First spy pictures of electric Boxster - Page 5 - Boxster/Cayman - PistonHeads UK

"Spy photographers managed to catch this black-painted, camouflaged-clad prototype of the all-electric 718 Boxster driving on the road, giving us our best look yet at what the production version may look like. Despite dropping the internal combustion engine altogether, the car still maintains a mid-engine silhouette, with a two-seat forward cabin" https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a41899673/electr...

drgav2005 said: "Spy photographers managed to catch this black-painted, camouflaged-clad prototype of the all-electric 718 Boxster driving on the road, giving us our best look yet at what the production version may look like. Despite dropping the internal combustion engine altogether, the car still maintains a mid-engine silhouette, with a two-seat forward cabin" https://www.roadandtrack.com/news/a41899673/electr... Thanks for sharing. Very interesting to see. Appreciate its all hanging together with gaffer tape but the lack of air vents in the side makes it look odd in my opinion, though I am sure they'll craft it to look lovely!

Electric Boxster? I’m sure there’s an emoji somewhere for that… Oh yes…

Need to sort out them panel gaps...

Looks like Porsche’s avant-garde stylists are on a roll.

lyricalgangster said: Need to sort out them panel gaps... how about these...

Looks like a boxster kit for an Mr2.

Proportionally very similar to existing car, but much wider tracks. Suspect it will look pretty good. But pity they have decided to go with Taycan style headlights. Taycan is a good looking car, but the Cayster had developed its own front end vibe and pity that it's being dropped in favour of the corporate EV visage. EV Macan getting the same headlight treatment, it seems. Main question mark obviously involves the batteries. You'd have to think it's a bit too soon for solid state. So, the car is either going to be a real lump, up somewhere near the thick end of 2,000kg, or the range is going to be rubbish. Or most likely split the difference and be quite heavy and quite poor range. I'll guess at 70-75kwh battery, 1,700kg and 250-275 miles claimed NEDC range and likely well under 200 miles real-world usable range. Will still drive pretty well, no doubt, a la Taycan. But odds are this first EV sports car effort will age very badly. If there's a decent amount of battery tech progress in the next 10 years, these earlish EVs are going to look awfully clunky. And it's not as if you could excuse that in the name of purism or the old school appeal of a nat asp engine or whatever. It'll be an EV, just with (what could very much be by then) really crap battery tech. It's very hard to think of reasons why an old heavy battery with poor range would have lasting appeal or add involvement. Unless worrying about finding a charger qualifies as involvement!

esotericar said: Main question mark obviously involves the batteries. You'd have to think it's a bit too soon for solid state. So, the car is either going to be a real lump, up somewhere near the thick end of 2,000kg, or the range is going to be rubbish. Or most likely split the difference and be quite heavy and quite poor range. I'll guess at 70-75kwh battery, 1,700kg and 250-275 miles claimed NEDC range and likely well under 200 miles real-world usable range I think that's a bit pessimistic. Tesla's current Model 3 is about 1,800kg and has range quite a bit higher than that - 370 claimed WLTP but well over 200 real world. I think that's probably enough.

OTOH it is mostly a weekend, fun car with limited luggage space not a grand tourer. Why does it need long range? I would have thought keep the weight down

BobM said: esotericar said: Main question mark obviously involves the batteries. You'd have to think it's a bit too soon for solid state. So, the car is either going to be a real lump, up somewhere near the thick end of 2,000kg, or the range is going to be rubbish. Or most likely split the difference and be quite heavy and quite poor range. I'll guess at 70-75kwh battery, 1,700kg and 250-275 miles claimed NEDC range and likely well under 200 miles real-world usable range I think that's a bit pessimistic. Tesla's current Model 3 is about 1,800kg and has range quite a bit higher than that - 370 claimed WLTP but well over 200 real world. I think that's probably enough. My current base Cayman 718 can do 500 miles on one tank. We drove from the West Coast of Ireland back to the SE via Holyhead earlier this year, the car is an excellent grand tourer with plenty of luggage space. Why on earth would I want something that is objectively worse, ~200 miles is hopeless and no doubt it will be much heavier. EV claimed ranges seem to be less accurate than the pre-NEDC quoted mpg figures and there's no way I'd constantly want to be queuing for non-working charge points. Solid state may well be the answer but we are probably ten years away from that. Edited by jimbo761 on Wednesday 9th November 08:29

Key questions are weight and range. let's see

wisbech said: OTOH it is mostly a weekend, fun car with limited luggage space not a grand tourer. Why does it need long range? I would have thought keep the weight down Plenty of reasons. Euro trips. Just a weekend away. Let's say you want to drive to Wales or Scotland or really anywhere that's not near home to experience some fun roads. I also personally don't see Boxsters and Caymans as just weekend fun cars. They have excellent luggage space and on the contrary are very good grand tourers. Perfect for a driving holiday in Europe. Loads of luggage space for two people. Honestly, loads! Central to their appeal is how usable they are, they are very well packaged and very practical for a mid-engine car. That's the whole point of them - ie they're not just toys you take out for an hour or two at the weekend. They're properly thought out and practical cars. So, in that context, you want as much range as any other car.

BobM said: esotericar said: Main question mark obviously involves the batteries. You'd have to think it's a bit too soon for solid state. So, the car is either going to be a real lump, up somewhere near the thick end of 2,000kg, or the range is going to be rubbish. Or most likely split the difference and be quite heavy and quite poor range. I'll guess at 70-75kwh battery, 1,700kg and 250-275 miles claimed NEDC range and likely well under 200 miles real-world usable range I think that's a bit pessimistic. Tesla's current Model 3 is about 1,800kg and has range quite a bit higher than that - 370 claimed WLTP but well over 200 real world. I think that's probably enough. Sorry, I indeed meant WLTP not NEDC. If you look at the range of the Taycan versus Model S...at the moment, weight for weight and battery capacity for battery capacity, Tesla gives you much more range than Porsche. I doubt the electric 718 will be as high as 370 WLTP and I suspect the real-world usable range (taking into consideration in the real world you don't arrive at the charger with zero miles of range left) will be under 200 miles, especially given it's a sports car and you're that much more likely to the use the performance more often. Anyway, will be interesting to see how it turns out. Hopefully, I am indeed being pessimistic!

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.] https://thumbsnap.com/sc/riufAkTP.jpg https://thumbsnap.com/sc/oEoQycBa.jpg https://thumbsnap.com/sc/Z7kCwfJu.jpg

esotericar said: But pity they have decided to go with Taycan style headlights. Taycan is a good looking car, but the Cayster had developed its own front end vibe and pity that it's being dropped in favour of the corporate EV visage. EV Macan getting the same headlight treatment, it seems. ! Look again. They are not taycan shaped lights. The normal looking 718 light appears to be under the tape.

