Just letting Tesla know they're pikers when it comes to making porkers.

Not the plug in hybrid of the future, obviously...
How can Porsche put it's name on a Plug in Hybrid with a RIDICULOUS 9.4KWH battery pack ? When TESLA set standards are for 40, 60 and 85KWH ?
This is only a gimmic to limit pollution taxes on CO2 in Europe. Pathetic.
No German company seams ready to launch a Tesla Inspired car just adding the missing Range Extender of German quality and the German comfort and reliability on top. I still have a hope on Mercedes who has an agreement with Tesla, but little.... Also them have too much to protect the day they go for all electric power trains (No Big German ICE engine, no big gearbox, no big transmission needed any more. Count the factories to close down...
Plug In Hybrid EV of the future will not come from them, full stop. I don't understand why TESLA does not add an optional Range Extender at least to Model X where there is more room, so it can become a BIG PLAYER on this HE market. Their current Pure EV niche won't scale up without that (Can't go on vacation with such a car !). Limiting their cars to luxury second car EV gadgets till they find a way to add that Range extender option...

We still need better batteries.

Adding a motor-generator and batteries is not likely to reduce maintenance and repair costs - though there is ample room for improvement in a German car.

Do you suppose the reason for the lack of Tesla equivalents in the market place is because they won't make enough profit for a good return on their investment (like Volt)?

Oh wait, making a profit is evil and they simply don't want to be evil - OK, that's it.

No wait, Tesla is making a profit - now I'm confused.

Patrick,

I disagree with you on most accounts. As long as car batteries are limited by production capacity and unit price, you get the highest total fuel saving by distributing the batteries on the highest number of cars. A modest battery pack means high utilization of the batteries. High utilization means high fuel savings.

I applaud Tesla for what they are doing. But I also think there is limited space in that market at the moment, just as there was limited appetite for Priuses in the beginning.

The German (European) engineering tradition is that of evolution and optimization (let's make it better) rather than revolution (let's make something entirely new and different) in the US. But nevertheless, you see all the European car makers reducing their fleet emission at a record pace, even without sorting to hybrid propulsion yet. Hybrids will come, and they will slash fuel consumption even further. And with time, as people get 'comfortable' with smaller ICE's supported by an e-motor, and batteries get cheaper, the ICE will get smaller, fuel consumption will drop further, until the point where we are at BEVs or PHEVs with small (25-30 hp) range extenders. At least that's what I predict.

I think this approach is wise in a market that still fundamentally demands ICE-powered cars. The readers of GCC constitute a small minority among car buyers.

Finally, I would like to applaude Porsche for taking a large (sensible) step from 1.7 to 9.4 kWh. My only experience with hybrid drive from a Prius was that the e-motor was annoyingly weak during acceleration. With 71 kW and presumably high torque, electric-only acceleration should be adequate for in-town driving.

High-end European cars just don't rust out in 5 years. They are designed to last for 20-30 years, more if garaged and well-kept.

In America, many people trade in their cars after 100-120k miles due to concern about future reliability. A Toyota's paint job will last for 15-20 years at least.

However, a PHEV with the engine and transmission still spanking new after 100k miles, the owner will feel confident to keep it for another 100k miles, totaling 200k miles before trading in. This is very good for the environment, is it not?... besides all the gasoline adn potential pollution saved? A PHEV will retain much higher value at 100k miles than a conventional ICEV.

@ Roger Pham. You need to try the Tesla S 85KWH top notch on the motorway : It can cruise the Autobahn at over 100 mph VERY WELL!
The beauties of such much larger Battery packs are huge. Not only you increase the capacity hence the full EV range, moving to 1 or 2 charges per week instead of 1 or 2 per day, for more comfort and so they wear a lot less, minimizing the need for any petrol to very few long trips per year with a 85KWH. But also you dramatically increase the Instant Power supplied at any moment to the motors, allowing to go to an "All Electric Drive train" working even when maximum power is required at high speed on the motorway or on mountain roads, like Tesla did. It allows you to dramatically simplify your drive train, pulling not just the Big tracting ICE engine but also most of the big gear box and the big transmision. Up to moving to one electric motor per weel or per axis, and only electric cables in between them and the batteries, the ICE Range Extender never having to tract the car itself any more, but only used as a pure "electric generator" optimized for rare usages at constant speeds, to refill the batteries or provide electric power directly to the electric motors when batteries are totally depleted. I know it is less effective to burn petrol to make electricity to run electric motors, but if this is used during only <5% of your yearly milleage and rest is 100% Electric burning ZERO PETROL and saving costs and weight, you won't mind that little un-effectiveness .... Problem is the more the batteries get large the less times per year that ICE generator will be used, creating new challenges and opportunities too.
TESLA did it all right, except that, missing a range Extender they prevent you from long trips and far away vacations to hostile places w/o secured fast charge plugs. Un-acceptable to me. Adding a Range Extender option to their Model X would tripple their maket, and count me in too, making it a real replacement car for my beloved BMW. Porsche design keeps the full big tracting ICE engine with its huge Gear Box and Transmission, adding the electric parts on top, means adding weight and costs and complexity and maintenance... This is totally un-effective in my view. Buy it if you want but don't count me in.

