE cars to the point where they are unaffordable is a doomsday scenario for both consumers and car companies.

Something will definitely have to give and the easiest thing to change is the law.

I think that is partially true, but I disagree that all EV sales are unprofitable. But let's move on and think about where we could be 10 years from now.

Since 2020 (the birth of the Taycan), but to a lesser extent today, there have been two major barriers to EV adoption -- vehicle cost and charging infrastructure (both at home and on road trips). However, even as we discuss this there is considerable evidence that costs can be brought down, and that charging infrastructure is good enough, and could even be great in the 2035 timeframe. [I also liked the video from "Engineering Explained" that discusses whether the US electrical grid can handle the transition to an all-EV future.]

Honestly, I've not heard of other adoption issues that relate to anything other than customer preferences. Yes, I've heard "don't tell me what to buy", and "I love the sound of a flat six revving and changing as I go through the gears", but is that going to change the targets in the EU? I think not, and I doubt that Porsche management believes it either.

Without even comparing the environment impact/benefit breakeven point (roughly 18 months on a Taycan) , everyone who drives an EV says they work well for the tasks they have to accomplish. EVs come in all sizes and shapes (trucks, SUVs, sedans, sports cars), drive just as well if not better than ICE vehicles, and are actually cheaper to maintain.

So unless there is some huge change in EU regulations, I think we know how this ends. The question I find interesting is whether Porsche management will step up and build on the success they have with the Taycan, and the Macan & Cayenne EVs. I applaud them for getting their manufacturing capacity in line with demand to keep cost under control, but the future is going to have lots of EVs in it, and I suspect they know that.

 

[PorscheTaycan]

I've heard "don't tell me what to buy", and "I love the sound of a flat six revving and changing as I go through the gears"

A 100 years ago, people were probably saying:

"I love my horse", "don't tell me what I can or cannot ride", "all I need to do is feed my horse hay, I don't need no gas", "I love the sound of my horse galloping, neighing and the feel of my bum on the saddle"... lol

 

[69Mach390]

I think that is partially true, but I disagree that all EV sales are unprofitable. But let's move on and think about where we could be 10 years from now.

Since 2020 (the birth of the Taycan), but to a lesser extent today, there have been two major barriers to EV adoption -- vehicle cost and charging infrastructure (both at home and on road trips). However, even as we discuss this there is considerable evidence that costs can be brought down, and that charging infrastructure is good enough, and could even be great in the 2035 timeframe. [I also liked the video from "Engineering Explained" that discusses whether the US electrical grid can handle the transition to an all-EV future.]

Honestly, I've not heard of other adoption issues that relate to anything other than customer preferences. Yes, I've heard "don't tell me what to buy", and "I love the sound of a flat six revving and changing as I go through the gears", but is that going to change the targets in the EU? I think not, and I doubt that Porsche management believes it either.

Without even comparing the environment impact/benefit breakeven point (roughly 18 months on a Taycan) , everyone who drives an EV says they work well for the tasks they have to accomplish. EVs come in all sizes and shapes (trucks, SUVs, sedans, sports cars), drive just as well if not better than ICE vehicles, and are actually cheaper to maintain.

So unless there is some huge change in EU regulations, I think we know how this ends. The question I find interesting is whether Porsche management will step up and build on the success they have with the Taycan, and the Macan & Cayenne EVs. I applaud them for getting their manufacturing capacity in line with demand to keep cost under control, but the future is going to have lots of EVs in it, and I suspect they know that.

I think there is really only 1 barrier to EV adoption- battery technology or more specifically the battery altogether.

EVs are awesome. BEVs are severely limited by battery tech.

Even if EVs were cheaper and you had available chargers on every corner…… batteries are still too heavy, don’t have enough range and charge too slowly.

All the things are getting better but still result in a compromise for the consumer.

I wish we had a better fuel source for electric motors than a battery.

BEVs really make sense when you can charge at home (which not everyone lives in a place you can). This is another major barrier to 100% adoption. DC charging is a bandaid fix and hopefully not the end game goal. It’s not efficient, harder on your car, and significantly more expensive than home charging.

The reality is that unless technology significantly changes (not just the incremental changes we’ve seen in the last 20 years), BEVs will not be a one size fits all solution. I’m ok with that.

Should we continue to make incremental progress in tech and environmental impact? Yes. But that means making gas cars less impactful and more efficient, not making them go away altogether.

 

[69Mach390]

A 100 years ago, people were probably saying:

"I love my horse", "don't tell me what I can or cannot ride", "all I need to do is feed my horse hay, I don't need no gas", "I love the sound of my horse galloping, neighing and the feel of my bum on the saddle"... lol

Why do people always make the horse comparison in these threads?

Electric cars predate gas powered cars and were built and sold alongside them 100+ years ago. New York City even had a full fleet of EV taxis in the 1920s.

Heck, they had to compete with steam powered cars too!

 

[PorscheTaycan]

Why do people always make the horse comparison in these threads?

It's more about transition from horses to cars (regardless of fuel type) - probably took some convincing due to cost, infrastructure etc.