TTmonkey said: Look again. They are not taycan shaped lights. The normal looking 718 light appears to be under the tape. I did look. Very closely. And on the contrary they've added some fake bits to make it look like they're Cayster style lights. I think they are Taycan shaped underneath. Time will tell, but IMO they are very, very likely Taycan style.

Dr S said: Key questions are weight and range. let's see Price? A leccy Boxster ain't costing £50k, more like £75k. For a fun car with a real-world range of close to 100 miles when driven as intended. Would make a nice boulevard cruiser, pop to the Ace Cafe etc..

I struggle to see what the appeal is if I am honest…obviously if you daily it and it fits with your use that’s different but as a fun/weekend car ? I really struggle with it.

Exciting news they could make it look like anything. Maybe like the original concept, that would be cool.. Looks at the pictures… oh!

Key questions for me are weight and price... I suspect £75k-90k with options... Weight I am going to take a punt at 1900kg With those stats I wouldn't be remotely interested in it - If they could make it say 1300kg with a base price of circa £50k it would be interesting... Probably not interesting enough for me to actually want to buy one but still interesting. I'd prefer to see a market disrupter brand launch a sub-1000kg "mid battery" roadster for sub £30k... Range would be less of an issue than weight and price if the car is genuinely fun and looks good, in my opinion...

Llew said: Key questions for me are weight and price... I suspect £75k-90k with options... Weight I am going to take a punt at 1900kg Surely no more than the lighter versions of Tesla 3 at 1650kg ish. Which is still absolutely horrifying. Price probs not far off, it doesn't bear thinking about really does it? I'd rather chop off my pecker tbh. Dunc.

This is the most depressing thread on PH

esotericar said: TTmonkey said: Look again. They are not taycan shaped lights. The normal looking 718 light appears to be under the tape. I did look. Very closely. And on the contrary they've added some fake bits to make it look like they're Cayster style lights. I think they are Taycan shaped underneath. Time will tell, but IMO they are very, very likely Taycan style. Maybe you are right, does look odd. Would also be odd to disguise a shape that they are not making, whilst making it look a lot like a shape that they are making, but in disguise, if you follow me?

thompson9745 said: This is the most depressing thread on PH Get used to it

Not sure about how these are going to work. Recently test drove a Tesla model Y. Impressive bit of kit if you want to daily commute in it and drive it sensibly to get some range out if it. However as soon as you drove it in 'weekend mode' the range vanished and it needed to be returned to be charged. An electric boxster, if you take it out and drive it as you want to drive a sports car you are not going to be able to go very far into the countryside until you are worrying about range with no charging points around. Also an electric boxster is likely to be very quick which means putting your foot down is going to result in you travelling at very high licence losing speeds very quickly. For this reason I've just bought one of the lowest mileage 981's I could find with sports exhaust. Can drive that at decent speeds with amazing sounds and if my tank gets a little low can fill up in minutes. Hopefully for this reason 981's will still be sought after for years to come?!!

D4rez said: thompson9745 said: This is the most depressing thread on PH Get used to it No thanks.

One positive about the EV Boxster. It’s going to make a 718 4 cylinder sound like a monster…!

TTmonkey said: Maybe you are right, does look odd. Would also be odd to disguise a shape that they are not making, whilst making it look a lot like a shape that they are making, but in disguise, if you follow me? IMO, all they are doing is trying (not very hard) to make a Taycan style unit look a bit more conventionally Cayster. If you look at the right hand unit here (as you look at it in the image) You can clearly see the shape. Porsche added a bit of decal above it to make the unit look a tiny bit like a old style light. You've also light units stacked horizontally internally as opposed to vertically as it's wider, shallower unit, versus the taller, narrower existing Cayster unit.

thompson9745 said: D4rez said: thompson9745 said: This is the most depressing thread on PH Get used to it No thanks. No sure it's entirely the end of the world. Versus the base and S model, I'd rather have electric. The turbo flat four sounds seriously rough and both the response and power delivery are not remotely to my preference - it's not just the noise that's problematic for me, I get no pleasure from working that engine. So may as well go EV and get perfect response. OK, EV power delivery has major issues that few people talk about IMO (basically, the power simply tails off when you keep your foot in, the opposite to a good sports car engine that builds to a crescendo the harder you work it), and there's no transmission involvement. But for me if the choice is EV or the F4T, I'd take EV. Of course, nat asp F6 miles preferable to both, the demise of the F4T will be no loss at at all for me.

Cheib said: I struggle to see what the appeal is if I am honest…obviously if you daily it and it fits with your use that’s different but as a fun/weekend car ? I really struggle with it. I think the main appeal is that you pretty soon won't be able to buy a combustion engined sports car Coming back to the weight, the original Tesla Roadster was 1305kg. I suspect the Boxster/Cayman won't be much heavier than the current road cars, nearer 1500kg than the 1800-1900kg being bandied about in here. It will likely have almost double the torque of the petrol engined cars and is likely to be a lot more fun than you're giving it credit for.

With current battery technology, how is it going to weigh 1500kg and still have a decent range?

Isn’t the range just a consequence of the battery capacity needed for the desired acceleration? In a similar way that the Tesla Roadster is predicted to have a phenomenal range, it’s a consequence not a primary aim?

Maybe we need to start thinking about what makes driving a car fun ? Supersonic licence busting (and unsafe ?) speeds on normal roads is accepted for most, as not fun. Getting the most out of a beautiful chassis at half sensible speeds it is accepted by most, is fun. If this minimises weight and creates a decent compromise between power, range and price .... then I could live with the option to choose the noise I hear inside the cabin ! I guess the acid test question is therefore, where do these criteria settle ? I used to think that a 1.6 Ford Capri was the perfect small family car ... sporty, 0-60 in 10 seconds, 30+ mpg, 100mph top speed, ... and I never thought about weight but I'm guessing 1100Kg's max ? I am all in favour of conscience free affordable fun, even if it will take time for electricity generation to be zero carbon. The big problem I have with this is the recycling of old batteries ... will these be used for power walls in homes with solar panels ? Or will they end up in a pile in a hole in some far flung part of the world creating a new environmental disaster ? Do we just solve one problem to create a smaller one ? Twenty years ago the Chinese set about looking at a future that other nations were blind to ... the selection of economically precious raw materials ... their sourcing and purchase at then "unwanted" prices. Now they control a very high percentage of rare earths, lithium, and the processing of these raw materials with a carefully regulated supply chain based on years of installing infrastructure into developing countries. The result is the excellent pricing and availability of the humble ... and rather good MG range of electric cars. I thing that we really need to get our thinking caps on and do the same in the smart generation of power and use of this energy ... and stop looking at faster / bigger / more expensive / built impossibly cheaply circle that cannot be closed. Surely current events which we see every day will help us to appreciate how compratively small affordable smart things can make us very happy ? Edited by ChrisW. on Thursday 10th November 09:43

