Porsche's new companies are all about electric bikes:
In the future, you may come across a lot more two-wheeled Porsches on the streets. The luxury automaker has launched two new joint ventures with Dutch company Ponooc Investment B.V., and they're both all about electric bikes. Porsche eBike Performance GmbH is based in Ottobrunn near Munich and will develop components, including motors and batteries. Anything it creates will then be used by P2 eBike GmbH, the second joint venture based in Stuttgart, to manufacture Porsche-branded e-bikes for consumers that the company plyans to launch starting in the middle of the decade. Porsche is far from a newcomer in the e-bike space. In 2021, it debuted two electric bikes inspired by the Taycan and were made to complement the Cross Turismo, which has a rear carrier. Those bikes, however, along with their motors and gear shifting systems, were manufactured by Japanese bicycle industry giant Shimano. With one company developing parts and another working on the consumer bikes themselves, the upcoming products the joint ventures will release will be all (or at least mostly) Porsche.The components business will use the e-bike drive systems develop by Fazua, a company Porsche recently acquired, as noted by Electrek. However, it will also develop e-bike systems under the Porsche brand name — it will even sell the technology it designs to other brands. As with anything Porsche, the bikes under the new ventures will most likely not come cheap: Its Taycan-inspired bikes, for instance, set buyers back at least $8,500 at launch, with the sports model selling for prices that start at $10,700.
In the future, you may come across a lot more two-wheeled Porsches on the streets. The luxury automaker has launched two new joint ventures with Dutch company Ponooc Investment B.V., and they're both all about electric bikes. Porsche eBike Performance GmbH is based in Ottobrunn near Munich and will develop components, including motors and batteries. Anything it creates will then be used by P2 eBike GmbH, the second joint venture based in Stuttgart, to manufacture Porsche-branded e-bikes for consumers that the company plyans to launch starting in the middle of the decade.
Porsche is far from a newcomer in the e-bike space. In 2021, it debuted two electric bikes inspired by the Taycan and were made to complement the Cross Turismo, which has a rear carrier. Those bikes, however, along with their motors and gear shifting systems, were manufactured by Japanese bicycle industry giant Shimano. With one company developing parts and another working on the consumer bikes themselves, the upcoming products the joint ventures will release will be all (or at least mostly) Porsche.
The components business will use the e-bike drive systems develop by Fazua, a company Porsche recently acquired, as noted by Electrek. However, it will also develop e-bike systems under the Porsche brand name — it will even sell the technology it designs to other brands. As with anything Porsche, the bikes under the new ventures will most likely not come cheap: Its Taycan-inspired bikes, for instance, set buyers back at least $8,500 at launch, with the sports model selling for prices that start at $10,700.
This too will pass...
You could say the same about the era of personal cars and inefficient urban sprawl that requires them - a much more recent fad than bicycles..
The addition of simple, compact electric drives addresses the major shortcoming of bicycles for the non-athletic, and they're getting steadily cheaper.
As the line blurs between electric motorcycles and bicycles, I would not be at all surprised to see the "cool" perception of motorcycles bleed back over into bicycles as well. They're already a lot more fun than cars usually are, and I think a lot of (most?) people already have fond memories of them from their younger, more energetic days.
OP here. Sorry for any confusion, I was just referring to the sleek-but-way-overpriced Porsche-branded e-bikes.
Oh, I thought, being Porsches, they would be expected to overtake the other bikes on the path...
Unless Porsche can get their prices down and competitive, I don't think they'll be making bikes for long. Mercedes built some nice prototype e-bikes a few years back, a friend bought one from them for $500 when they discontinued the program (employee only opportunity) - absolute steal for a bike that never could have retailed under $2500. But, Mercedes quickly figured out that at a $2500+ price point, they'd never be able to sell enough of them to justify setting up the supply chain, maintenance and support and all that goes with it.
Mercedes quickly figured out that at a $2500+ price point, they'd never be able to sell enough of them to justify setting up the supply chain, maintenance and support and all that goes with it.
As with anything Porsche, the bikes under the new ventures will most likely not come cheap: Its Taycan-inspired bikes, for instance, set buyers back at least $8,500 at launch, with the sports model selling for prices that start at $10,700.
My first thought on seeing the price... F-ME!!!Then I thought just who they are going to sell these too? Who can afford that for a bike... Not even a motorcycle costs that much.Well then I thought of how much the price of cars went up since covid/supply chain issues and did a search... Yup, entry level motorcycles are still between $5000 and $10000.