 

[69Mach390]

It's more about transition from horses to cars (regardless of fuel type) - probably took some convincing due to cost, infrastructure etc.

I get the analogy, but the problem with equating it to EVs today is that 100+ years ago they tried and failed against gas powered cars and they’re once again struggling for the same reasons.

100+ years ago EVs were too expensive, lacked sufficient range, took too long to charge and lacked charging infrastructure. Sound familiar?

This isn’t like changing from horses to cars. This is once again like choosing between gas cars and EV ones. (Or hybrid, PHEV, fuel cell, series hybrid etc).

The issue isn’t convincing people. The issue is that people need different vehicles for different purposes.

Whenever I talk to people about possibly buying an EV, I ask them what their use case is. And they’re wonderful…… for some people. But definitely not for everyone.

Trying to tell everyone to buy an EV would be like trying to tell everyone to buy a sedan. Some people have different needs for sure and it’s good we have options.

 

[snstevens]

100+ years ago EVs were too expensive, lacked sufficient range, took too long to charge and lacked charging infrastructure. Sound familiar?

Respectfully, I think it's time you refresh your information.

Charging and range anxiety are long gone in the rearview mirror for me . Not only can I find charging stations with no wait within 10 miles of anywhere I'm located, but the charge time is typically <10 minutes. On long trips it might take 15-20 minutes but I find that reasonable (YMMV). Also, recent data shows --

• High Speed DC EV charging sites are all over the place. As of 1/2026 there are 68,000 charging ports at over 14,000 locations across the US.
• While the number of DC fast charging stations seems small compared to over 150k gas stations (~10x more), consider that a) Only 2% of vehicles are EVs, and b) most of us get to charge at home >90% of the time.

Regarding your "too expensive" claim compared to ICE vehicles. Consider this --

• Kelley Blue Book estimated the average transaction price for all new vehicles (dominated by ICE and hybrids) at about $49,077 in recent data.
• There are 12 EVs with >200 mile range that cost <$50k USD. The table below is from an AI search and the sources for "Best EVs under $50k " included Car & Driver, InsideEVs, and MotorWeek. Click on the links to see the articles.
• 100 years ago EVs had a range of 20-40 miles, so any comparison is unrealistic.

Model (2025–26 era)	Approx. base price (USD)	Approx. EPA range (mi)	Notes
Hyundai Ioniq 5	~36,600–50,500	245–318	Excellent fast charging, very efficient.
Kia EV6	~39,400–54,500	237–319	Sporty drive; some trims creep above $50k.
Nissan Leaf (long‑range trims)	~31,500–40,500	~259–303	Upper trims clear 200+ easily.
Tesla Model Y (RWD / entry trims)	Under $50k for base	~260–300+	Crosses $50k in higher trims but base qualifies.
Chevrolet Equinox EV	Starts ~34,995	Up to ~319	Very strong dollars‑per‑mile value.
Hyundai Kona Electric	Starts ~34,000–34,270	~200–261	Base battery right around 200 miles.
Chevrolet Bolt EV (where still sold / on lots)	~31,000	259	Sub‑$35k with solid range; being phased but still referenced.
Chevrolet Bolt EUV	~33,000	247	Slightly larger than Bolt, still under $50k.
Ford Mustang Mach‑E (Select and similar trims)	Around 42,990 (Select)	~240+	Several trims list under $50k with >200 miles.
Kia Niro EV	High‑20s to 30s used; under $50k new	Around 250	Cited near 250 miles range in buyer guides.
Polestar 2 (RWD, earlier‑year or value configs)	Often under $50k new/transaction	~250+	150 kW DC charging, ~250 miles in common setups.
Volvo XC40 Recharge (value / older configs)	Transaction prices trending downward	~220–230	Range falls a bit but still over 200 miles.

 

[PorscheTaycan]

The issue isn’t convincing people. The issue is that people need different vehicles for different purposes.

I think the horses to car analogy will be more similar with the transition from current driving to self-driving - just like right now people can still ride horses for fun, but they drive cars for daily transport, in future (probably not immediate future) people can still drive cars for fun but for daily transport they use self-driving cars.

 

[snstevens]

I think the horses to car analogy will be more similar with the transition from current driving to self-driving - just like right now people can still ride horses for fun, but they drive cars for daily transport, in future (probably not immediate future) people can still drive cars for fun but for daily transport they use self-driving cars.

I can see it. I shouldn't feel sad about it, but I kind'a do...

 

[snstevens]

Respectfully, I think it's time you refresh your information.

Charging and range anxiety are long gone in the rearview mirror for me . Not only can I find charging stations with no wait within 10 miles of anywhere I'm located, but the charge time is typically <10 minutes. On long trips it might take 15-20 minutes but I find that reasonable (YMMV). Also, recent data shows --

• High Speed DC EV charging sites are all over the place. As of 1/2026 there are 68,000 charging ports at over 14,000 locations across the US.
• While the number of DC fast charging stations seems small compared to over 150k gas stations (~10x more), consider that a) Only 2% of vehicles are EVs, and b) most of us get to charge at home >90% of the time.