ChrisW. said: Maybe we need to start thinking about what makes driving a car fun ? Supersonic licence busting (and unsafe ?) speeds on normal roads is accepted for most, as not fun. Getting the most out of a beautiful chassis at half sensible speeds it is accepted by most, is fun. If this minimises weight and creates a decent compromise between power, range and price .... then I could live with the option to choose the noise I hear inside the cabin ! I guess the acid test question is therefore, where do these criteria settle ? I used to think that a 1.6 Ford Capri was the perfect small family car ... sporty, 0-60 in 10 seconds, 30+ mpg, 100mph top speed, ... and I never thought about weight but I'm guessing 1100Kg's max ? I am all in favour of conscience free affordable fun, even if it will take time for electricity generation to be zero carbon. The big problem I have with this is the recycling of old batteries ... will these be used for power walls in homes with solar panels ? Or will they end up in a pile in a hole in some far flung part of the world creating a new environmental disaster ? Do we just solve one problem to create a smaller one ? Twenty years ago the Chinese set about looking at a future that other nations were blind to ... the selection of economically precious raw materials ... their sourcing and purchase at then "unwanted" prices. Now they control a very high percentage of rare earths, lithium, and the processing of these raw materials with a carefully regulated supply chain based on years of installing infrastructure into developing countries. The result is the excellent pricing and availability of the humble ... and rather good MG range of electric cars. I thing that we really need to get our thinking caps on and do the same in the smart generation of power and use of this energy ... and stop looking at faster / bigger / more expensive / built impossibly cheaply circle that cannot be closed. Surely current events which we see every day will help us to appreciate how compratively small affordable smart things can make us very happy ? Edited by ChrisW. on Thursday 10th November 09:43 Sorry but you have just spouted a complete load of utter tosh

wisbech said: OTOH it is mostly a weekend, fun car with limited luggage space not a grand tourer. Why does it need long range? I would have thought keep the weight down Ummm mine is my daily & my only car

ChrisW. said: Supersonic licence busting (and unsafe ?) speeds on normal roads is accepted for most, as not fun. Getting the most out of a beautiful chassis at half sensible speeds it is accepted by most, is fun. Can't see how that is remotely true. You only need to look at the spec of cars on sale today to see that's not what sells in volume. Small handful of new cars that buck the trend. Otherwise, it's near universally about power, numbers and outright performance. Oh and this: ChrisW. said: The big problem I have with this is the recycling of old batteries ... will these be used for power walls in homes with solar panels ? Or will they end up in a pile in a hole in some far flung part of the world creating a new environmental disaster ? Do we just solve one problem to create a smaller one ? Car batteries won't just be buried in the ground. There will be money to be made recycling them. But the environmental impact of producing batteries on such a large scale in the first place is certainly problematical. Edited by esotericar on Thursday 10th November 12:04

esotericar said: No sure it's entirely the end of the world. Versus the base and S model, I'd rather have electric. The turbo flat four sounds seriously rough and both the response and power delivery are not remotely to my preference - it's not just the noise that's problematic for me, I get no pleasure from working that engine. So may as well go EV and get perfect response. OK, EV power delivery has major issues that few people talk about IMO (basically, the power simply tails off when you keep your foot in, the opposite to a good sports car engine that builds to a crescendo the harder you work it), and there's no transmission involvement. But for me if the choice is EV or the F4T, I'd take EV. Of course, nat asp F6 miles preferable to both, the demise of the F4T will be no loss at at all for me. Hello as always I mostly disagree with you with you, Yes the F4T doesnt sound that brilliant but there is nothing wrong with the way it goes down the road, I know I owned one for 2.5 years, We have discussed EV's before my opinion hasnt changed they are rubbish and are pointless in a sportscar

esotericar said: Plenty of reasons. Euro trips. Just a weekend away. Let's say you want to drive to Wales or Scotland or really anywhere that's not near home to experience some fun roads. I also personally don't see Boxsters and Caymans as just weekend fun cars. They have excellent luggage space and on the contrary are very good grand tourers. Perfect for a driving holiday in Europe. Loads of luggage space for two people. Honestly, loads! Central to their appeal is how usable they are, they are very well packaged and very practical for a mid-engine car. That's the whole point of them - ie they're not just toys you take out for an hour or two at the weekend. They're properly thought out and practical cars. So, in that context, you want as much range as any other car. With you here on usability. All Porsche sports cars, even 911s, can accommodate a lot of stuff along with the passengers. I rather like the look of this. Assuming, being a Porsche, it’s a good drive, what’s the range?

Charlie_1 said: ello as always I mostly disagree with you with you, Yes the F4T doesnt sound that brilliant but there is nothing wrong with the way it goes down the road, I know I owned one for 2.5 years, We have discussed EV's before my opinion hasnt changed they are rubbish and are pointless in a sportscar F4T has plenty of shove. But for me that's it. Sounds bad, don't like the lag and don't like the turbo power delivery. Obviously if you own one for several years you're going to be OK with those aspects. But the F4T is very different from an NA motor in more than just noise.

esotericar said: ChrisW. said: Supersonic licence busting (and unsafe ?) speeds on normal roads is accepted for most, as not fun. Getting the most out of a beautiful chassis at half sensible speeds it is accepted by most, is fun. Can't see how that is remotely true. You only need to look at the spec of cars on sale today to see that's not what sells in volume. Small handful of new cars that buck the trend. Otherwise, it's near universally about power, numbers and outright performance. Oh and this: ChrisW. said: The big problem I have with this is the recycling of old batteries ... will these be used for power walls in homes with solar panels ? Or will they end up in a pile in a hole in some far flung part of the world creating a new environmental disaster ? Do we just solve one problem to create a smaller one ? Car batteries won't just be buried in the ground. There will be money to be made recycling them. But the environmental impact of producing batteries on such a large scale in the first place is certainly problematical. Edited by esotericar on Thursday 10th November 12:04 I can agree also that the production of batteries creates environmental issues ... but it solves the carbon problem. Hence my argument here is for light, fun cars with reasonably small batteries that maximise fun and minimise environmental damage. To do so their components should also be recyclable .... Speed is relative ... I would settle for 0-60 in 6 seconds and tops 120mph with happy cruising at the legal speed limit ... for £40k ... ?