I agree with the parent post... Just who the hell do they think are going to buy a $10,000 electric bike?Hell, even a Segway [wikipedia.org] will be considered a marketing success compared to the flop that this bike will likely become.
Eh, they're Porsche. From the simulators I've driven, the high price is one of their vehicles' main selling points. Eh? Eh?
But seriously - have you looked at the high end e-bike market lately? There's not exactly a shortage of options well over 5-grand. Heck, you have long had many options to spend over $10k on a non-electric bike if you're a serious enthusiast, and mid-drive ebikes with torque sensors for a more intuitive experience *start* at $2k
I certainly wouldn't consider paying such an amount, but I suspect it's like the high-end sports car market - with the benefit that a much larger percentage of the population could afford them if they really wanted to.
I've a friend who owns three 10K+ regular bikes. His community truly hates electric. The reason is it's possible to build a bike that looks totally normal but would give the owner 50-250% extra power.There will be blood.
I used to ride 5km along a bike path as my daily commute. Took it easy to avoid arriving all sweaty and it would take about 15 minutes. I was occasionally passed by a big fat guy going at least twice as fast as I was. Took a couple of times before I realized he had a practically silent and well hidden electric drive.
There won't be blood.
The first thing these buyers would do with a $10k racing bike is try to drill a hole in the carbon frame to add a basket and headlamp. It's a completely different market with no overlap. I ride a heavy, fat tire eBike with day-glo stickers, basket, bell, wide seat, step thru eeeezeeee frame. The skinny cunts in lycra can overtake me all day long I dont give a fuck.
What the OP is referring to probably is that the drive systems have become so advanced that battery and engine can be hidden completely within a normal looking racing bike. These systems are a godsend for the older Lycra- clad crowd who would otherwise have to dabble in doping to pretend that they can still keep up with the young ones.
Pro-races these days are controlled for this with frame scanners. An (in)famous case happened here in Belgium, about 4 years ago (women cyclocross).
That truly trained Lycra clad community is highly visible, but probably has fewer competitive members than the NFL has paid players.... It's a niche within a niche.
Add the weekend warrior poseurs and it grows tenfold or more, but you are still talking about less than one per thousand people in most communities.
Like Gucci, anything with Porsche on it will sell in some quantities, but Gucci made far more money on their lower cost so-called knockoff products than they ever did on the genuine luxury goods.
Gucci is about status, isn’t it — you buy their trinkets to suggest to others that you’ve got a whole closet of the real stuff at home: the ordinary people just catched you unawares, in casual mode.
For the opposite reason I think Porsche will silently leave the market after a few years. Most cyclists here are organised in clubs, where discussing drives, the merits and prices of the gear, and what’s happening in pro-cycling are the main pastime. In those circles you’re considered an amateur if you don’t recognize a pro-cyclist on telly based on his saddle position and favorite gear shift.
Couple that with the price of a decent racing bike starting at 3.5k, and Porsche will have a hard time selling just because of high price and muh name.
(Note that the ratio of cyclists is much higher here: I’d place it more at 1 per 70 inhabitants, if you’d include cyclocross and MTB)
Well, Porsche is also most definitely about status. They talk about performance heritage, etc. but deep down inside, they all know: it's a club, just like Ferrari and to a lesser extent BMW, and to join you just have to own (or lease) a car...
I agree that serious cyclists will shun the Porsche products en-masse, but I think I mentioned above: for every serious cyclist there are 10+ poseurs, so the question becomes: can Porsche appeal to the poseurs in sufficient quantity to support a product line?
I think not in bicycles, but in the world of cars and car racing they do. At any given "open competition" autocross type event, you'll usually see about 1% Porsche representation, and for every one seen in open competition there are two who compete in more 'exclusive' marque specific events. Porsche has legit competitive chops at some of the higher levels of auto racing, but when you get down into sub-0.1% wealth individual owner-drivers, the price/performance ratio isn't really there. I mean, you pay your Porsche money and you get something that is not entirely embarrassing to drive on the track, but you could definitely get better performance per dollar elsewhere. What you really get with the Porsche is entree' to the marque specific events, and they smell like a Country Club (my father has been a member since I was about 12...)
