Slashdot Mirror


World's Fastest Hybrid OK'd For Production

thecarchik writes "The Porsche 918 Spyder hybrid supercar, first shown as a concept at this spring's Geneva Motor Show, got official approval as a production model today from the company's board of directors. Just consider the specs: a 500-horsepower, 3.6-liter V-8 engine with a 9200-rpm redline, 0-to-62-mph acceleration of 3.2 seconds, and top speed of 198 miles per hour. Oh, and did we mention it gets 78 miles per gallon on the European cycle? The astounding fuel efficiency comes courtesy of an E-Drive mode that lets the 918 Spyder drive up to 16 miles on pure electric power, though [ahem] not at 198 mph."

35 of 208 comments (clear)

  1. And this one pays for itself... by paulsnx2 · · Score: 3, Funny

    And in only 150 years, the gas you save pays for the car!

    --Assuming you drive an earth mover to work today.

    1. Re:And this one pays for itself... by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How do you know they aren't paying to get the superior performance and power delivery afforded by the torque characteristics of electric motors in the drivetrain?

      --
      If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
    2. Re:And this one pays for itself... by Anarki2004 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      No, the limo driver would cost less.

      --
      The teachers will crack any minute, purple monkey dishwasher.
    3. Re:And this one pays for itself... by ArcherB · · Score: 2, Funny

      If I'm paying a lot of money for a car in order to have threesomes with barely legal chicks. I'm getting a gas guzzling Bugatti to attract shallow hot chicks that will shave their legs and pits.

      Well, for starters, the hippie chicks have shaved all the hair off their bodies to donate to the gulf clean up effort.

      Next, this is the perfect car. First, it's an insanely expensive and fast Porsche, so you still get the hot, shallow chicks. But in the off chance you see that college student chick with a fresh dolphin tattoo who is in the experimental stage trying to define herself at the local "Save the Blind Salamander" protest (yes, a real protest I saw in San Marcos, TX), you also stand a chance with her because this car provides you with the green creds needed to get the ball rolling. (Bonus if your three way is with the hot shallow chick AND the hippie.)

      There is no chick of any political persuasion that can resist who can resist a Porsche that gets 78 MPG.

      --
      There is no "I disagree" mod for a reason. Flamebait, Troll, and Overrated are not substitutes.
  2. SI units by SensiMillia · · Score: 4, Informative

    78 miles per gallon is about 3 liter for 100 km.

    198 miles = 319 kilometers

    1. Re:SI units by trentblase · · Score: 2, Insightful

      How many Joules are in a gallon of gasoline? Is it the amount of energy generated by internal combustion? The amount of energy generated during "ideal" combustion? Maybe it's the amount of energy released during fusion or fission?

      \ How many Joules are used by an electric car? Which losses are we including (transmission, storage, motor efficiency)?

      I'm seriously asking, because I'm not sure a Joules to Joules comparison would necessarily be any more helpful.

    2. Re:SI units by moreati · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The standards to which the EU are trying to move are litres/100 km or kWh/km

    3. Re:SI units by TheLink · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If/when more cars start using lots of electricity to run, you'd probably want distance/kWh since most electricity rates are by kilowatt hour (whether they are taking money from you, or crediting you :) ).

      FWIW there are about 34 megajoules in a litre of petrol. So that's about 9.5kWh/litre. BUT that's not so useful if your fuel supplier doesn't charge you in kWh. After all what most people would want to know is how much it would cost them. For a hybrid car the fuel may be converted to electricity, but it also may not be.

      So what you'd want is a "100% liquid fuel" only distance/litre rate, and a "100% electric" distance/kWh rate, then you can get the distance/$$ for both, so that you can better decide on whether you want to fill up at the fuel station, or charge at home.

      You don't want some marketing bullshit MPG rate, with fine print stating lots of assumptions about electricity cost (which varies a fair bit) and how much you drive on "electric only".

      --
  3. Deceiving. by pwnies · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "78 miles per gallon on the European cycle"

    Sure, and my plug in golf car gets mpg on any test thrown at it. Really that's poor and deceitful advertising. This car is a plug in car - it doesn't generate it's own electricity. It's not like a prius where you just fill it and forget about it, you're supplying another form of energy yourself. Saying what MPG it gets is redundant unless you also show how many Joules of electricity it used in the process as well.

    1. Re:Deceiving. by billcopc · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Or, for the idiotic mass public:

      "Miles per buck"

      Really, that's all people care about. Multiply by the average cost of a gallon of fuel, or kwh of charge, and spit out a number any cousin-fucking retard can understand. Maybe then people will become a tiny bit more conscious about efficiency, and/or take arms against the energy cartels (a nerd can dream, can't he ?)