Charlie_1 said: orry but you have just spouted a complete load of utter tosh Well argued Charlie

ChrisW. said: Charlie_1 said: orry but you have just spouted a complete load of utter tosh Well argued Charlie The other poster (not Charlie) is a banned returnee who is clearly trolling the threads again. No point engaging.

The sweet spot for a sports car is surely not much more than a tonne? Adding a battery pack involves around 300kg for a 44kWh battery with the rest of the EV drive train weighing about the same as an ICE engine, gearbox and fuel/ fluids so you could do this with an ultra lightweight sports car with extensive use of composites etc and a single motor EV setup but it would be very expensive and have fairly limited range, especially if driven hard. I doubt there is enough of a market to justify the development costs so sadly I expect EV sports cars to be heavy, more powerful than anyone needs and to rely on electronics to make them handle. Anyone fancy rebodying a BMW i3 though, that would be fun?

One of the best Porsches ever made is about to put on a serious middle age spread and have the mute button pressed.

Alpine did this lash up recently to demonstrate an A110 EV: https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/alpine... 1378KG, 261 miles. Pretty sure a more optimised arrangement (i.e a bespoke EV platform) would be able to get something nearer, say, 1500kg with 330 miles range production ready in two years from now. Particularly as Porsche already have some experience with EV platforms. Bear in mind an ICE Cayman plus a tank of fuel is 1500KG - this isn't 1998 when cars were actually genuinely light. Range doesn't have to be 500 miles for 99% of customers. It's a canard. 300+ miles is good, as it means those rarer slightly longer journeys (particularly rare in this sort of car I'd say) can be done without stopping. But as with all EVs the real advantage is never having to stop for fuel. Just plugin every night, 300 miles every morning, ready to go, no time wasted hanging around petrol station forecourts. And if you're driving 330 miles without stopping for a pee and a sandwich, then your bladder is made of sturdier stuff than mine. Oh, and it'll be unbelievably quick.

ChrisW. said: Charlie_1 said: orry but you have just spouted a complete load of utter tosh Well argued Charlie Dont do arguing with idiots its pointless eg Supersonic licence busting (and unsafe ?) speeds on normal roads is accepted for most, as not fun, everyone I have asked thinks its jolly good fun so thats wrong for a start

bobo79 said: Alpine did this lash up recently to demonstrate an A110 EV: https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/alpine... 1378KG, 261 miles. Pretty sure a more optimised arrangement (i.e a bespoke EV platform) would be able to get something nearer, say, 1500kg with 330 miles range production ready in two years from now. Particularly as Porsche already have some experience with EV platforms. Bear in mind an ICE Cayman plus a tank of fuel is 1500KG - this isn't 1998 when cars were actually genuinely light. Range doesn't have to be 500 miles for 99% of customers. It's a canard. 300+ miles is good, as it means those rarer slightly longer journeys (particularly rare in this sort of car I'd say) can be done without stopping. But as with all EVs the real advantage is never having to stop for fuel. Just plugin every night, 300 miles every morning, ready to go, no time wasted hanging around petrol station forecourts. And if you're driving 330 miles without stopping for a pee and a sandwich, then your bladder is made of sturdier stuff than mine. Oh, and it'll be unbelievably quick. Except quoted range of 300 miles will be well under 200 usable miles in the real world. Nobody arrives at the charger or destination with 0 miles left. So subtract your comfort zone from the range for starters. Personally, I wouldn't want to go much below 50 miles in order that I still have options if I arrive at the charger and it's broken (not terribly uncommon). It's no good turning up at a charger with 15 miles of range left to find it's broken and the nearest alternative fast charger is 25 miles away. And of course if you drive a sports car like a sports car, you'll get nowhere near the quoted range. Real world usable range of that Alpine is likely less than 150 miles. Under 100 likely if you really trash it. The point about 500 miles of quoted range is that it means you'll actually have 250 miles of properly usable sports car EV range. As for wasting time at petrol forecourts, it's typically a few minutes to chuck in a coupe of hundred miles worth of petrol. And there are so many stations in most parts of the country, you don't have to do any planning whatsoever. EVs are great as local runabouts. For medium to long distances, the charging network and the range of the vehicles can be very problematic.

I thought the Mission R was a test bed for a platform that would act as the start for the Cayman \ Boxster replacements? Yeah, I understand that there will be enthusiasts that absolutely will not want an EV based sports car. However there will undoubtedly be a market of new customers that will be all over an EV sports car. It won't be long before ICE is legislated off the roads so I'm looking forward to having a more interesting option than just a Suv based EV.

T1berious said: It won't be long before ICE is legislated off the roads so I'm looking forward to having a more interesting option than just a Suv based EV. You think? Going to be very unpopular with 70/80% of the voting population who can’t afford more than a 10-15k car.

bosshog said: T1berious said: It won't be long before ICE is legislated off the roads so I'm looking forward to having a more interesting option than just a Suv based EV. You think? Going to be very unpopular with 70/80% of the voting population who can’t afford more than a 10-15k car. 2030/35 will be kicked into the long grass.

esotericar said: bobo79 said: Alpine did this lash up recently to demonstrate an A110 EV: https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/new-cars/alpine... 1378KG, 261 miles. Pretty sure a more optimised arrangement (i.e a bespoke EV platform) would be able to get something nearer, say, 1500kg with 330 miles range production ready in two years from now. Particularly as Porsche already have some experience with EV platforms. Bear in mind an ICE Cayman plus a tank of fuel is 1500KG - this isn't 1998 when cars were actually genuinely light. Range doesn't have to be 500 miles for 99% of customers. It's a canard. 300+ miles is good, as it means those rarer slightly longer journeys (particularly rare in this sort of car I'd say) can be done without stopping. But as with all EVs the real advantage is never having to stop for fuel. Just plugin every night, 300 miles every morning, ready to go, no time wasted hanging around petrol station forecourts. And if you're driving 330 miles without stopping for a pee and a sandwich, then your bladder is made of sturdier stuff than mine. Oh, and it'll be unbelievably quick. Except quoted range of 300 miles will be well under 200 usable miles in the real world. Nobody arrives at the charger or destination with 0 miles left. So subtract your comfort zone from the range for starters. Personally, I wouldn't want to go much below 50 miles in order that I still have options if I arrive at the charger and it's broken (not terribly uncommon). It's no good turning up at a charger with 15 miles of range left to find it's broken and the nearest alternative fast charger is 25 miles away. And of course if you drive a sports car like a sports car, you'll get nowhere near the quoted range. Real world usable range of that Alpine is likely less than 150 miles. Under 100 likely if you really trash it. The point about 500 miles of quoted range is that it means you'll actually have 250 miles of properly usable sports car EV range. As for wasting time at petrol forecourts, it's typically a few minutes to chuck in a coupe of hundred miles worth of petrol. And there are so many stations in most parts of the country, you don't have to do any planning whatsoever. EVs are great as local runabouts. For medium to long distances, the charging network and the range of the vehicles can be very problematic. FYI I’ve had an EV for 18 months now and there is no way I would ever go back to ICE as a daily driver. I have an Elise as well but since having a Taycan I am far less inclined to use it, even during summer. My Taycan was rated at 230 miles or so when I bought it. In summer I get 300 out of it in long distance trips. That will be 10%-15% more than that after the software update I’m having in a couple of weeks. I.e way above what the quoted range is. And the theory about more than being under 200 real world is just utter tosh. I have used public public charging about 8 times in 18 months. Including 4 when going to the south of France and back, when I’d have wanted to stop any way for a bite. I commute a round trip of about 90 miles per day. Every morning I wake up and have a full charge and never need to go to a petrol station. I’ve saved time v a petrol car at petrol fire courts overall, for sure. And a stack load of cash (for what it’s worth - no one buys a Porsche to save money). Many of the (same old) arguments about EVs come from people who have never lived with one. If they had, they’d realise they are either vastly overstated or irrelevant. I like the sound of a flat six as much as the next man, but I imagine my Taycan will be replaced by an EV sports car of some kind when the time comes, be it a Porsche, Alpine or Lotus.