Now, "e-drive made by Porsche" might carry a little brand value in the larger marketplace, maybe enough to mark up the motor by 10% or so, and you don't have to run the whole service and support network from Porsche to do that. I put a V6 conversion kit in my Miata, and while I am perfectly satisfied that it's a 275hp Ford Duratec, it comes from an (ooooh) Jaguar S-Type, and the engine design for the Jaguar variant was developed in part by (aaaah) Cosworth and (mmmmn) Porsche. That "brand value" in turn helped to sell over 100 kits, which is why I went with that particular kit: because they had the experience of 100+ kit builds all in one place, something the guys who are just yanking (best hp/$ ratio) Duratecs out of old Lincolns don't have.
Most people don't realize mine is electric unless I tell them. The battery is in the frame and the motor is in the back wheel hub. It looks like a normal bicycle, except it's bigger. Most people notice the fat tires first.
Which one do you have? I am shopping.
Aventon Aventure. Pretty happy with it so far.
That’s a growing tendency here. A few years ago it was pretty clear which was an e-bike and which not, with the battery a tell-tale sign. I’d estimate that 80% of all adult bikes are now e-bikes, where 10-20% you can only tell by the speed and, on closer look, the wheel nave.
Seems to me there's four main reasons to ride a bike outside of formal races (where cheating is rightfully despised):
FunTransportationTraining for racingBecause you're a hyper-competitive douche who wants to feel superior to other people.
That last group are the only ones who have any reason to object to electric bikes. But since they're also the group responsible for almost all of the bad reputation of bicycling, I say F$#@ their opinion.
They use the same app to claim their achivements and then somebody from admin or respected community member has to either approve or deny a particular run over the same road.Basically, electric bikes are destroying an established world wide competitive amateur racing.
A few years back ford came to the office and propose an investment into a mass self driving car at... $500,000 starting price. Wall Street boys passed.
The original 8 bit 64k RAM IBM PC was $4,000 forty years ago, the Apple was even more expensive. I've watched tech prices drop all my life, and I'm 70. In 1977 a 24 inch color TV was $600 in 1977 dollars.
A reasonable computer have had the same price all over the years. To be on the cutting age you'd have to spend the same $4000 inflation adjusted now.As per TVs, it's a different story.
Yes, but a $4000 computer from 1995 wouldn't even display a modern web page using the U of I browser. My $120 cell phone has more computing power than NASA did when men walked on the moon. ENIAC wouldn't even power a singing Hallmark card.
I am not sure I get your point.
The point was that electric technology always gets cheaper and never more expensive. I've never in my 70 years seen technology get more expensive, just cheaper and/or better. That was an example. Another is an electric drill I have that my dad bought for $50 in 1960. I've lost the chuck. I bought a new professional use drill that uses rechargeable batteries, is lighter and more powerful, and needs no chuck that I paid $100.00 for. Remember, a McDonald's hamburger was 15¢ and is now $2.49 for the same burger.
Well, compressed air driven tools are still 5 times cheaper than electric ones and they never go bad if a drop of oil per day rule is followed. I don't know how much they were in 1960, but nowadays I have them all as they are dirt cheap and still better than electric for many applications. My compressor was made in 60s though and I got it for free on a garage sale.You can, off course, argue that a compressor itself is electric, for which I'd reply it does not have to be. Regardless, the main issue is and ever was the battery. It does go bad used or not. Actually, if a battery is not used it goes bad much faster which is an issue for an occasional user.
I was comparing a 1960 electric drill to a 2019 electric drill. Comparing an electric drill to a pneumatic drill is apples and oranges.
You compared two electric drills and implied that electric technology develops well.I compared electric technology to pneumatic one and implied that it's even better tech.
An entry level motorcycle has a really small engine, usually under 100 CC displacement. Your Porsche will be priced more like a Harley Davidson 1200 Hog than a 75 CC Suzuki.
In the US, e-bikes are limited to 20 mph (gasoline mopeds are allowed to do 30, WHY?). One e-bike is as fast as the next.
That said, when the warranty's up I'll look into hacking the governor...
There's a huge difference between 20mph on a 250w hub motor and 20mph on a 2000w peak motor.
Our bikes are 350 and 750w, and even though they are both governed to 20mph, the experience is quite different getting there.
Mine is 750 watts, according to the manual. I still want to know why gasoline mopeds are allowed to do 30.
'cause: reasons. Laws on top of laws, special interests driving those laws, etc.
Around here: Class-(something) e-bikes, which are regulated exactly 100% like a pedaled bicycle, are limited to 20mph. Once you exceed 20mph you're in moped and/or motorcycle regulations. I don't think mopeds require any special licensing, but they're not bicycles so can't be ridden on bike trails, etc. and there's probably a few hoops they have to jump that e-bikes don't - but what those are I'm not entirely sure. Then above 28mph, I think, you're in motorcycle class where you need DOT everything, special operators' license, etc.