Regarding your "too expensive" claim compared to ICE vehicles. Consider this --

• Kelley Blue Book estimated the average transaction price for all new vehicles (dominated by ICE and hybrids) at about $49,077 in recent data.
• There are 12 EVs with >200 mile range that cost <$50k USD. The table below is from an AI search and the sources for "Best EVs under $50k " included Car & Driver, InsideEVs, and MotorWeek. Click on the links to see the articles.
• 100 years ago EVs had a range of 20-40 miles, so any comparison is unrealistic.

Model (2025–26 era)	Approx. base price (USD)	Approx. EPA range (mi)	Notes
Hyundai Ioniq 5	~36,600–50,500	245–318	Excellent fast charging, very efficient.
Kia EV6	~39,400–54,500	237–319	Sporty drive; some trims creep above $50k.
Nissan Leaf (long‑range trims)	~31,500–40,500	~259–303	Upper trims clear 200+ easily.
Tesla Model Y (RWD / entry trims)	Under $50k for base	~260–300+	Crosses $50k in higher trims but base qualifies.
Chevrolet Equinox EV	Starts ~34,995	Up to ~319	Very strong dollars‑per‑mile value.
Hyundai Kona Electric	Starts ~34,000–34,270	~200–261	Base battery right around 200 miles.
Chevrolet Bolt EV (where still sold / on lots)	~31,000	259	Sub‑$35k with solid range; being phased but still referenced.
Chevrolet Bolt EUV	~33,000	247	Slightly larger than Bolt, still under $50k.
Ford Mustang Mach‑E (Select and similar trims)	Around 42,990 (Select)	~240+	Several trims list under $50k with >200 miles.
Kia Niro EV	High‑20s to 30s used; under $50k new	Around 250	Cited near 250 miles range in buyer guides.
Polestar 2 (RWD, earlier‑year or value configs)	Often under $50k new/transaction	~250+	150 kW DC charging, ~250 miles in common setups.
Volvo XC40 Recharge (value / older configs)	Transaction prices trending downward	~220–230	Range falls a bit but still over 200 miles.

Sorry, but I got swept up in the data and I forgot to make the key point I was trying to get to.

The automotive game has changed fundamentally. A combination of government mandates and flat out better performance, reliability, and innovation, all at a competitive price point, make EV’s the cars of the future.

Porsche really has no choice but to play in this game if they want to be relevant at all. Of course, there are many famous marques whose manufacturers are no longer in existence, so that’s not out of the question.

 

[whitex]

Trying to tell everyone to buy an EV would be like trying to tell everyone to buy a sedan. Some people have different needs for sure and it’s good we have options.

Trying to tell everyone to buy a car also doesn't work. There are still scenarios where bicycles, or even horses, fit the usecase better than cars. Those scenarios are niche scenarios (at least in the west), as will increasingly be ICE powered cars. I suspect at some point in the EV adoption, the gas station infrastructure will start shrinking, which will further speed up non gasoline car adoption.

 

[voksic]

Porsche should learn from Ferrari. Luce is so different from all Ferraris that it clearly targets different audience. It's a 5 door Ferrari. Market for that car are tech influencers and rich tech giants. There's plenty of people these days who can cash out 600.000€ for a car, as long as it does not hurt their reputation. 12v Ferrari hurts their reputation in Europe, but a Ferrari EV? Everybody will love them.

There's a big opportunity between ID.4 and Luce. Porsche even has almost great products. It just needs a better story. They were too vocal about pivoting *back* to ICE. Result? Worst sales ever. Porsche has been on a steep upward trajectory with EV sales in Europe. Now that growth is gone. How? Product portfolio did not change.

I walk into a dealership today and there's not a single Taycan poster - a year ago it was only Taycan on the walls. I ordered 4 Porsches in last 2 years (all EVs), but I'm thinking on giving up on the brand, as they clearly are going backwards.

 

[69Mach390]

I can see it. I shouldn't feel sad about it, but I kind'a do...

For sure. If full self drive becomes THE thing, that may be the death of Porsche.

Who cares how “fun to drive” a taxi is?

 

[69Mach390]

Porsche should learn from Ferrari. Luce is so different from all Ferraris that it clearly targets different audience. It's a 5 door Ferrari. Market for that car are tech influencers and rich tech giants. There's plenty of people these days who can cash out 600.000€ for a car, as long as it does not hurt their reputation. 12v Ferrari hurts their reputation in Europe, but a Ferrari EV? Everybody will love them.

There's a big opportunity between ID.4 and Luce. Porsche even has almost great products. It just needs a better story. They were too vocal about pivoting *back* to ICE. Result? Worst sales ever. Porsche has been on a steep upward trajectory with EV sales in Europe. Now that growth is gone. How? Product portfolio did not change.

I walk into a dealership today and there's not a single Taycan poster - a year ago it was only Taycan on the walls. I ordered 4 Porsches in last 2 years (all EVs), but I'm thinking on giving up on the brand, as they clearly are going backwards.

If there is anything to “learn” from Ferrari about the Luce it’s more about what “not to do.”

Did you miss the part where Ferrari stock dropped 8% when they announced that monstrosity?

Sponsored