T1berious said: I thought the Mission R was a test bed for a platform that would act as the start for the Cayman \ Boxster replacements? Yeah, I understand that there will be enthusiasts that absolutely will not want an EV based sports car. However there will undoubtedly be a market of new customers that will be all over an EV sports car. It won't be long before ICE is legislated off the roads so I'm looking forward to having a more interesting option than just a Suv based EV. The mission R is based on a current gen Cayman chassis.

I may be in the minority but I'm actually looking forward to an electric Cayman, in fact it could be just about perfect for me as an everyday work car assuming that electric vehicles continue to enjoy favourable taxation. I currently have a Taycan turbo for work and I think it's excellent apart from range and size, if these two aspects could be addressed then I would be very happy - a new electric Cayman could well do this. Who wouldn't want to drive a Cayman or Boxster to work rather than an Audi A4/BMW 3 series etc if that is the choice? Now if only the charging infrastructure could get sorted out... Just for balance, I have had two 981's (Boxster S and Spyder) and I really liked those so can completely understand their attraction. I've also got my name down for an electric Macan, and will do for a Cayman.

bobo79 said: In summer I get 300 out of it in long distance trips. Is that downhill with a tail wind when the temp isn't too hot or too cold? How about real world in the middle of winter in the cold and rain mainly high speed up hills on the motorway?

thompson9745 said: Is that downhill with a tail wind when the temp isn't too hot or too cold? How about real world in the middle of winter in the cold and rain mainly high speed up hills on the motorway? It's my normal commute over the mendips (i.e. not flat) and back every day. I'm in normal traffic and not driving like a nob. Last winter was about 235-240 - I'd imagine I get nearer 250-260 with the update.

bobo79 said: thompson9745 said: Is that downhill with a tail wind when the temp isn't too hot or too cold? How about real world in the middle of winter in the cold and rain mainly high speed up hills on the motorway? It's my normal commute over the mendips (i.e. not flat) and back every day. I'm in normal traffic and not driving like a nob. Last winter was about 235-240 - I'd imagine I get nearer 250-260 with the update. I presume you have a 4S? At the current temperature I get about 10 miles less than that out of my turbo. I wouldn't get too excited about the software update, I had mine updated about 6 weeks ago and rather than increasing the range it reduced it by about 10% - this remains the case after multiple charging cycles and 2000 miles - thanks Porsche, very helpful. If I'd have known this beforehand I wouldn't have had it done - it's mainly about changing a couple of sensors.

bobo79 said: thompson9745 said: Is that downhill with a tail wind when the temp isn't too hot or too cold? How about real world in the middle of winter in the cold and rain mainly high speed up hills on the motorway? It's my normal commute over the mendips (i.e. not flat) and back every day. I'm in normal traffic and not driving like a nob. Last winter was about 235-240 - I'd imagine I get nearer 250-260 with the update. That's seriously impressive. Given charging facilities as available and reliable as agas station, I could live with that. I'd still miss six cylinders though...

Flying machine said: bobo79 said: thompson9745 said: Is that downhill with a tail wind when the temp isn't too hot or too cold? How about real world in the middle of winter in the cold and rain mainly high speed up hills on the motorway? It's my normal commute over the mendips (i.e. not flat) and back every day. I'm in normal traffic and not driving like a nob. Last winter was about 235-240 - I'd imagine I get nearer 250-260 with the update. I presume you have a 4S? At the current temperature I get about 10 miles less than that out of my turbo. I wouldn't get too excited about the software update, I had mine updated about 6 weeks ago and rather than increasing the range it reduced it by about 10% - this remains the case after multiple charging cycles and 2000 miles - thanks Porsche, very helpful. If I'd have known this beforehand I wouldn't have had it done - it's mainly about changing a couple of sensors. Yes a 4S. Might be the update overstates range - more like Tesla do? I’ve seen many tests where Taycan is well over published range figures and the Model S well under (though still ahead - but not by as much as publisher at all). I suppose it’s like Porsche under rating BHP values with ICE engines.

T1berious said: I thought the Mission R was a test bed for a platform that would act as the start for the Cayman \ Boxster replacements? Yeah, I understand that there will be enthusiasts that absolutely will not want an EV based sports car. However there will undoubtedly be a market of new customers that will be all over an EV sports car. It won't be long before ICE is legislated off the roads so I'm looking forward to having a more interesting option than just a Suv based EV. "Yeah, I understand that there will be enthusiasts that absolutely will not want an EV based sports car. However there will undoubtedly be a market of new customers that will be all over an EV sports car." my money says not

I remember the Nissan GTR being respected for its performance but widely criticized for the weight (1700kg) and 4WD application in a sports car. And yet 15 years later, 4WD is common in the majority of performance cars sold and the weight is about bang average for cars on the category...

thompson9745 said: bobo79 said: In summer I get 300 out of it in long distance trips. Is that downhill with a tail wind when the temp isn't too hot or too cold? How about real world in the middle of winter in the cold and rain mainly high speed up hills on the motorway? Not doubt 300 miles possible cruising long distance at optimal speed in perfect conditions. Could be easily half of that ragging the same car round B roads in colder weather. And, again, you're not going to run the thing to 0 miles range, so you'd be looking at well under 150 miles usable range. As range increases, the margin you need to leave becomes less significant. If the car has a range of 1,000 miles, keeping 50 miles in hand is inconsequential. When the range is 150 miles driven hard, keeping 50 miles in hand makes a big difference! Anyway, if anything I'd argue a sports car needs more range than a normal car given the driving style remit. You can easily cut the range in half or worse spanking a car about rather than cruising. Which again is why I'd want a sports car that could do 500 miles in normal conditions, thereby ensuring circa 250 miles of spanking it range. I think people are generally underestimating the impact the sports car remit will have on range in the real world. Not all the time, obviously, but when driven like an actual sports car.

esotericar said: I think people are generally underestimating the impact the sports car remit will have on range in the real world. Not all the time, obviously, but when driven like an actual sports car. I rarely drive ever my sports car for more than 100 miles in one go, fwiw. Mainly weekend blats and the odd commute when the weather is decent. And I doubt I've ever driven it 'properly' hard for more than about 50 miles. The idea of driving like a nob for 250 miles seems quite mad to me, but horses for courses, obviously. The main two issues I have with an EV sports car are weight (which, given a Cayman plus fuel is 1.5 tonnes and a 911 Turbo S is 1.75 tonnes probably isn't as big a deal as it appears at first glace) as well as noise. Thouigh I already feel like a loud engine is a bit of a guilty pleasure, so i imagine in a few years I won't care too much, except as a treat. And people under 30 will think anything with an ICE incredibly antiquated and anti social... I'll never sell my Elise, incidentally - and I'm definitely an 'enthusiast', but after using an EV so much I welcome the future.

bobo79 said: And I doubt I've ever driven it 'properly' hard for more than about 50 miles. The idea of driving like a nob for 250 miles seems quite mad to me, but horses for courses, obviously. Nobody was implying that. The scenario, as I described above, might be to drive from, somewhere in the south of England to blatt about in Wales for the day. Not a remotely implausible scenario, could easily be over 250 miles. It's something lots of people actually do. You'd need a huge amount of range to do that on one charge. Or driving up to Bedford to do a track day. Or roap tripping in Europe. Or just using the car as a car. So, you might not drive your sports car any distance. But many do. And indeed that's exactly why they might choose a Cayster over something like an Elise. Because the Porsche is expressly designed to be good as a practical, usable car. It's also why I don't have an Elise. Great cars, but I prefer something more usable. There's probably a market for an Elise-like EV with short range. A short-range Cayster would not be a great proposition, I don't think. Usability has always been central to the appeal of mainstream Porsche sports car models.

And I doubt I've ever driven it 'properly' hard for more than about 50 miles. The idea of driving like a nob for 250 miles seems quite mad to me, but horses for courses, obviously. Sometimes I read stuff and I think what are they talking about makes no sense

esotericar said: Nobody was implying that. The scenario, as I described above, might be to drive from, somewhere in the south of England to blatt about in Wales for the day. Not a remotely implausible scenario, could easily be over 250 miles. It's something lots of people actually do. You'd need a huge amount of range to do that on one charge. Or driving up to Bedford to do a track day. Or roap tripping in Europe. Or just using the car as a car. So, you might not drive your sports car any distance. But many do. And indeed that's exactly why they might choose a Cayster over something like an Elise. Because the Porsche is expressly designed to be good as a practical, usable car. It's also why I don't have an Elise. Great cars, but I prefer something more usable. There's probably a market for an Elise-like EV with short range. A short-range Cayster would not be a great proposition, I don't think. Usability has always been central to the appeal of mainstream Porsche sports car models. See this is where you confuse me because this a properly sensible statement spot on in fact

Charlie_1 said: esotericar said: Nobody was implying that. The scenario, as I described above, might be to drive from, somewhere in the south of England to blatt about in Wales for the day. Not a remotely implausible scenario, could easily be over 250 miles. It's something lots of people actually do. You'd need a huge amount of range to do that on one charge. Or driving up to Bedford to do a track day. Or roap tripping in Europe. Or just using the car as a car. So, you might not drive your sports car any distance. But many do. And indeed that's exactly why they might choose a Cayster over something like an Elise. Because the Porsche is expressly designed to be good as a practical, usable car. It's also why I don't have an Elise. Great cars, but I prefer something more usable. There's probably a market for an Elise-like EV with short range. A short-range Cayster would not be a great proposition, I don't think. Usability has always been central to the appeal of mainstream Porsche sports car models. See this is where you confuse me because this a properly sensible statement spot on in fact Yep, perfectly sums it up for me too. I can see that EVs will work for the mundane and the family stuff, but not the really fun ‘driving’ stuff!

You know, it’s not that hard to “fill up” on those occasions you want to drive to wales for a blast, either. And in 2 years time it will be even easier than it is now (when it is not hard at all).

Not sure how to do the 'sports car remit' bit. I end up driving my 991 pretty much as I do my other cars because I easily catch up some dawdler doing 50. If there's a chance to overtake I do so but then catch up the next 50 mph roadblock shortly after. And I'm likely to be last in a queue. Opportunities to drive at the speed I want and in the manner I want are rare indeed. In an eBoxster the range would probably last me pretty well...

Maxym said: Not sure how to do the 'sports car remit' bit. I end up driving my 991 pretty much as I do my other cars because I easily catch up some dawdler doing 50. If there's a chance to overtake I do so but then catch up the next 50 mph roadblock shortly after. And I'm likely to be last in a queue. Opportunities to drive at the speed I want and in the manner I want are rare indeed. In an eBoxster the range would probably last me pretty well... Just keep overtaking. Always amazes me the number of defeatist people who can’t do this. Getting stuck behind the usual 50 train is no problem, overtake and keep leap frogging making space as needed until you get past. Of course I will concede EV acceleration will also be great at this.

thompson9745 said: Just keep overtaking. Always amazes me the number of defeatist people who can’t do this. Getting stuck behind the usual 50 train is no problem, overtake and keep leap frogging making space as needed until you get past. Of course I will concede EV acceleration will also be great at this. This isn’t really possible anymore on British roads where queues can be long and gaps minimal.

I Like Tea said: thompson9745 said: Just keep overtaking. Always amazes me the number of defeatist people who can’t do this. Getting stuck behind the usual 50 train is no problem, overtake and keep leap frogging making space as needed until you get past. Of course I will concede EV acceleration will also be great at this. This isn’t really possible anymore on British roads where queues can be long and gaps minimal. And dash cams to punish every misjudgement.

Please don’t make it too big or heavy… The inevitable increase in weight can somewhat be mitigated, but there’s nothing that can be done about physical size. The beauty of a Cayman/Boxster is that they’re relatively small and placeable, and reap the rewards from this. The 911’s already suffered from too much middle-aged spread!

Evanivitch said: I Like Tea said: thompson9745 said: Just keep overtaking. Always amazes me the number of defeatist people who can’t do this. Getting stuck behind the usual 50 train is no problem, overtake and keep leap frogging making space as needed until you get past. Of course I will concede EV acceleration will also be great at this. This isn’t really possible anymore on British roads where queues can be long and gaps minimal. And dash cams to punish every misjudgement. Jesus. Far too many negative nellies on this thread. Believe it or not you don’t just get jailed because some confused pensioner submitted some footage.

thompson9745 said: Jesus. Far too many negative nellies on this thread. Believe it or not you don’t just get jailed because some confused pensioner submitted some footage. Why the melodramatic response? Police encourage people to submit dashcam footage all the time.

Evanivitch said: Why the melodramatic response? Police encourage people to submit dashcam footage all the time. Indeed. I found this bit particularly unrealistic: “ overtake and keep leap frogging making space as needed until you get past.” The reality is trying to brake down to 50mph to squeeze into a space whilst the car at the rear of said space closes it further while sitting on their horn giving you main beam, what fun

I Like Tea said: Evanivitch said: Why the melodramatic response? Police encourage people to submit dashcam footage all the time. Indeed. I found this bit particularly unrealistic: “ overtake and keep leap frogging making space as needed until you get past.” The reality is trying to brake down to 50mph to squeeze into a space whilst the car at the rear of said space closes it further while sitting on their horn giving you main beam, what fun Unless you drive like a complete loon not every dash cam submission results in a custodial sentence. With regard to the suggested scenario, just get a rear cam since horn and main beam for a perfectly legitimate overtake is a tad aggressive. Anyway apologies for diverting the topic as I fear this is a subject for another thread…

[Image-only or quote-only post; no author-written text.]

julian987R said: Nice exhaust. 718.2…? Let’s hope,eh…

thompson9745 said: Nice exhaust. 718.2…? Let’s hope,eh… maybe, or perhaps it is just for aesthetics and serves no purpose. I am not sure there will be a Gen 2, won't it just be the EV model from the next iteration onwards? and I am not sure the 718 monicker will remain.

julian987R said: thompson9745 said: Nice exhaust. 718.2…? Let’s hope,eh… maybe, or perhaps it is just for aesthetics and serves no purpose. I am not sure there will be a Gen 2, won't it just be the EV model from the next iteration onwards? and I am not sure the 718 monicker will remain. Ah crap, no intakes

thompson9745 said: julian987R said: thompson9745 said: Nice exhaust. 718.2…? Let’s hope,eh… maybe, or perhaps it is just for aesthetics and serves no purpose. I am not sure there will be a Gen 2, won't it just be the EV model from the next iteration onwards? and I am not sure the 718 monicker will remain. Ah crap, no intakes Yep, and I reckon that exhaust is just a red herring and won't be in the final production. Looks a bit Mazda'esque without the air intakes. The front grills look dreadful in my opinion. Not withstanding its spy shots, but it doesn't look like it'll be a looker.

Silly me put my headphones on .... it sounds electric, so it doesn't sound, it whines. On the other hand, this could be one of the best of what is coming ....

ChrisW. said: Silly me put my headphones on .... it sounds electric, so it doesn't sound, it whines. On the other hand, this could be one of the best of what is coming .... I am sure it will be great, as was the original iPhone at the time. But me thinks the first Boxster EV release will date very quickly as the technology in batteries evolves.

That’d be my worry too. But then, if bought on PCP it’s the manufacturer taking all the depreciation risk so who cares if tech is a lot better in 3 years or whatever.

That is the best reason for using PCP ... the level of the final payment will say it all ! What is the latest on solid state batteries ?

julian987R said: I am sure it will be great, as was the original iPhone at the time. But me thinks the first Boxster EV release will date very quickly as the technology in batteries evolves. Isn't that what people said 10 years ago about electric cars? Has the technology gotten better, sure. Have old EV prices plummeted? Certainly not.

Evanivitch said: julian987R said: I am sure it will be great, as was the original iPhone at the time. But me thinks the first Boxster EV release will date very quickly as the technology in batteries evolves. Isn't that what people said 10 years ago about electric cars? Has the technology gotten better, sure. Have old EV prices plummeted? Certainly not. I think they have plummeted used price wise? haven't they?

julian987R said: Evanivitch said: julian987R said: I am sure it will be great, as was the original iPhone at the time. But me thinks the first Boxster EV release will date very quickly as the technology in batteries evolves. Isn't that what people said 10 years ago about electric cars? Has the technology gotten better, sure. Have old EV prices plummeted? Certainly not. I think they have plummeted used price wise? haven't they? Autotrader Cheapest Model S £30k, but we're £50k new. Cheapest Nissan Leaf still £4.5-5k, had for £21.5k new A VW Golf that started life at a similar price to the Leaf has a similar price now.

Evanivitch said: julian987R said: Evanivitch said: julian987R said: I am sure it will be great, as was the original iPhone at the time. But me thinks the first Boxster EV release will date very quickly as the technology in batteries evolves. Isn't that what people said 10 years ago about electric cars? Has the technology gotten better, sure. Have old EV prices plummeted? Certainly not. I think they have plummeted used price wise? haven't they? Autotrader Cheapest Model S £30k, but we're £50k new. Cheapest Nissan Leaf still £4.5-5k, had for £21.5k new A VW Golf that started life at a similar price to the Leaf has a similar price now. Thanks, that confirms it, they have plummeted and I suspect the Boxster EV will plummet hard after a few subsequent Gen updates.

julian987R said: Thanks, that confirms it, they have plummeted and I suspect the Boxster EV will plummet hard after a few subsequent Gen updates. You find it tough to admit when you're wrong then

Evanivitch said: julian987R said: Thanks, that confirms it, they have plummeted and I suspect the Boxster EV will plummet hard after a few subsequent Gen updates. You find it tough to admit when you're wrong then How so? a car that goes from £21K to £4K, and £50K to £30K, those are significant drops. I am not convinced you are up-to speed on this thread. Best regards.

julian987R said: How so? a car that goes from £21K to £4K, and £50K to £30K, those are significant drops. I am not convinced you are up-to speed on this thread. Best regards. No, they've depreciated. And less than or in equal magnitude to comparable ICE cars. The idea that EV technology quickly becomes obsolete and impacts second hand prices is unfounded and illogical. But then you take pleasure in being wrong, again and again and again.

It’ll be utterly soulless, I can’t see the point. I think I would rather go without. Luckily there will plenty of real ones around to see me out.