What I don't understand is the quantum leap in price, from $800 for a decent minimalist 20mph e-bike to $5K for a minimalist highway capable motorcycle. I get that it has to be more expensive because of the parts required, etc. but... 6x more expensive?!?
I believe e-bikes within compliant speed and power (and possibly mass?) limits are legally classified as bicycles at the federal level, and very few places require that you have a license to ride them. (A big win for the e-bike industry, and others that see e-bikes being a big part of our transportation future.) Presumably because it's unusual to cause serious injury or loss of life to anyone else while traveling at human-propelled bicycle speeds and masses. You can easily get yourself killed playing in traffic, but unlike a moped or motorcycle you're not *that* much more dangerous to other people than a pedestrian.
Without such limiters... an impact at 30mph will release more than twice the energy as at 20mph. Even without the extra mass of a more substantial moped or motorcycle, that's more than enough to make the difference between "everyone probably walks away", and "someone likely needs professional medical attention"
And it's not like gas-powered bicycles haven't existed for a long time - just usually as aftermarket conversion kits with severe power limits, for similar reasons.
Mopeds (gasoline or electric) are a legally distinct class that in many (most?) states require a license to drive. With the proof-of-competence, and often insurance, that comes with it.
There's plenty of e-bikes that ignore the limits, and even more with user-removable limiters. You just need to be properly licensed to operate them legally. Because legally they're mopeds. Or motorcycles, depending on their capability.
The point is short - license and insurance.We all agree that bicycles don't need either. Motorcycles regardless of engine type need both.Now, electric "community" wants to cheat the game.
Cheating? I suppose it depends on what you mean.
I'm fully on board with treating bikes with a motor assist that doesn't let them go faster than under pedal power continuing to be treated as a bike. You could argue the EU's 15mph assist limit is more reasonable in that respect.
I'm also fully on board with user-removable limiters (it's *my* bike!), though that does mean there are some "cheaters" who remove the limiter without taking the required steps to comply with the law.
Frankly though, I doubt either case applies to the "not-quite-a-motorcycle" bikes a lot of these companies are beginning to sell.
Ebikes are subdivided into four classes in the US, and if you have a motor more powerful than 1hp (750W) only the highest class potentially applies:1,2 - 20mph limit -- generally treated as bikes3 - 28mph assist-limit, less than 1hp -- legal requirements vary with jurisdiction, generally treated as (or similar to) a moped4 - 28mph assist-limit, 1hp and up -- legal off-road only, usually requires registration and licensing, and often banned from public land. So, pretty close to dirt-bike rules.
All the quasi-motorcycles are at best eligible for class 4. If they don't have speed limiters they don't even qualify as mopeds, and must be registered as motorcycles to be street legal.
Well, my point was a bit simpler, I guess. I do bike a lot and I do ride a motorcycle. I believe that motorcycles belong to the road while bikes could go anywhere with reasonable precautions.Now we have this electric power that could change both of them substantially. I am not a purist and I am over 60 so I do want a bicycle that helps me a bit over hills I used to go over by myself. However I definitely do not want my motorcycle types on the same path.How to regulate this exactly is the question, but the idea, I believe, is clear enough.
Yeah, I suppose there's still a legal grey area in terms of what is acceptable on trails isn't there?
I do lean towards treating class 3 and 4 as mopeds/motorcycles by default - e.g. presumed prohibited from bike-friendly trails unless otherwise noted, where class 1 and 2 are presumed to be permitted.
The fact that there's not always much visual difference presents a problem to easily identifying violators who aren't caught in the act (or by enough probable cause for a bike inspection), but I'm not sure how big a problem that really is compared to jurisdictions just not having established rules.
None of that is necessary to be said, of course there should be limits, but why is a gasoline moped allowed to do 30 but an electric moped only allowed 20?
An electric moped *is* allowed to go 30.
What it's NOT allowed to do is call itself an ebike in order to let the owner sidestep the legal responsibilities associated with driving a moped.
What legal responsibilities? Have a link?