Perhaps in the Tesla Model X with the rear drive version, the front of the car can serve as luggage room so that the range extender can go on the rear trunk space. Perhaps a Kawasaki Ninja 500cc motorcycle engine with 59 hp can be used. This motorcycle weighs 370 lbs, so the engine, fuel tank and generator may weigh about 200 lbs, and can be placed right behind the rear seat and take up 1/2 of the rear trunk space. Instead of 85 kWh battery pack, a 60 or 40 kWh battery pack can be used, thus offsetting the extra weight and cost of the range extender. Why don't you work this out and present this idea to Tesla? If Tesla adopts this idea, the next PHEV Tesla could be my and your future car.

A front-wheel-drive version of this PHEV Tesla model S will leave more room in the back for a larger fuel tank of 8-10 gallons, hence driving range comparable to other ICEV's.

However, more importantly, the front wheel drive version can allow for direct coupling of the engine to the drive shaft at above 30-40 mph in order to eliminate electrical ohmic loss, AND the contribution of the engine's torque and the torque of the generator turned into motor during brisk acceleration. This can add a potential of 60-110 more hp to the car to rival the performance version of the model S lineup, and will fetch a higher price premium, hence higher profit margin, added by the fact that the engine and generator should cost no more than $3000, vs. the $8000-10,000 saving on battery cost when downsizing from 60kWh to 40 kWh. A handsome profit margin, indeed, or the cost reduction can be passed on to the customer by reducing the price of the baselevel Model S from 62,000 to $55,000-57,000.

The direct coupling of the engine with a clutch to the drive train will also improve mpg on engine mode, perhaps allowing > 40 mpg overall driving. The lower engine friction operated at optimum load and rpm allows better mpg than that of the C-Max Energi, even though the PHEV Model S is bigger and heavier. The engine will operate at 50-70% load during level cruise at 60 mph, so should be reving about 3500-4500 rpm. When the car goes up hill, the engine torque will be supplemented by the motor, while when going down hill, the engine will still operate at 50-70% load to remain in peak efficiency, by charging the battery. At 120 mph top speed, the engine will be reving near its maximum power rpm at 9000 or so, and additional power will be provided by the battery to maintain this speed. Top speed on charge-sustaining mode should be around 80 mph in order to be competitive with other ICEV's on the highway.

Should be an exciting development, and I'll buy this vehicle in a heart beat!

@ Roger Pham. You're getting closer,... still we need to convince Tesla. Be carefull that reducing Battery too much may not work. My bet is Tesla cancelled the 40KWH Model S last week due to insufficiant instant power delevired with it, not just the lower range, that if they were adding a Range Extender ICE engine they could overcome easily. So Discussion for me is between the 60KWH and the 2 x 85KWH packs, and I'd tend to pick the High-Perf 85KWH pack only here so I'm sure to have enough Instant Power at any speed on the motorway and on mountain roads, and with >300M all EV range I only have to recharge one time per week during working times and short week-end trips. And to have enough room for the Batteries plus the Range Extender plus the familly Laggage on long vacations trips, I would forget the Model S and only try put that on much larger Model X only, whose delay to 2014 could be used to add this... But then for the Range Extender used as a "Pure Generator" in it, we can be more "creative". That "never tracting" ICE engine needs to be small, light and very effective at constant speeds, so it could be of a different techno than usual tracting ICE engines. Look at the very small Micro Turbines in former Jaguard EV car concept, th

@Patrick,
For a 40 kWh pack to provide 270 kW (362 hp) of power, it is only putting out under 7 C. This is a low power rating. Modern Lithium Polymer battery for R/C use now starts with 25 C rating as entry level, going up to 60 C for high performance version. Years ago, R/C lipo started at 10 C and going up to 20 C for high performance. A small battery pack will save $8-10,000 and over 300 lbs of weight, so the PHEV will be cheaper and lighter as well. High performance cars and planes need to be as light as possible or else you will have a dog. Try some R/C electric flying or R/C electric car racing for a while and you will see this point. I always use the smallest battery pack possible, usually 30-40% smaller than what is called for, and smaller motor and smaller speed controller as well, and make 'em work harder. That's how you get performance! Weight will destroy performance!