      --
      -Billco, Fnarg.com
    2. Re:Deceiving. by timeOday · · Score: 2, Informative

      Sure, and my plug in golf car gets mpg on any test thrown at it. Really that's poor and deceitful advertising.

      It is accurate if you remember that the "G" in "MPG" stands for "Gallon", as in, gasoline. Yes, additional energy is required, but energy isn't the main problem - gasoline is. If you live in France, for example, most of that extra energy comes from a nuclear power plant, doesn't contribute to global warming, and doesn't sponsor terrorism.

    3. Re:Deceiving. by hardburn · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Subtraction is just addition using negative numbers. Why not skip subtraction altogether and just do addition? And hey, multiplication is just addition done over and over, and division is just subtraction done over and over, so we could simplify all those operators down to just one.

      We don't do that, not because we're too stupid, but because it's terribly inconvenient to work everything out in terms of addition alone. We pick the notation that's most convenient for the given purpose.

      Doing the faction in terms of volume-over-distance is better in comparing fuel efficiency because it makes it obvious where to focus efforts in efficiency increases.

      Full writeup on the subject.

      --
      Not a typewriter
  4. Re:Tesla by pieisgood · · Score: 2, Informative
    --
    Eat sleep die
  5. What am I missing? by Just_Say_Duhhh · · Score: 2, Insightful
    OK, in the "e-drive" mode, you're on pure electric (for 16 miles), and the "78 miles/gallon" figure that they've stamped on it comes from the fuel used to charge up the batteries using a 500-horsepower, 3.6-liter V-8? Let's just say I'm skeptical.

    The other modes (Hybrid, Sport Hybrid, and Race Hybrid) sound interesting, but consider:
    • You're not getting 78 MPG in any of those modes
    • If you've got a 500-horsepower, 3.6-liter V-8 under the hood, do you really need a "push to pass" button?

    Ahhh, who cares - just park one in my driveway, and let me do an in-depth product test!

    --
    I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
  6. Too fast by SuperKendall · · Score: 4, Funny

    It accelerates so fast they can't even stop the timer before it reaches 62.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
  7. Re:0 to 62? by Simulant · · Score: 4, Informative

    Europe is on the metric system. 62miles is about 100km.

  8. Re:Fitting since Porsche made the first hybrid by netsavior · · Score: 4, Interesting

    d'oh broked link
    Sorry about that

  9. Re:Tesla by NoPantsJim · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Wow, did they really need to have an auto-playing video ad with obnoxious music at the bottom of the page? I'm pissed that I gave them even that one pageview. I won't be reading the article.

  10. 16 whole miles on battery? wow. by John+Hasler · · Score: 5, Funny

    If I put a couple of extra batteries in my old Chevy I think I could get that far on the starter.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
  11. Re:Tesla by photogchris · · Score: 5, Informative

    Sorry, but different Poreche. the hybrid is a 918 spyder, your linking to a Boxster spyder. Basically the Boxster has a 320hp flat 6 while the hybrid 918 has a 500hp V8 plus 2 109hp electric motors. Also it looks to be 4 times more expensive then the Tesla at about $650,000!

    http://nexus404.com/Blog/2010/07/29/porsche-918-spyder-goes-to-production-kind-of-confirmed-back-in-march-the-green-light-on-the-porsche-918-spyder-is-now-officially-on/

  12. Re:Hybrid - Worst of both worlds. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Informative

    Because, YOU TWIT, 198 mph and 0-62 in 3.2 seconds isn't really fast.

    Sheesh.

  13. Re:Tesla by WalksOnDirt · · Score: 2, Informative

    The Spyder was $72.5k. But it won.

    --
    a,e,i,o,u and sometimes w and y (at be if of up cwm by)
  14. Re:Tesla by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's called flashblock, use it.

  15. Re:Ho hum by oldspewey · · Score: 4, Funny

    I think I heard Porsche has a couple okay engineers on staff.

    --
    If libertarians are so opposed to effective government, why don't they all move to Somalia?
  16. Re:0 to 62? by h4rr4r · · Score: 2, Informative

    It was to 100kph. It is a German car.

  17. Re:16 whole miles on battery? wow. by nxtw · · Score: 2, Informative

    Plenty of modern electronic fuel injected vehicles get infinite MPG for periods of time, without having to employ dangerous shenanigans like shutting off the engine (and consequently shutting off safety systems and power control). They simply stop injecting fuel when the vehicle is moving sufficiently fast while in gear and without any accelerator input.

  18. Re:Question for car engineers by Just_Say_Duhhh · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm an engineer...and a race car driver. You can decide if that qualifies me to answer.