Evanivitch said: julian987R said: How so? a car that goes from £21K to £4K, and £50K to £30K, those are significant drops. I am not convinced you are up-to speed on this thread. Best regards. No, they've depreciated. And less than or in equal magnitude to comparable ICE cars. The idea that EV technology quickly becomes obsolete and impacts second hand prices is unfounded and illogical. But then you take pleasure in being wrong, again and again and again. you have gone the wrong way there in the debate, comparison to ICE cars isn't part of the debate. I feel you are warping the conversation to suit the point to want to make - which is solid and spot on, but so too is your agreement that EV used prices see significant depreciation - thats all we are discussing there. We are talking cheese on toast, you are introducing baked beans - no need to.

thompson9745 said: Nice exhaust. 718.2…? Let’s hope,eh… 718 is in fact already .2 car. It's a 981.2, in reality, never mind the 982 codename.

Evanivitch said: No, they've depreciated. And less than or in equal magnitude to comparable ICE cars. The idea that EV technology quickly becomes obsolete and impacts second hand prices is unfounded and illogical. But then you take pleasure in being wrong, again and again and again. While I agree EV residuals seem fine, there's definitely substance in the idea that EVs are at the beginning of a very steep development curve that will see the technology advance extremely rapidly before the gains become more gradual. In particular, if there's an big breakthrough in battery any time from now until the medium term, that will likely wallop residuals. If something like solid state tech means that EVs with real-world ranges of 500 miles are norm, all the (real-world) sub 200 mile of today will look pretty hopeless. And that's not academic willy waving spec like top speed. Moreover, while old ICE cars can have a certain charm due to a lack of sophistication and refinement, it's hard to imagine an EV being charming because it has crap range or takes longer to charge. Put another way, while there are plenty of reasons why you might choose an old ICE car over something new today, it's very hard to think of what you might favour in today's EVs versus whatever is on sale in 15 years that has much better range and charging - and probably better long term battery durability etc.

Yep you certainly don’t want to be owning a EV with current battery technology. I’m no fan of PCP but in this case (and only this case, I.e. early tech EVs) I can see the appeal of limiting your risk.

cabbalisticar said: While I agree EV residuals seem fine, there's definitely substance in the idea that EVs are at the beginning of a very steep development curve that will see the technology advance extremely rapidly before the gains become more gradual. . Again, just isn't true of the last 10 years. We've already seen the Nissan Leaf go from a 24kWh to a 62kWh battery in the same chassis. The energy density of the assembled batteries has increased massively over the last 10 years. The 70-80kWh of the early Model S (a large saloon in itself) is now commonly available in Kona and ID3 sized vehicles.

Evanivitch said: Again, just isn't true of the last 10 years. We've already seen the Nissan Leaf go from a 24kWh to a 62kWh battery in the same chassis. The energy density of the assembled batteries has increased massively over the last 10 years. The 70-80kWh of the early Model S (a large saloon in itself) is now commonly available in Kona and ID3 sized vehicles. Has the energy denisty improved massively? Or have manufacturers just been more willing to put huge 500kg-plus battery packs in cars where once that seemed liked madness? And also that batteries are getting cheaper so where a leaf with a 60-plus kWh battery would have been too expensive, it's now more viable. Energy density has improved in the last 10 years, but I think much of the capacity increase is just bigger batteries.

cabbalisticar said: Has the energy denisty improved massively? Or have manufacturers just been more willing to put huge 500kg-plus battery packs in cars where once that seemed liked madness? And also that batteries are getting cheaper so where a leaf with a 60-plus kWh battery would have been too expensive, it's now more viable. Energy density has improved in the last 10 years, but I think much of the capacity increase is just bigger batteries. The energy density at cell level hasn't improved at that rate (though there has been some improvement) but the energy density of the assembled pack has improved at that rate (hence why I was specific). Even cars like EV6/Ioniq5/Taycan with their 800V architecture haven't made 350/400V obsolete overnight despite the significantly improved charging and thermal management.

Evanivitch said: Even cars like EV6/Ioniq5/Taycan with their 800V architecture haven't made 350/400V obsolete overnight despite the significantly improved charging and thermal management. No 800v hasn't made 400v obsolete overnight. But the question remains, is it plausible that short range and long charging times will add charm to old EVs in future? Or what will the charm of an old EV be in rough equivalent terms to the charm of an old ICE car versus a new ICE car? With old ICE cars people can tune into interesting noises, mechanical transmission and steering feel, more involving control inputs etc. I struggle to see that there's going to be an equivalent for old EVs versus new EVs in 15 or 20 years. The old EVs will sound the same. The inputs will be the same. They'll just have crap range and slow charging and perhaps by then even issues with charging infrastructure compatibility. I also think if there is a big step change in battery tech it will make existing EVs look awfully clunky. So, far, EV tech has changed much. The batteries have gotten bigger, the charging a bit quicker. But we are only now entering the really fast ramp up phase where all the big manufacturers are launching essentially first gen tech that will be rapidly iterated from here. IMO residuals could get ugly, I think 10 years from now, EVs will be dramtically better than they are today, a bigger step change than today versus 10 years ago.

The way I see it, old EVs will be cheap. Very cheap. Purely for people to use as work shuttles and runabouts for as long as they last until they're scrapped for being too uneconomical to repair or when highly model specific electrical components are no longer available. They're white goods, essentially, rather than something you get an emotional attachment to which is where old ICE cars have an attraction. The world needs to find a good and eco-friendly way to recycle old EVs, otherwise we're just kicking the can down the road.

Current batteries degrade over time as well further reducing their range. The tax incentives are good at the moment if you can live with their limited range but I'd certainly not be looking to own one, and no doubt the tax benefits will slowly start to be withdrawn as we see with road tax.

Twinfan said: The way I see it, old EVs will be cheap. Very cheap. Purely for people to use as work shuttles and runabouts for as long as they last until they're scrapped for being too uneconomical to repair or when highly model specific electrical components are no longer available. They're white goods, essentially, rather than something you get an emotional attachment to which is where old ICE cars have an attraction. The world needs to find a good and eco-friendly way to recycle old EVs, otherwise we're just kicking the can down the road. At the moment people are willing to pay £500/kWh for home battery storage. In the extreme case that a Leaf 24kWh loses half it's range, that's still a 12kWh that has a second-life purpose. Modern EVs are circa 40-50kWh batteries, and suffer less battery deterioration (because they aren't taken 0-100-0% daily), so even when the 'chassis' is end of life, there's still 20-40kWh of energy storage available.

New shots of it. Large front grills huh. https://uk.motor1.com/news/626327/porsche-boxster-...