RE: Porsche Cayenne Turbo S E-Hybrid Coupe | Driven
Discussion
t of supposedly trying to save the planet.W12GT said:
I’m sorry but 19miles on electric is just ridiculous and there should be no tax benefits for it. In fact there should be no place for it at all.
You either go EV or you stick to a big petroleum engine.
To me it’s just wrong and a very disappointing effort imho.
Couldn't agree more - 19 miles is a piss poor effort.You either go EV or you stick to a big petroleum engine.
To me it’s just wrong and a very disappointing effort imho.
This is exactly why governments shouldn’t interfere too much.... a 2.5 tonne 680hp machine surely isn’t what they intended to be on the roads.
Impressive engineering etc but it’s just to get round legislation.
It’s almost three Elise’s worth of weight! 4 people and luggage and it’s light goods vehicle territory.
Impressive engineering etc but it’s just to get round legislation.
It’s almost three Elise’s worth of weight! 4 people and luggage and it’s light goods vehicle territory.
whp1983 said:
This is exactly why governments shouldn’t interfere too much.... a 2.5 tonne 680hp machine surely isn’t what they intended to be on the roads.
Impressive engineering etc but it’s just to get round legislation.
It’s almost three Elise’s worth of weight! 4 people and luggage and it’s light goods vehicle territory.
Weighs nearly as much as our 10 feet tall VW LT Camper.Impressive engineering etc but it’s just to get round legislation.
It’s almost three Elise’s worth of weight! 4 people and luggage and it’s light goods vehicle territory.
T-195 said:
whp1983 said:
This is exactly why governments shouldn’t interfere too much.... a 2.5 tonne 680hp machine surely isn’t what they intended to be on the roads.
Impressive engineering etc but it’s just to get round legislation.
It’s almost three Elise’s worth of weight! 4 people and luggage and it’s light goods vehicle territory.
Weighs nearly as much as our 10 feet tall VW LT Camper.Impressive engineering etc but it’s just to get round legislation.
It’s almost three Elise’s worth of weight! 4 people and luggage and it’s light goods vehicle territory.
oop north said:
TartanPaint said:
That loophole got knocked on the head, so that's not the purpose here. The company car BIK brackets are based on EV range now, and you need 140+ miles of range to get a decent benefit bracket, which no hybrid can do. A much better system if you ask me.
incorrect - need less than 50g/km for electric range to be relevant to bik - anything above that the pure electric range is irrelevant. See https://pod-point.com/guides/business/company-elec...I await the puzzled looks on the Porsche sales faces when you go in to ask about one and the specs.
Porsche won’t or can’t tell you. They can’t for the standard Cayenne Hybrid. It’s currently a right cock up. Nobody knows if it’s PDK or (new)Tip S. Nobody will confirm the price, nobody will confirm delivery dates or schedules, nobody will confirm standard equipment specs.
Feel free to go into your local dealer and try to get any of that confirmed. I’ve been trying since March.
Porsche won’t or can’t tell you. They can’t for the standard Cayenne Hybrid. It’s currently a right cock up. Nobody knows if it’s PDK or (new)Tip S. Nobody will confirm the price, nobody will confirm delivery dates or schedules, nobody will confirm standard equipment specs.
Feel free to go into your local dealer and try to get any of that confirmed. I’ve been trying since March.
ROSS-ncbaf said:
Excessive car weight needs taxing. A lot. A 2500kg car like this wears out the road 5.76x more than a typical, 1600kg car.
Blame potholes on tw&ts in SUV's.
Roads are designed to take vehicles several times the weight of these things (not that I’m saying that weight is a good thing).Blame potholes on tw&ts in SUV's.
Potholes appear because of cheapskate repairs and maintenance.
drpep said:
What a bizarre world we live in. The days in which a 2.5 tonne SUV, returns < 85g CO2/Km, and also produces 680hp, getting you to 60 in 3.8s. That's a second quicker than an E92 M3. Crazy times indeed.
This will make a wonderfully comfy grand tourer, albeit somewhat removed from the experience of traveling quickly. Coming to a Waitrose car park near you, soon.
Once there is sufficient penetration into the mass market of EVs and their subsidies have been wound down then almost certainly the next phase of punitive taxation will be based on vehicle weight. It is weight afterll that is the true pollutant and driver of pollution. This will make a wonderfully comfy grand tourer, albeit somewhat removed from the experience of traveling quickly. Coming to a Waitrose car park near you, soon.
Until then we can enjoy these absolutely irrelevant and wholly inappropriate bits of kit.
T-195 said:
We should start taxing vehicles based on weight.
The heavier the car the more damage done to the roads for one.
It will come but will take time as there needs to be that EV price inversion first. The heavier the car the more damage done to the roads for one.
Less weight means fewer raw materials used, smaller tyres, brakes and engines. Engines can be ICE or EV as the amount that they pollute will have dropped enormously as most suburban runabouts will be EVs. Less wear and tear to the road network, less damage in collisions. Taxing weight will also incentivise the use of smaller vehicles freeing up more road space.
The other huge benefit of taxing on weight is that it is rather difficult to game the system.
E65Ross said:
ROSS-ncbaf said:
Excessive car weight needs taxing. A lot. A 2500kg car like this wears out the road 5.76x more than a typical, 1600kg car.
Blame potholes on tw&ts in SUV's.
I was thinking of blaming lorries more than SUVs to be honest.Blame potholes on tw&ts in SUV's.
Just out of curiosity, where did the 5.76x come into it? I would assume that it's not just mass, but pressure as well....would wider tyres help, because the mass is over a larger surface area?
There's a few other studies which roughly mirror these figures as well. Then factor in the level of materials and energy needed to create the vehicle, to power it, to dispose of it...the list goes on and on. Lorries at least serve a purpose; to transport goods. Cars like this are wholly unnecessary.
swisstoni said:
ROSS-ncbaf said:
Excessive car weight needs taxing. A lot. A 2500kg car like this wears out the road 5.76x more than a typical, 1600kg car.
Blame potholes on tw&ts in SUV's.
Roads are designed to take vehicles several times the weight of these things (not that I’m saying that weight is a good thing).Blame potholes on tw&ts in SUV's.
Potholes appear because of cheapskate repairs and maintenance.
https://streets.mn/2016/07/07/chart-of-the-day-veh...
On the subject of weight, this (rare, range-topping) hybrid is still the same weight as (or lighter than) a Discovery, RRS or FFRR, which are produced in much larger numbers. The non-hybrid Cayennes are light for their class, lots of aluminium etc.
I recognise that some people just want to hate Cayennes. They don't care why they hate them, they just have to be disgusted by them, regardless of logic.
I recognise that some people just want to hate Cayennes. They don't care why they hate them, they just have to be disgusted by them, regardless of logic.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff