Porsche’s Mission E Will Hit the Streets in 2019

Megalith

Megalith

24-bit/48kHz
Staff member
Joined
Aug 20, 2006
Messages
13,000
Porsche’s all-electric four-door sports car is entering its latter stages of development: the automaker claims that the Mission E can reach 62mph in “less than 3.5 seconds” and takes less than a quarter of an hour for its battery to charge up to 80%. The vehicle, which will be priced at around $85K, is capable of traveling up to 300 miles on a full charge.

If the original 600bhp, 800-volt Mission E concept is anything to go by, the production car should be worth waiting for. The Mission E concept is a four-door sports car - a bit like a squashed Panamera, but with a stealthy swagger that turns heads. Especially in its matt white paint job with white and black alloys and neat detailing such as a full-width LED lighting bar for rear lights. Those rear doors are suicide hatches, revealing a 2+2 cabin.
 
Mission Erection? I've always thought Porsche looked too much like beetles for me to take them seriously and they seem to all just look the same. But they're pretty good performance cars from what I hear. Not that I'll ever be able to afford an 85k car. But that's cheaper than a Tesla, isn't it?
 
RogueTadhg said:
Mission Erection? I've always thought Porsche looked too much like beetles for me to take them seriously and they seem to all just look the same. But they're pretty good performance cars from what I hear. Not that I'll ever be able to afford an 85k car. But that's cheaper than a Tesla, isn't it?
Click to expand...

Yup, a Tesla is right around $100K. Though their new $35K car has just entered production.
 
RogueTadhg said:
Mission Erection? I've always thought Porsche looked too much like beetles for me to take them seriously and they seem to all just look the same. But they're pretty good performance cars from what I hear. Not that I'll ever be able to afford an 85k car. But that's cheaper than a Tesla, isn't it?
Click to expand...
I'm saving my pennies for the hardcore Mission R E: Pole Position version.
 
zamardii12 said:
Less than 15 minutes and 80% charge? I find that incredibly hard o believe. If this is true then Tesla is really falling behind. Holy shit.
Click to expand...
I can't claim to know how it works, but in my head it should be doable. Look at phones, they can be charged up to 80% quite fast, just do the same with the electric cars.
I would think it comes down to how the battery cells are configured and how large each cell is. If you have a lot of small cells and can charge every cell at the same time, I would imagine it can be done fast. Of course it is likely done with a dedicated charging station and not from your home wall socket though.
 
zamardii12 said:
Less than 15 minutes and 80% charge? I find that incredibly hard o believe. If this is true then Tesla is really falling behind. Holy shit.
Click to expand...

Not really -- Tesla already has plans or works in progress for Version 3 of their superchargers which (plan to) work at 350kwh, thats right about the same level that would allow 80% in 15 min or so. The current V2 superchargers work at 125kw max currently and lets you get 170 miles of range in 30 minutes assuming you have the stall to yourself.


The problem at this point for any charger (Tesla or Porsche or whoever) is pushing that many amps through the cable and keeping things cool enough to operate safely. We are talking 200+ amps @ 480V for what's out now, and double that for the next gen chargers. I think they were experimenting with liquid cooled charging cables to keep heat at bay in these new systems.

Hope to be in a Model 3 by early 2019 myself, currently I'm already pretty happy with my 12A @ 240V charging at home for my 2017 Volt :-p
 
Looks impressive! Just wondering if you had millions of cars like this (battery powered and same charging characteristics) being charged what kind of grid you would need to be able to make that happen :D

Instead of cable lines you may just need real busbars going to the support platforms. Some very interesting tech is coming around now. Wished I had an extra $85,000 laying around, not sure the real charge time with my anemic electrical system at home.
 
zamardii12 said:
Less than 15 minutes and 80% charge? I find that incredibly hard o believe. If this is true then Tesla is really falling behind. Holy shit.
Click to expand...

It helps when there's Formula E and Porsche is getting into it too for 2019 season. Battery tech has advanced a bit and I think the players already in and entering Formula E are at the head of the curve with those Williams batteries. They taken what Tesla started with and expanded it.

Funny vid of FE vs F1, not realistic or representative of anything but funny still.

 
Last edited:
Out of my price range more than likely -- 85K is a ton, problem is that's probably a base car with nothing on it, before any fees/delivery etc, If 85k is the starting number odds are you will be at 100-120k by the time you get it in your driveway.
 
zamardii12 said:
Less than 15 minutes and 80% charge? I find that incredibly hard o believe. If this is true then Tesla is really falling behind. Holy shit.
Click to expand...

With 350kW fast-charging, this will be a reality. It will be enough for a 400km (250-mile) range on an 80% charge.' Total range with a full battery stands at 500km (300 miles).
Click to expand...

Fucking LOL. So when is Porche gunna make their own supercharger network? Not just any supercharger network, but one with a 2.5 times more kW than Tesla's already working supercharger network? 'Cause you can't charge that fast in your house, and what's more, there's no need to even if you could. If you can't charge that fast at your long distance highway stops, then this 80% in 15 minute thing is a meaningless curiosity.

Tesla isn't behind at all. Porche is going to put 10 chargers on the Autobahn and call it good. Meanwhile Tesla has 951 supercharger stations with 6,550 individual superchargers, and they plan on doubling that number over the next year or so. This article is some Porche make-believe.

That said, it does look like a sweet sports car. Its just not realistically capable of long distance travel nor will it ever be realistic to charge it that fast. The best thing Porche could do is pay Tesla to allow its vehicles to use their supercharger network.
 
Interesting style point there on the front lid--that center section (slightly raised) reminds me right away of the original 911, except that on the original car the same section was slightly recessed (and there was an air intake across the back, so it made some sense). https://www.google.com/search?q=Por...Q7AkIMg&biw=1920&bih=971#imgrc=zjDmPRiz63LazM:

It probably won't suffer this problem either: https://www.oregonpca.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/ORPCA-IMS.pdf

I wonder who will be the first to play DOOM on his new one?
 
EODetroit said:
Fucking LOL. So when is Porche gunna make their own supercharger network? Not just any supercharger network, but one with a 2.5 times more kW than Tesla's already working supercharger network? 'Cause you can't charge that fast in your house, and what's more, there's no need to even if you could.
Click to expand...

In the US, most tracks home are wired for 240 with a 100 amp panel. Some larger home will have a 150 amp panel.

No chance of coming close to the super charger numbers at home, since they require 480 volts. Unless you are rich enough to install a business level electrical service, it will always take over night to change an electric car with a 300+ mile range.
 
No doubt it will be a nice drive. I'll give Porsche their due, they know how to make a sports car that drives great, in a biblical sense. But man, if it's not reliability then it's running costs. Between costs for wear parts and sealed engines, it's murder if you like track days (brakes, so much brakes) and/or like to tinker.

Wait, I was wrong. Murder is where the rear sub-frame detaches during "prolonged spirited driving" like in a BMW. Again, props to Porsche were it's due.

As far as that 300 mile range, it'll be just like 40+ MPG in a Prius. It's possible, but very few I see driving either will achieve it. Most Prius I see are driven like late nineties Civics delivering pizza, 0-40 in "FUCK YEA!". Forget a range estimate Porsche, how many laps of the Ring can it do at speed before needing a charge?

Gonna take something major in batteries to counter the energy density of gasoline, and more so diesel, even with the efficiency disparity.
 
I consider the Porsche Panamera to be a blight in Porsche's lineup. It's performance is horrid. It's body frame horrid leading to a bad ride. It's far from comfortable, and terribly priced. A family sedan form Porsche is just an badly conceived idea. (And yes I rode in one a couple times)

Quite frankly whenever you add more doors you weaken the body structure. Rigidity is key to any good sports car and why the best sports car use body on frame designs over unibody. A frame will always be stiffer. (Although the gap has closed, frame is still superior)
 
DigitalGriffin said:
the best sports car use body on frame designs over unibody.
Click to expand...


nope


XRm9Bwv.png
 
0neTwo said:
"The best" is in the post you quoted. :)

What other "best" cars use body on frame?
Click to expand...

Let's see lambo, Ferrari corvette viper iust to name a few still prefer frames.

Even the Chiron with it's extensive use of carbon fiber uses weld sub frame assemblies.

Unibodies aren't bad and ones made of carbon fiber are outstanding if you can afford that luxury. But over time typical unibody construct weakens and begins to flex more. It's also harder to repair.
 
I just need to convince the Mrs we need to sell our house and move into a tiny apartment so I can afford toys like this.
 
The more competition the better, hopefully will help drive battery prices down even faster. We're getting closer and closer to hitting the magic $100/kwh mark, after which EVs should cost less than ICE vehicles to manufacture.
 
Burticus said:
I just need to convince the Mrs we need to sell our house and move into a tiny apartment so I can afford toys like this.
Click to expand...

My friend stopped by in a Ferrari 458. My kids took pics in it. While nice, and sexy as hell I'd rather not live in a 458. Maybe when I was 30 and didn't give a shit about the future... but not now with kids and all.
 
thesmokingman said:
My friend stopped by in a Ferrari 458. My kids took pics in it. While nice, and sexy as hell I'd rather not live in a 458. Maybe when I was 30 and didn't give a shit about the future... but not now with kids and all.
Click to expand...

Don't have to sleep in it... was just talking about selling the house and everything I own to live in a 1 bedroom apartment... to sleep in. All waking moments will be in the car, LOL
 
Burticus said:
Don't have to sleep in it... was just talking about selling the house and everything I own to live in a 1 bedroom apartment... to sleep in. All waking moments will be in the car, LOL
Click to expand...

I know, its just funny. I have some 30 something friends who basically drive their houses around. Don't hate the Playa, hate the game!
 
This reads like Porsche is just making random predictions about future battery tech, and spinning it into a press release.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
Let's see lambo, Ferrari corvette viper iust to name a few still prefer frames.

Even the Chiron with it's extensive use of carbon fiber uses weld sub frame assemblies.

Unibodies aren't bad and ones made of carbon fiber are outstanding if you can afford that luxury. But over time typical unibody construct weakens and begins to flex more. It's also harder to repair.
Click to expand...

Chevy silverado = body on frame.

Ferrari/lambo/the vast majority of vehicles made today/etc. = unibody with subframes.

WTF are you talking about?
 
Even Porsche can't make a good looking electric car, apparently. But I'll wait to make a final judgment until the production version is revealed.
 
raz-0 said:
Chevy silverado = body on frame.

Ferrari/lambo/the vast majority of vehicles made today/etc. = unibody with subframes.

WTF are you talking about?
Click to expand...

and you know why they use a frame on a silverado? Because a unibody won't cut it.

Most cars today are vastly unibody with stamped sheet frames that really aren't frames. They are just heavier material.

As I said with the Chiron, subframes are welded together to form a larger one. It's the same with Lambo and Ferrari. They still use frames in the vital sections.

I'll break it down this way (and there's going to be some engineering talk in here)

The amount a beam will bend in based on it's cross sectional moment of inertia (I^4). Well there are several ways you can increase this cross sectional moment of inertia.

1. Make the part thicker (More weight)
2. Use a material with a higher modulus
3. Increase the distance between spans perpendicular to the direction of forces.


With unibody you are treating the entire car as frame or beam. And your strength comes from #3, because you are incorporating elements like the roofline, a pillar, b pillar, engine support structure etc. And you do this analysis using finite elements to determine an approximate moment of inertia.

Now there are benefits to doing it this way:

1. You can use thinner materials which weigh less
2. The cost of the car comes down because you are using thinner materials.

Now there is a problem here...Imagine a stack of thin aluminum foil about 1" high and pierced/welded on the ends. Now imagine an aluminum bar about 1" high. Which would you rather try to bend? As a rule, frames handle a variety of forces on the chassis better.

As you spread out your connecting joints over a longer distance, there is more flex and bend and the joints where they are welded together are thinner and subject to more stress causing them to flex more with time.

Not only that, but it's harder to repair a unibody. With a frame body there's less to adjust and if necessary you cut out the bad frame section and replace. With unibody you should end up bending the entire car sideways (as in my wife's prius)

There are advantages to hybrid approaches. Even engine mounts on high end performance cars typically use Magnesium to save weight. You save weight and use actual frame where it's needed. And Carbon fiber frames are amazing (increasing the modulus:weight ratio), but often cost prohibitive.

Frame will always be superior.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
and you know why they use a frame on a silverado? Because a unibody won't cut it.

Most cars today are vastly unibody with stamped sheet frames that really aren't frames. They are just heavier material.

As I said with the Chiron, subframes are welded together to form a larger one. It's the same with Lambo and Ferrari. They still use frames in the vital sections.

I'll break it down this way (and there's going to be some engineering talk in here)

The amount a beam will bend in based on it's cross sectional moment of inertia (I^4). Well there are several ways you can increase this cross sectional moment of inertia.

1. Make the part thicker (More weight)
2. Use a material with a higher modulus
3. Increase the distance between spans perpendicular to the direction of forces.


With unibody you are treating the entire car as frame or beam. And your strength comes from #3, because you are incorporating elements like the roofline, a pillar, b pillar, engine support structure etc. And you do this analysis using finite elements to determine an approximate moment of inertia.

Now there are benefits to doing it this way:

1. You can use thinner materials which weigh less
2. The cost of the car comes down because you are using thinner materials.

Now there is a problem here...Imagine a stack of thin aluminum foil about 1" high and pierced/welded on the ends. Now imagine an aluminum bar about 1" high. Which would you rather try to bend? As a rule, frames handle a variety of forces on the chassis better.

As you spread out your connecting joints over a longer distance, there is more flex and bend and the joints where they are welded together are thinner and subject to more stress causing them to flex more with time.

Not only that, but it's harder to repair a unibody. With a frame body there's less to adjust and if necessary you cut out the bad frame section and replace. With unibody you should end up bending the entire car sideways (as in my wife's prius)

There are advantages to hybrid approaches. Even engine mounts on high end performance cars typically use Magnesium to save weight. You save weight and use actual frame where it's needed. And Carbon fiber frames are amazing (increasing the modulus:weight ratio), but often cost prohibitive.

Frame will always be superior.
Click to expand...

Dude you are out of your mind. For performance, chassis rigidity is important. The absolute strongest, most rigid designs are monocoques. Seriously, the test righs that can bend those pickup frames have been destroyed by sports car monocoques. Pickups use body on frame because it is cheaper to build something that can take abuse that way, and because they are good at letting them haul weight, AND letting the frame twist without destroying the body, since they are not rigidly coupled. They are also easier to repair as you said, and let you do things liek swap the bed out for other appropriate utilitarian devices.

But as for sportscars, you are out of your fucking mind that body on frame rules. All the car makers you said use it don't.

So still. WTF are you talking about.

Seriously. You said the best sports cars use body on frame. Give me a make and model and show me the frame.
 
raz-0 said:
Dude you are out of your mind. For performance, chassis rigidity is important. The absolute strongest, most rigid designs are monocoques.
Click to expand...

I agree. Rigidity rules. And you can't get that kind of rigidity on a unibody for a truck frame. If you think the torsion on a frame is bad on a regular frame truck, imagine a unibody! It wouldn't be practical.

Oh look a frame on a Chiron:

http://navidhillon.esy.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/bs1.jpg

Oh look a Hurican with box frame elements:

http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2014/03/2015-Lamborghini-Huracan-final-chassis.jpg

Oh look a corvette with a box frame

http://gmauthority.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Corvette-Aluminum-Frame-1024x577.png

Oh look a viper with a frame

https://www.allpar.com/photos/dodge/viper/2013/frame.jpg

I seen these things go down the factory line. I see how the frame is formed. It's quite a bit different from a common consumer car where metal sheets are stamped and welded together.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Anyone that is talking about performance should never use Ferrari and especially Lamborghini as a reference FYI... Ferrari hasn't won any F1 since forever, and their road cars pales in comparison to its rivals from Porsche, McLaren, Bugatti, Koenigsegg etc in almost every aspect.

Lamborghini has always been overpriced cars made for rappers and lottery winners that like to make loud noises and nothing else. On the bright side, upper end Ferrari's hold their value.
 
TFchris said:
Anyone that is talking about performance should never use Ferrari and especially Lamborghini as a reference FYI... Ferrari hasn't won any F1 since forever, and their road cars pales in comparison to its rivals from Porsche, McLaren, Bugatti, Koenigsegg etc in almost every aspect.

Lamborghini has always been overpriced cars made for rappers and lottery winners that like to make loud noises and nothing else. On the bright side, upper end Ferrari's hold their value.
Click to expand...

When you start getting into the stratosphere of Hyper Cars in the $1 mil+ all rules are off. And your statement is a blanket one. Different cars are used for different types of races. McLaren isn't doing so well either. Porsche has more than their fair share of stinkers. (Ever heard a Cayman called a "Gay-man") And a Bugatti has weakness around curves despite AWD and active Aero. Each has their strengths and weaknesses.

But I'm the kind of guy who prefers naturally aspirated. After that I like super chargers are they are more predictable. And if you have to go turbo, dump to atmosphere so you don't have to worry about exhaust back pressure. As they say "To each their own"
 
DigitalGriffin said:
I agree. Rigidity rules. And you can't get that kind of rigidity on a unibody for a truck frame. If you think the torsion on a frame is bad on a regular frame truck, imagine a unibody! It wouldn't be practical.

Oh look a frame on a Chiron:

http://navidhillon.esy.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/bs1.jpg

Oh look a Hurican with box frame elements:

http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2014/03/2015-Lamborghini-Huracan-final-chassis.jpg

Oh look a corvette with a box frame

http://gmauthority.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Corvette-Aluminum-Frame-1024x577.png

Oh look a viper with a frame

https://www.allpar.com/photos/dodge/viper/2013/frame.jpg

I seen these things go down the factory line. I see how the frame is formed. It's quite a bit different from a common consumer car where metal sheets are stamped and welded together.
Click to expand...

Half of those are the frikin unibody/monocoques.

I mean seriously, bugatti describes the construction of the chiron as a carbon fiber unibody.

The hurican is described by the manufacturer as an aluminum carbon fiber composite unibody. Ferrari describes theirs as unibody with subframe.

The vette is described as a permieter frame, but after you weld it all together I'd argue that blurs the line of bolting panels to a weird unibody backbone that could probably go and actively do car things all on it's own with seats in it and everything. I will also point out with the corvette, it certainly isn't all that tough or easy to repair, as was noted in recent bit of news going around describing how an owner hitting a rock and putting a 1" crack/tear into the "frame" totaled their vette.

The viper is indeed described as a body on frame design by the manufacturer.

So now I ask if that is what you think a frame is, what do you think a unibody is?

Because, while I may not be an engineer, you are using terminology way differently than I have encountered in the automotive world to date. You are also hitting a piretty shitty average on what you are describing as framed vehicles and those which turn out to even be remotely such.

Granted, even the industry tends to have a huge gray area where monocoque and unibody seem to overlap, but that's why I slashy it. It's not well defined and you'll get argumetns over where one thing ends and the other begins.
 
raz-0 said:
Half of those are the frikin unibody/monocoques.

I mean seriously, bugatti describes the construction of the chiron as a carbon fiber unibody.

The hurican is described by the manufacturer as an aluminum carbon fiber composite unibody. Ferrari describes theirs as unibody with subframe.

The vette is described as a permieter frame, but after you weld it all together I'd argue that blurs the line of bolting panels to a weird unibody backbone that could probably go and actively do car things all on it's own with seats in it and everything. I will also point out with the corvette, it certainly isn't all that tough or easy to repair, as was noted in recent bit of news going around describing how an owner hitting a rock and putting a 1" crack/tear into the "frame" totaled their vette.

The viper is indeed described as a body on frame design by the manufacturer.

So now I ask if that is what you think a frame is, what do you think a unibody is?

Because, while I may not be an engineer, you are using terminology way differently than I have encountered in the automotive world to date. You are also hitting a piretty shitty average on what you are describing as framed vehicles and those which turn out to even be remotely such.

Granted, even the industry tends to have a huge gray area where monocoque and unibody seem to overlap, but that's why I slashy it. It's not well defined and you'll get argumetns over where one thing ends and the other begins.
Click to expand...

No the Chiron is described as a HYBRID carbon fiber unibody with subframes welded. And I stated this MANY post ago. Carbon Fiber allows you to avert many of the nastiness of unibody by raising the modulus:weight ratio.

All those cars use solid tube/box rails formed as the basis with more pieces welded on from front to rear. Some are actually made from solid rail/boxes that are hydroformed and bent from front to rear. That's NOT unibody. Some of them are admittingly hybrids and it's smartly use unibody where stresses are lowest.

