Porsche knew the game was up when a sedan blasts a 911 on acceleration with ease. The Taycan is going to look pretty poor as Tesla steps up 30% improved Mawell battery technology, 3 motor torque vectoring, V3 superchargers and tops it off with the Roadster and full autonomy. When you consider Tesla will now integrate the same handling prowess of the Model 3 on future vehicles old auto has a fight on its hands. The past 10 years dismissive FUD simply wont cut it anymore, well done to Tesla for staying laser focused.

That's been a long 10 years or so Graham. I think the naysayers will be a quantum level quieter from now on. Look at those EV and ICE sales in Norway this month! Cleantechnica reported it.

No the FUD spreader's will still be noisy as heck. Many are being paid to spread the FUD. So it will continue until they are no longer paid to do so.

We're in the middle of a PUMPing of TSLA after the shares were pulled unrealistically low during the DUMP. A few naysayers will be a bit quieter than usual, as per their pay masters' instructions, to help the PUMP along it's way. But with 35% of the float shorted, the noise is, at best, having a temporary reprieve. Hold onto your hat (and your stocks.) Or block your ears and avert your gaze for a few years.

Salute to Elon Musk! And I notice the newbies are discovering that it is not easy to follow Elon, let alone beat him at his own game. Software, battery availability, electric motors, acceleration, you don't buy these things at the corner store.

Are you listening GM? "...there is “significant demand” for electric cars, particularly those which combine sustainability with performance and design." After breaking important ground with the 2011 market introduction of the gen-1 Volt, GM could only tone down the design five model years later with introduction of the gen-2 Volt that looked like every other Asian import and had only modest range improvements. Three (3) years later GM dumps the EREV Volt entirely for a little boxy middle-range BEV, the Bolt.

In comparison, without GM's resources or electrification head start, Hyundai comes along in half the time and brings to market a very nice mid-size SUV EV, the Kona, which offers far more market appeal and performance than the Chevy Bolt. If that's the best GM can do with all their world class resources, they should give up their EV expectations now and outsource to Tesla their EV build requirements the way Toyota did with the RAV EV several years ago to meet CARB regs. GM can always continue to milk their obsolete line of ICE utility trucks for a static market segment. Toyota is no better, the company remains stuck in the past with 20 year old Prius hybrid tech scaled across their Toyota and Lexus brands that have taken ICE efficiency as far anyone can or should go.

VW group has a lot to make amends for in their diesel-gate crimes that extend beyond the VW brand to Audi and Porsche brands. Porsche CEO Klaus Zellmer clearly gets it, the challenge will be to bring along the rest of the company with him, and over come battery shortages and technology challenges.

As for the rest of Detroit, they're not even in the game. GM talks of taking Cadillac "all EV" in 5 years, but that remains to be proven. In that same time, Tesla will be delivering a full line of BEV vehicle models and perhaps even built their first flying and submersible variants of the Model S.

Tesla is the company that continues to set the bar higher each year, for both the automotive and energy sectors, while want-a-be competitors hang onto the past as long as possible while missing opportunities to advance and to evolve, or just haven't figured out the game, because Tesla has re-written the rules...

To be fair about GM, at that point they were hoping EVs were just a phase. their EVs were compliance cars, they didnt want demand and designed the car to keep it as low as possible, if they needed more demand they could cut the price, since their plan wasnt even to make a profit with it, it was simply to get govt EV credits for selling them since the govt fines were worse then the loss from selling their crap EVs.

Now that tesla is proving EVs are here to stay, they are trying to catch up with their hat in their hand and finding out they are years behind and have pissed off and annoyed virtually every customer with their BS and tactics.

I sincerely believe that with Barra at the helm, GM is going to be a shipwreck. They are going to sink like a rock.

As long as there are Republicans, there will be demand for gasoline-burning vehicles, especially huge pick-up trucks.

The GOP makes a lot of money off the corportations that push the oil and gas centric narrative. As long as they do so this will continue.

Not necessary. Republicans can decide Rivian is the real america EV car and jump into it.

You cannot be Republican (especially a Trump supporter) and say you care about the environment . That's an oxymoron. So I assume you only have the EVs because of financial and performance benefit?

"You cannot be Republican (especially a Trump supporter) and say you care about the environment"
You are so prejudiced. Just because someone supports one political party does not mean they support all its views. What if the Republican immigration stance is more important but you still hate their climate denial?

Then you'd be voting for the representatives that share both those values - and definitely not for a president that thinks windmills cause cancer. Don't tell me there are no other options. Your example lists a non-logical priority anyway - Without the climate crisis being addressed, immigration won't be a problem at all...

Typical climate Chicken Little.

You're so right! 97% of scientist MUST be wrong! Live under a rock much?

Pfft. Democrats don't have a monopoly on concern about the environment. They're just the ones whose M.O. is to throw other peoples' money at every problem.

You're so right! Republicans use their own money.for oil subsidies, defense, immigration control and golfing. How did I never see that?

Wrong from the get-go...

You can, but in only shows how little they pay attention or care about facts. The misinformation is deep and difficult to get out of once it's smeared all over you.

Everyone manufactourer's first real EV will be short range, buggy, inefficient. The best legacy players can offers are nice seats, nice buttons, performance wise will be behind.
In a year or two we will see how uneven the playing field is. probably something like Tesla owns 50% of total ev market.

75% in the US. But China will keep Tesla from ever reaching 50% globally. Maybe just in western countries.

I'm rooting for Tesla. Not a car built as a result of being caught rigging emissions numbers, and a company that is still tied to oil, dealer networks, and suppliers that are also closely linked to those groups.

Bravo. Ir takes a lot for an ICE CEO to say that especially when they don't even have a released product yet.
Looking forward to hopefully Porsche at least trying to capture their small segment.

Side note, for the non 911 owners, who in
their right mind goes Porsche for EV instead of a proven M3P or S? SMH

Who would go for the Porsche? People who like the sharper design, better manufacturer reliability and interior comfort.
Of course they are trading those things for Tesla's superior charging network and battery performance. But I bet there a lot of people who make the switch, unless Tesla comes up with a September surprise for a new model S.

The margins on Porsche BEVs will be quite high. Porsche, rightfully so, charges full bore for their clever cars. Their Taycan will be no different.

No one has to worry about Porsche capturing a vast sales market. It will be a small clique of owners. Most of their customers are extremely rich.

That CEO is only repeating what the truth is.

Model S is pretty old at this point, so the comparison is really going to be Model S 2.0 vs. Taycan. Can't compare both cars until they're announced this September. There's lots of people in their right mind who go Porsche, and generally it's for the driving experience, handling, quality, etc. Porsche's are almost never the fastest cars in a straight line, so they will most likely get smoked by the equivalent Tesla in a drag race, so the real question will be whether their handling and quality will outweigh the outright acceleration of the new Model S.

Model 3 Perf. can already outdo BMW sports cars in terms of handling and overall track times. Top Gear finally did a fair test/comparison (compared to their biased BS from the past) of the two, totally expecting the BMW to beat the Tesla in everything except acceleration, only to come away empty-handed and forced to admit the Tesla is better in every way.

Considering the above results, I'd expect the next-gen Model S Perf. to also be able to outdo any Porche with ease.

I read that same article, and I agree that the Model 3 seems to have very good handling and clearly beat the M3, but BMWs are not the gold standard in sport cars and handling, Porsche is. And it's due to features like their Active Suspension Management, Dynamic Chassis Control, and Rear Axle Steering, plus OCD levels of tuning and adjustments that they put into each car they develop. So it would be very unwise to expect any car, from any manufacture, to outdo a Porsche's handling. I'm not saying it's not possible, I'm just saying that isn't some easy task where they put a programmer on it for a few days and figure it out with a software update, they'd have to invest serious resources into it. Plus anytime you're talking about a larger, heavier car (like the Model S), physics work heavily against you and handling isn't so easy anymore.

I really do hope they can match Porsche in that area, because then it would be a slam dunk no brainer to go for the more affordable, faster accelerating and more technologically advanced Tesla. But for now we'll just have to wait and see.

I would expect the new S to have track mode like the M3P, therefore it'll be much more nimble.
Hopefully Tesla has passed initial release slumps and quality won't be an issue, so far so good on the 3.

I think the Model S should go full luxurious and step up pricing to $200,000 ala Porsche.

Turbo??? Petrolheads!

everyone but tesla making evs is crap. all are struggling trying to copy tesla. knowing that selling evs are only losing them sales of their ICE vehiclies the demand for which has been flat for the last 40 years.

The Taycan is a good first effort and can (probably) beat the Model 3P on the track with some massive battery thermal management (at twice the price).

But despite being a major Tesla fan, I can’t wait to see Porsche apply what they learn to their Gen 2 vehicles. Those will be looking to compete with the Roadster 2.

Porsche will struggle in the EV era. With EVs it is much cheaper to make a car that offers great perf and handling, assuming the battery is large enough anyway as range and charging rates are the top priority.
That erases Porsche's main asset, even if they make a car that is a bit faster, offers a bit better handling, the difference will be small. They'll be left with the brand and design but to do well they need to pivot away from perf and towards ...
With autonomy you care about comfort, convenience and safety so that would be a radical shift for someone like Porsche. The even bigger problem is that when it comes to autonomy, VW doesn't even seem to have a strategy defined yet and tthe CEO is not optimistic at all on Level 5 arriving soon.
The easy path forward in the medium term with car ownership is to lead in range+charging rates but Porsche screws up in this area with the Taycan by spending too much on cooling and not enough on pack size and efficiency. It's only a medium term solution anyway as all EVs will offer sufficient charging and range soon enough. Ofc car as a service kill the ownership market even sooner but topic confuses people and they start to protest like they were protesting EVs 10 years ago.

There is always a balance. for those that dont drive much, renting a car via tesla self driving uber like app might be a great option. but for people that drive for their jobs, renting a car near constantly at the same rates would absolutely destroy them financially. In fact, it may come to a point where the govt has to step in if the car manufacturers in general wont sell to individuals while charging high rates.

Conflating people against EVs and people that want to own cars is silly. Reality is that owning on average is always cheaper then renting, full stop. To rent means whoever you are renting from is taking a slice of a profit pie and driving your cost up.

Government won't have to step in. Efficient "price discovery" is one of the things capitalism is pretty good for, as long as we avoid monopolies.

G02 That is a school view that doesnt meet reality. Drug prices, we dont have monopolies, but they blatantly make deals to price fix and in general gouge people, this is an absolute fact and several companies are currently being sued for it. Funny thing is, price gouging is legal, price fixing isnt. What costs a dollar in other markets will cost 100-1000$ in the USA. There is even limits placed on materials and constructed shortages to artificially limit how much of a drug is available, there are studies proving its happening. Then there are the cable companies splitting up the USA so no more then 2 share an area and both rip you off. Then there are car companies only releasing certain kinds of expensive vehicles, you buy it or you get nothing. You can call it what you want, but businesses if large enough can do whatever they want so long as they arnt out in public blatantly breaking laws. The banks themselves were even responsible for the market crash years ago due to their policies on who they gave loans to and how large they were. The govts economists like to pretend it had nothing to do with it but you cant just allow people to request any amount of money for a loan with no ability to pay it back with a rate that changes over time to get worse or a loan where you only ever pay back the interest. The market collapse was guaranteed and plainly visible to ANYONE in the field at the time, but NOBODY higher up CARED, if you talked about it you were a "loony" with conspiracy theories, then when it happened, so quick how everyone forgot there were people saying it would happen.

So-called "gouging" just means there's a temporary spike in demand with a limited supply, so prices SHOULD go up accordingly. (Medicine is a different beast since, in the extreme, everyone would pay anything to save their life or their loved one's, and because there are artificial limits to product availability due to different countries' regulations.) And your bank example is irrelevant to cars: people took larger risks in the hope of making more money and they got burned. (The real problem there was that investors weren't making informed decisions.) Cable companies might be behaving as you say, but in doing so they've opened themselves up to attack from competitors such as streaming companies. That's all to the good. The cable companies will adjust or be replaced. Car companies will end up the same: if they charge more than they should, someone else will undercut them before too long.

Taycan fully electric...Turbo ? Where ?

Turbo? Really?? Bwa-ha-ha-ha!! Probably injected, ported and with some really neat headers, too.

Nikola motors CEO Trevor Milton could take a hint from this guy.

The demand was there before Tesla. When GM first released EV1 just about 2 decades ago, demand was there, but they pulled it from market controlling supply. They did not want the demand then and they were hoping it would phase out now, but this time they were not controlling the supply.

Why do you carry your pet anvil everywhere you go?

So what? Demand was there. Offer was not.

Well done Porsche keep going lets c the taycan first n get a road test a side by side test to the model S would b nice ,.. hope it turns out ok,..