By on April 29, 2014

IMG_7700

TTAC reader Casey Parkin sent us these shots of a Porsche 918 at a dealer training event. It will be a long time before TTAC gets their hands on one of these, at least someone was kind enough to give us a better look at the car.

Get the latest TTAC e-Newsletter!

21 Comments on “Reader Submission: Porsche 918 Dealer Training Event...”


  • avatar

    It’s an absolute monster.

  • avatar
    mitchw

    “Too bad the engine isn’t in the rear. Shame”

    -every 911 guy

    • 0 avatar
      LeMansteve

      “Meh. Eat my dust.”

      -every 918 guy

    • 0 avatar
      philipwitak

      re: “Too bad the engine isn’t in the rear…”

      why?

      ‘engines in the rear’ is an ancient / archaic / antiquated approach.

      the 918 boasts technology that is the way forward – and in the meantime, caymans and boxsters will suffice as far as i am concerned.

      • 0 avatar
        p___mill

        The rear engine layout does have merit beyond tradition and marketing. Sure a mid engine layout is best for absolute performance, but a rear engine gets you the same benefits of RWD, high weight on the drive wheels, a compact drivetrain, and good brake force distribution. A rear layout also leaves room for rear seats, which has historically made the 911 more practical than its rivals. Mid engine sports cars with rear seats are rare and often ungainly.

    • 0 avatar
      Compaq Deskpro

      “Lol you jelly bro.”

      - Every 918 guy

    • 0 avatar
      OneAlpha

      I’ve always thought it was more accurate to refer to engine placement relative to the occupants, not the axles.

      A truly MID-engined car would have the powerplant about where the shifter is. Actual center of mass. The car would then have the proportions of either a fighter plane or a Bill Thomas Cheetah.

      Porsches and Lamborghinis are BOTH rear-engined, most cars are front-engined and the only truly mid-engined car would probably be some sort of robotic drone with no occupants at all.

      • 0 avatar
        p___mill

        I think the traditional front, mid and rear terms do a good job of conveying where the weight is actually carried. For longitudinal mounted mid engines like in the Cayman or F458, the engine is entirely between the wheels and justifiably mid engine. Cars like the MR2 and Elise with transverse engines blur the line since they are mounted almost directly over the rear axle. Most front-mid terms are marketing BS with engines still hanging halfway forward of the front axle.

        Some cars like you describe exist in racing. In the late 90s/early 2000s Panoz raced a “front” engine prototype: http://www.mulsannescorner.com/panozlmp07-2.html

        Putting the fuel tank behind the driver and putting the engine behind the fuel tank still seams to be the best packaging solution. For racing you want your fuel tank at the CG so balance doesn’t change over the course of the race. But there has been a trend lately to push everything forward with a very long gearbox structure behind the engine. Look at where the engine is on the Porsche 919 race car:
        http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2014/03/porsche-919-hybrid-lemans-racer-goes-after-the-two-thirds-of-gasolines-energy-thats-wasted-as-heat/

        Some circle track cars do actually place the engine next to the driver, which can give a better lateral weight balance when you are only turning one direction.

      • 0 avatar
        healthy skeptic

        The best solution in the future will probably be all-electric drivetrains. The motor is so compact and lightweight that it really doesn’t matter where you put it (or them, if you use more than one motor). You can put them right next to the wheels they power.

        With ICEs, the size and mass is in the motor, not the energy container. With electrics, it’s the other way around. And with batteries you have great freedom where you put them on the car. In the future, as energy density of batteries continues to climb, eventually it may be possible to have the battery pack directly under the occupants, tightly clustered in the center of the car. (The Model S already has the battery pack under the car, but it’s a big sheet that spans the length and width of the vehicle, so no centered mass.)

        My bold prediction: 20 years from now, the best performance cars will be all-electrics. ICE performance cars might still be offered for nostalgic enthusiasts.

        • 0 avatar
          OneAlpha

          I generally agree with you regarding the electric car, but energy density is the main problem for both motors and battery packs.

          A motor powerful enough to simulate an ICE is going to be heavy because of its iron core.

          What we need is some breakthrough motor that can use carbon or some other lightweight material to generate the EM field.

          And the problem with battery packs is the lack of a nationwide charging infrastructure.

  • avatar
    hubcap

    Car looks great. I’m guessin’ we’re looking at the general shape of the upcoming 960.

  • avatar
    raph

    Love the look of this car, just not a fan of hybrid drivetrains but I guess that’s the “in” thing among supercar buyers and having bleeding edge technology.

    • 0 avatar
      ellomdian

      Just curious, but given the opportunity to have one designed mostly for performance, why are you not a fan? I terms of automotive evolution, it’s really no different than fuel injection, digital ignition, or cam-less valves; just another way to optimize efficiency (and by that, I mean power efficiency, fuel efficiency is a nice side effect.)

      I think it’s funny that we’ve had this hybrid concept in production for almost 20 years and people still treat it as whizz-bang high-end cutting-edge nerd-stuff. The 918 is (effectively) a Prius – a very high end Prius with a big ol’ engine and much nicer motors and a different energy recovery/use design, but it’s still a Prius – just like F1 cars, the McLaren, La Ferrari, and when they can be bothered to get around to it, the Mustang (I don’t think GM has the stones) to put this argument to bed.

  • avatar
    Astigmatism

    Well now I’ve gone and gotten drool all over my keyboard.

  • avatar
    sproc

    I think it’s absolutely astounding. I remember pouring over every photo and article of the 959, and this car is giving me that same tingle.

    My only nit to pick is that horribly intrusive center stack. I can completely live without that.

  • avatar
    stuki

    It possibly has it’s merits, but looks wise, I can’t see anything at all that hasn’t been done to outright boredom before. Low, wide plank with a Le Mans racer like bubble on top and aero/downforce surfaces dictating all shaping. Big rims with a thin layer of rubber deposited on the outside. A bunch of carbon fiber bling. And in grey to boot… The white 911 looks better to my eyes.

    It does have one thing going for it; relatively upright a-pillars. That’s one area where uptight German stylists have their literally laid back Italian colleagues beat.

  • avatar
    87 Morgan

    I am fairly certain said boring design was done to ensure this was a street legal race car ala Enzo.

    If it looked like a Nissan Juke it most likely wouldn’t do so well on the track.

  • avatar
    p___mill

    I was hoping for more information…any driving impressions or interesting technical material presented to dealers and not the general public?

  • avatar
    CoreyDL

    Just another Porsche people will buy and immediately store in a dark garage. Like the 959 and the GT.


Back to TopLeave a Reply

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Subscribe without commenting

Recent Comments

New Car Research

Get a Free Dealer Quote

Staff

  • Contributing Writers

  • Jack Baruth, United States
  • Brendan McAleer, Canada
  • Marcelo De Vasconcellos, Brazil
  • Vojta Dobes, Czech Republic
  • Matthias Gasnier, Australia
  • W. Christian 'Mental' Ward, Abu Dhabi
  • Mark Stevenson, Canada
  • Cameron Aubernon, United States
  • J Emerson, United States