There's also a difference between stamped piece unibody and frame based ("monocoque one piece" as you call it.) You don't have to have a box shape like a pickup for it to be a frame. But a central structural member usually box, tube, or beam has to be the central focus of rigidity and forces. It doesn't necessarily have to be one piece. But it's certainly not stamped metal welded together.

If Unibodies were superior, they would be using them on NASCAR right? After all the cars they are based on are unibody.

http://s.hswstatic.com/gif/nascar-frame.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
DigitalGriffin said:
I agree. Rigidity rules. And you can't get that kind of rigidity on a unibody for a truck frame. If you think the torsion on a frame is bad on a regular frame truck, imagine a unibody! It wouldn't be practical.

Oh look a frame on a Chiron:

http://navidhillon.esy.es/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/bs1.jpg
Click to expand...
That's a unibody.

DigitalGriffin said:
Oh look a Hurican with box frame elements:

http://st.motortrend.com/uploads/sites/5/2014/03/2015-Lamborghini-Huracan-final-chassis.jpg
Click to expand...
That's a unibody.

DigitalGriffin said:
Oh look a corvette with a box frame

http://gmauthority.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/Corvette-Aluminum-Frame-1024x577.png
Click to expand...
This one is a space frame, I'll give you that.

DigitalGriffin said:
Oh look a viper with a frame

https://www.allpar.com/photos/dodge/viper/2013/frame.jpg
Click to expand...
This one is a monocoque frame.
 
DigitalGriffin said:
When you start getting into the stratosphere of Hyper Cars in the $1 mil+ all rules are off. And your statement is a blanket one. Different cars are used for different types of races. McLaren isn't doing so well either. Porsche has more than their fair share of stinkers. (Ever heard a Cayman called a "Gay-man") And a Bugatti has weakness around curves despite AWD and active Aero. Each has their strengths and weaknesses.

But I'm the kind of guy who prefers naturally aspirated. After that I like super chargers are they are more predictable. And if you have to go turbo, dump to atmosphere so you don't have to worry about exhaust back pressure. As they say "To each their own"
Click to expand...

I was referring to their upper echelon hyper cars where the full R&D of each company is shown. Considering the Porsche 918 has the fastest road-legal production car to lap the Nürburgring ring (The gold standard of performance cars) and was observed by a third party, McLaren P1 LM is fastest non-road-legal car to lap the same ring, Bugatti Veyron, and now the Chiron has broken the record for the fastest 0 - 250 mph on any road legal production vehicle... I would say they all have their merits. Can't say the same for Ferrari. Heck, even in design and detail, Pagani takes the prize. I literally cannot think of a single thing Ferrari can outshine their competitors in (performance wise).

But hey, if you want to mention the Cayman, it's not as bad as Ferrari literally rebranding a Maserati and calling it the Ferrari California LOL but Lamborghini is probably the biggest joke of them all... which is sad because two of my three favorite cars are the Ferrari Enzo and Lamborghini Reventon (even though it's just a murcielago, it looks so sexy)
 
Armenius said:
That's a unibody.
Click to expand...

No it's a hybrid. There are frame elements fore and aft. The Unibody section is made of carbon fiber. And as I said multiple times the same rules don't apply to carbon fiber. But few people can afford such.

That's a unibody.
Click to expand...

What you can't see is the box frame elements under the car. It's pretty much front to rear frame. I can highlight the sections with red circles you are missing. These frame elements are what designed to take the bulk of the forces.


This one is a space frame, I'll give you that.
Click to expand...


This is probably the best example of a frame as it's singular tubes running fore to aft. And it's Nurburgring times are nothing to sneeze at.


This one is a monocoque frame.
Click to expand...


While it's a monocoque frame, it has solid frame box elements going from front to rear.

Unfortunately I don't have a picture of the suspension system of most of these, but you will see they are all hard bolted to the frame members.

Now for a TRUE unibody take a look at most economy cars like the Chevy Volt: See the difference? All stamped metal. No main structural members running down the majority of the car. (I-Beams, Tubes, Box Beams, etc...)


1009021R12-006.JPG
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top