Not offhand. But in many states mopeds require a license and possibly insurance.
major shortcoming of bicycles for the non-athletic,
Not just the non-athletic, but also the aging and wearing out group, including myself. I would ride 500+ miles a year in my 20s. Somewhere in my early 50s my knees decided they didn't want to pedal anymore, at least not with any real force - took the fun out of biking not being able to accelerate, or cruise over 8mph, or ride uphill. E-bike gets me out and pedaling again, even if I'm not getting the heavy cardio workout anymore at least I'm getting most of the neuro-stim from being out and moving - and that's no small part of the benefit of biking.
I am in my 60s and still do pedaling without E, but yes, I can hear you, and my time is coming; fast.
Jump on that shit grandpa. You don't get extra points for struggling. I bought my first one age 33 and it was hallelujah. You're wasting time - go to the store now, try a few out, buy one.
> You don't get extra points for struggling
Never heard of Type II fun?
I justified my way in with a Sondors fat tire for something like $800 delivered. The fat tires are nice to have around here, open up a lot more trails, and having the motor makes up for the fat tire drag and lack of gear options.
Got my wife a RadRover fat tire after, and it's worth the little extra money, but I haven't replaced my Sondors yet. Passed 500 miles on the odometer last week, I think I have had it about 3 years now, maybe a bit longer.
So you're happy with the fat tires? I've been trying to use my relatively short commute (across a valley that makes pedaling completely disheartening both ways) to justify getting an e-bike that I would (in theory) use for trail riding too. And it does sound like the fat tires are a lot more stable for trail riding, at the cost of being less nimble on the road. The big down side seems to be that there are few options for "tire armor"/flat-proof tubes in those sizes, and goats-heads thorns are common here.
Yeah, I was concerned about tire repair when I first got 'em. So far I haven't had an issue, but I don't think it's because the tires are unusually puncture resistant - more that my miles have been on relatively tire-friendly terrain.
I mean, the tires are fat, the frame is heavy, and you're carrying a battery pack, motor, controller, etc. so, yeah, it's not exactly nimble, but it's nimble enough for me. We had one of these: http://buddybike.com/Home.htm [buddybike.com] that was an ungainly pig, even without a front rider/passenger - by comparison the fat tire bike is very nimble.
I am looking at front wheel conversion. Anybody tried it?I really do like the idea...
Not tested, but I've been tempted. I seem to recall hearing that it's best done with a heavy steel frame without front shocks (say, a cheap mountain bike). Those front forks just aren't designed to drag the bike forward, and can easily warp under the load.
I've also been intrigued by the Rubbee X. An old-fashioned friction drive that'll prematurely eat your back tire, but in a compact quick-release package that lets you take all the expensive parts with you when locking up. Unfortunately quite expensive for the power and range provided.
Not just the non-athletic, but also the aging and wearing out group, including myself.
Not just the non-athletic, but also the aging and wearing out group, including myself.
Heh, you'll need at least a tricycle soon enough. Falling off from two wheels is not funny over a certain age, especially when the sense of balance on kinaesthesia wear down enough.
Tried a traditional (two in the rear) recumbent trike a few years back, scary as F to ride fast, much more unstable than a bike. Maybe a tadpole configuration would be better, but one in front without the ability to lean is a bad idea.
I understand tadpoles have their own issues - mostly that you want to be *really* sure your feet can't come off the pedals to hit the ground, as you'll likely end up with a broken leg, at best.
I can't understand why anyone ever though it was a good idea to add a motor to traditional non-leaning tricycles. I'm not actually sure if the off-roaders or highway cruisers are more unnerving.
Well, at least outside of mobility applications where the rider will never have any interest in going fast. (I've heard it claimed that such people exist...)
That's what they said about automobiles, but like automobiles did, the price will really have to drop before they're really popular. Mine, an Avanton Aventure, was two grand. I guess the Porsche will be six?
Note that Porsche makes VOLKSWAGENS. I doubt if these bikes will be Porsche-branded or cost more than mine did.
"Far from a newcomer" = made a prototype last year with major help from another company...?
All women have to do is go for the guy riding the bike instead of the guy driving a Porsche and soon every guy will be riding a bike.Well now the decision is a lot easier as both guys are technically driving a Porsche!
Women are, by biological nature, are mostly conservatives. Just saying.
Did you read that in Playa magazine?
Whoever marked me troll got to read some biology basics.
If she's the sort who goes for the expensive car then pretty soon the porsche driver is riding the bike.
and soon every guy will be riding a bike.
I know this was a joke, but in reality, only men lacking self-respect, meaning and purpose in their life do this type of thing. The male-feminists, the narcissists, the people lacking what I would call a soul. A man makes his way in the world and women find ways to attach themselves to these men.