    Electric motors can produce torque at all RPMs, so you don't have to mess around with complex gearing to keep the engine in the "power band."

    Sure, if you wanted to burn rubber, an electric motor would be happy to comply, but if you want a car that is easy to control, you only supply as much torque as the tires can handle (even ICE-powered cars do this). You don't want super-wide tires, because you increase rolling resistance, making the car less efficient. Tire contact patches are optimized for traction and resistance (and then the owner screws that up because he thinks 22" wheels on a sub-compact looks "gnarly!").

    --
    I need trepanation like I need a hole in the head.
  19. Huh? by spineboy · · Score: 3, Informative

    They compared a Porsche Boxster variation (320 HP, $70,000, 2900 pounds) to the Tesla (288HP $155,000 , 2800 pounds), and the Porsche won.
    There is no Porsche made in the last 20 years that had only 220 HP

    Now for $150,000 you can get a new Porsche 911 Turbo 0-60 3.2 seconds, 3400 pounds, and that will trounce the tesla a bit more than the Boxster.

    --
    ..........FULL STOP.
  20. Re:Wow! by TooMuchToDo · · Score: 5, Informative

    As for Tesla? Screw 'em. We're paying them (government subsidy??) to develop a car they will sell us back at a ridiculous price.

    It's a loan you twat, not a subsidy

    http://www.google.com/search?q=doe+loans+electric+vehicles

    Hell, Nissan got $1.4 billion+, Fisker got around $500 million, GM got $14.4 billion and Chrysler got $8.5 billion. You know who has a solid, proven drivetrain and energy management system? Tesla. There should be some sort of test before you're allowed to post here.

  21. Re:Ho hum by haruharaharu · · Score: 3, Funny

    Because then it would be a volkswagen.

    --
    Reboot macht Frei.
  22. Give them credit by vcp+webster+thailand · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Come on now, give them credit where they're trying. Some of the most gas guzzling vehicles n the roads in the last few years have been changed to at least be slightly nicer to the environment... just the start of big things to come. vcp @ university in thailand

  23. Missing the point by chocapix · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A lot of comments here miss the point of this car.

    It recovers some of the braking energy before a corner to charge the batteries, and then use the electric motors to exit the corner faster. The point of this car is to go fast, not save fuel/money (seriously guys a $500,000 car to save money?)

    The fact that you can use it as a hybrid and get good mileage in some (very rare) circumstances is no more than a funny side effect.

  24. Re:Question for car engineers by theapeman · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's true that an electric motor provides more torque than an internal combustion engine at low revs.
    The shape of the toque curve is very different.
    An electric motor can provide a lot of torque at 0 rpm, while an internal combustion engine can't even keep itself turning at very low revs.

    This means that the power curve has a different shape. An electric motor has a much broader curve, so it is able to run with high power over a large range of speeds. So much so that it wont need a clutch, and may not need different gear ratios. It may still need some kind of gearbox to match the rpm of the motor to that of the wheels, but a single speed box is sufficient in many cases (possibly not if you want to get the max possible performance).

    Wide tires dont give you extra contact area. The area of contact between the tyre and the road is determined mostly by the air pressure in the tyre. If you increase the width of the tyre without changing the pressure then you change the shape of the contact patch, but not its area (not much anyway). Wide tyres are useful because they are less affected by irregularities in the road surface and because they spread the load through a large area of rubber (so they dont overheat so quickly). The contact patch is also short and wide, which means that the front and rear edges of the contact patch are longer (and these edges carry a bit more of the load than the centre due to the bending of the rubber). An Ultra-wide (steamroller) tyre would not be useful. It would require some internal structure to transfer weight to the centre of the tyre (otherwise it would bend and just lie on the road surface in the middle with very little pressure). It would also cause cornering problems - how would you provide a differential? Wide tyres already have problems cornering due to the difference in road speed between the inside and outside edges - there is bound to be some slippage. Narrower tyres are usually more efficient. The only practical way to increase traction is to provide extra downforce (e.g. aerodynamic - which only works at speed) or to use all 4 wheels for traction (doing something to the materials of the tyre/road and the tread pattern also have some effect).
     

  25. Silence... by leuk_he · · Score: 2, Funny

    The silence of the electric motor is a very good add-on to make carmageddon style pedestian kills. Unless that feature is negated by downloadable car sounds when the car is in electric mode.

  26. Re:Wow! by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The loan Is a subsidy. If it wasn't, they'd have to get the loan on their own, and they'd be paying more for the money (e.g. interest). Otherwise they wouldn't have bothered getting it from the government.

    --
    Can you be Even More Awesome?!