The Ninja engine can out perform any turbine unit. It is a super-duper hot rod engine with >10,000 rpm redline, and very light for its power, with good fuel economy. It is designed to power a generator separately in the serial hybrid mode, but can also be coupled to the drive train via a clutch at the right rpm to avoid ohmic loss and increase power at top speed. You won't be able to find any turbine engine that can match what this engine can deliver! A turbine engine will consume twice as much fuel for the power and the range on engine power will be unacceptable. Plus, a turbine engine will cost tens of thousands of dollars...Not cost effective!

@ Roger Pham. I agree with most of your comments. This said if you move to an "All Electric Drive train", you save a lot of weight & $ too : No big German ICE engine, no big gearbox, no big transmission needed any more, with all components attached this should save a TON in weight, no ? So there should be some room for a larger battery for more comfort - although I agree 40KWh could work if instant power is OK - with a R-E, especially if the Range Ext is as light as you pictured your Ninja..., still keeping an overall light weight for the SUV.
Also Roger, if what you say is right : "For a 40 kWh pack to provide 270 kW (362 hp) of power, it is only putting out under 7 C. This is a low power rating. Modern Lithium Polymer battery for R/C use now starts with 25 C rating as entry level, going up to 60 C for high performance version...", then why the hell does the VOLT that has # 18KWH Battery available if I got it right, needs its very complex cinematics so the ICE can help the electric engine tract the car when maxi power is required at high speed on motorway or when climbing mountain roads ? 18KWH x 25 = 450KW that should be a lot more than enough to tract that can in all circumstances and simplify the drive train of the volt. Obviously there is a reason Volt designers did not buy that was enough.... I don't expect them stupid at all, since so far they made the best ever PHEV optimized arround that affordable battery capacity...
Also @ Engineer-Poet : I keep worrying on the limited number of cycles each battery can stand before retaining only <80% of its initial capacity, and wearing, considering the HUGE cost for replacing that battery. So for me charging twice per day a battery limited to 3000 x cycles before hitting <80% should start "damadge" it in no more than 4 years, while charging it only twice per week should push that to 29 years instead = A lot better ! I understand we should never push the battery to full/deep discharges, but I'm missing where is the optimum in between. I hardly buy that recharging batteries depleated by <10% makes any sense considering the wearing cycles.... On the other side I get the need to be able to fully recharge overnight, and ideally in # half of that time, so in the evening the Grid can reverse the charge for sometimes to pass its peak comsumption times using EV car batteries as very effective instantly available optional local generators for the grid, then fully recharge it the other way as soon as all citizens go to sleep and consume much less power, fully completing the charge before you need to take your car in the am. But still I'm missing how that can play with battery wearing cycles. No question to kill my expensive battery pack in few years to help the grid for free ! I could accept an agreement that can secure > 10 years usage of my battery, assuming the Grid contributes one way or another if it wants me to allow the reversal at peak hours ...

@Patrick,
The following link will give detailed info on how to manage lithium battery and prolong its life.
http://batteryuniversity.com/learn/article/how_to_prolong_lithium_based_batteries

Note 3 important things:
1. The number of charging cycles will increase greatly with reduction in depth of discharge. See the table on that page.
2. Avoid full charge and full discharge if possible, and avoid storing the battery at full charge over prolonged period of time. Charge to 80% of maximum charge, to be discharged to no less than 20% for optimum battery life.
3. Battery does age with time and reduce capacity even if you don't use it. If you keep the battery fully charge and kept it at 40 degree C, capacity will drop quickly with time. However, keep it charged to well below max and keep it cool, battery capacity will be maintained for much longer.

For the reason that battery does age with time even with little use, and the effect is accelerated with higher ambient temperatures, it is best to have a smaller pack and use the heck out of it, and replace them every 5-7 years, instead of having a bigger pack with twice the investment, only to see the pack significantly degraded after 5-7 years with less use, due to the large pack size. People living in desert or hot tropical areas should use PHEV like the Ford C-Max Energi with only 8 kWh pack, so that it would not cost too much to replace the battery pack more regularly.

The Volt was designed 10-15 years ago, so its battery pack technology reflects what was available back then, 7-10 C max, made by LG Chem. The 25-C (and up) Lithium Polymer now all came from China, and it seems that the Chinese now have the latest advancement in Lithium Polymer battery. No LiPo battery made elsewhere can match in performance and quality.

The latest in LiPo now available from China can be charged at 8-C current, and seems to have 3x more charging life cycles than older packs. This is very fast charge. At 6-C charging, a pack can be charged full from zero in 10 minutes. If charged from 20% to 80% of capacity, a pack can be charged in 6 minutes at 6-C current to avoid overstressing the pack. Talking about advancement. I hope that the latest in LiPo technology will make its way to automotive use, although safety consideration may require a safer chemistry like LiPO4, with somewhat lower energy density, but still very applicable to PHEV's requiring smaller-capacity pack.