Porsche Panamera Dud?

[markopolo]

Going back to the original OP, Panamera IS as ugly as Aztec. It is as ugly as ... Rosie O'Donnell

To remove this ad, register today or login if you already are registered!

[LSM777]

Originally Posted by markopolo

Going back to the original OP,
Panamera IS as ugly as Aztec.
It is as ugly as ... Rosie O'Donnell

Rosie O'Donnel may possibly look better.....

[absent]

Originally Posted by LSM777

Rosie O'Donnel may possibly look better.....

No car,no matter how ugly ,deserves to be compared to Rosie.
Obviously you are seeing some traces of attractiveness in her.
That's sick......

[LSM777]

Originally Posted by absent

No car,no matter how ugly ,deserves to be compared to Rosie.
Obviously you are seeing some traces of attractiveness in her.
That's sick......

hahahahaha LOLOLOLOL

[vonbeeler]

Originally Posted by dbtk

I agree on the Panamera's challenging styling, however, when it comes to its 0-60 mph performance 3.5 sec (C&D and R&T) is pretty impressive for a 4,500 lb sports sedan. So now, the new 997.2 with PDK can do under 4 sec with "only 385" (from a NA engine).

The 3.5 stat is obviously for the turbo $150k car which I agree is impressive and should be for the price.My problem is the lackluster performance from base model at $100k+. I guess for me the point is Porsche was always way above in performance and at the $100k base model its just mediocre.

Originally Posted by Oliverk

Porsche is about balance, not massive HP. 385bhp with a 3300lb curb weight makes for a pretty good performing vehicle. It won't be a rocketship, but again, straight line acceleration is not what a Porsche is for.

If you gave a 997 Carrera S a good work out on a road course, you'd realize that 385bhp is more than enough for most drivers.

I have not owned but rented a 997 Carrera S for a few days as I wanted to consider purchase. As fun as the driving experience was for me the biggest obstacle that I couldn't overcome at $105k was lack of power and lack of sound. Before my recent purchase of M3 cab I almost bought a 09 911turbo cab. Sweet deal with 400miles about $25koff. It did have the power but still lacking the sound and again after sales tax it was still $135k. Let me say this M3 cab has the sound, enough power, is faster around the track than Carrera S (R&T I think), and the handling is really super surprising all for $60K ($22k off 6000 miles). and I have kids and a usable rear seat

So in summary as of late Porsche has been too much $ for not enough performance for me. It wasn't always that way and I still have plenty of Porsche posters in my garage.

[Oliverk]

Thats why the Porsche offers the GT cars. Raw, loud, and more powerful.

I recall the M3 vs porsche argument, but I believe that was a standard carrera, not an S.

[transferred]

I don't like convertible M cars...they are always FAR heavier than their fixed head counterparts. The M6 convertible weighs almost 500lbs more than the M5 for christ sakes....new conv M3 is way heavier too...

[kafklatsch]

As a lover of performance... Porsche is at the top of the heap. I would only own the GT ($$$), as I dont like any other Porsche styling. The few that I have riden in are near race car harsh.

That aside, The performance of porsches when the company chooses is nearly untouchable across the lineup. The vision of a GT accelerating to 200mph makes me shake my head in amazement.

If one can not agree on the performance that porsche engineers into these vehicles then there really is no further reason to discuss the issue.

I just am not a porsche man.... I like Benz

Originally Posted by transferred

I don't like convertible M cars...they are always FAR heavier than their fixed head counterparts. The M6 convertible weighs almost 500lbs more than the M5 for christ sakes....new conv M3 is way heavier too...

[LSM777]

Originally Posted by vonbeeler

The 3.5 stat is obviously for the turbo $150k car which I agree is impressive and should be for the price.My problem is the lackluster performance from base model at $100k+. I guess for me the point is Porsche was always way above in performance and at the $100k base model its just mediocre.



I have not owned but rented a 997 Carrera S for a few days as I wanted to consider purchase. As fun as the driving experience was for me the biggest obstacle that I couldn't overcome at $105k was lack of power and lack of sound. Before my recent purchase of M3 cab I almost bought a 09 911turbo cab. Sweet deal with 400miles about $25koff. It did have the power but still lacking the sound and again after sales tax it was still $135k. Let me say this M3 cab has the sound, enough power, is faster around the track than Carrera S (R&T I think), and the handling is really super surprising all for $60K ($22k off 6000 miles). and I have kids and a usable rear seat

So in summary as of late Porsche has been too much $ for not enough performance for me. It wasn't always that way and I still have plenty of Porsche posters in my garage.

Wow, i couldnt disagree more....your 4000lb M3 convertible handles better than a Carrera S which weighs 3200 lbs and has almost as much power Lack of power? what the 15-20 extra hp your M3 has with an extra 800lbs makes it more powerful?? i dont think so...Come on bro....And Porsche's are much more involving/better handling/sharper as well...the Carrerra S will beat the M3 in every single acceleration category as well...Its faster than the M3 coupe which weighs 400lbs less than your Cabrio but nontheless still a porker at 3600-3700lbs...The M3 has completely become a GT car increasing weight every year and losing some handling....Dont get me wrong the M3 is a great car, I love it, but its in a different stratosphere than any Porsche....You want louder opt for PSE....

[LSM777]

Originally Posted by Oliverk

Thats why the Porsche offers the GT cars. Raw, loud, and more powerful.

I recall the M3 vs porsche argument, but I believe that was a standard carrera, not an S.

Or granted the Turbo is more but for a 3k chip and 3k exhaust its loud and scary and I mean scary fast with 580hp and 580lb/ft

Lou

[LSM777]

Someone mentioned the Panamera's lackluster performance on the standard models...Yea its 400hp, but i guarantee that will equate to mid 4's 60 times even at 4000lbs on the base model..Porsche is notorious from getting more from less HP than others manufacturers solutions of bigger engines in ever portlier cars....The carrera S runs sub 4 second 60 times with 385 hp....

Lou

[transferred]

Originally Posted by LSM777

Wow, i couldnt disagree more....your 4000lb M3 convertible handles better than a Carrera S which weighs 3200 lbs and has almost as much power Lack of power? what the 15-20 extra hp your M3 has with an extra 800lbs makes it more powerful?? i dont think so...Come on bro....And Porsche's are much more involving/better handling/sharper as well...the Carrerra S will beat the M3 in every single acceleration category as well...Its faster than the M3 coupe which weighs 400lbs less than your Cabrio but nontheless still a porker at 3600-3700lbs...The M3 has completely become a GT car increasing weight every year and losing some handling....Dont get me wrong the M3 is a great car, I love it, but its in a different stratosphere than any Porsche....You want louder opt for PSE....

Fair views, maybe a little extreme but I hear you. However, M3 GTS puts that right...3285lbs w/ 450bhp. It hits the streets in europe early next year

[1998CLK320]

Merc just needs to stop making huge engines and americanizing themselves

Tell me why my 3.2 liter w208 engine is the same size as my bros e46 M3 3.2 as well?

His engine would destroy mine.

If they want to be more fuel efficient they need to get more out of the engine the same way Porsche and BMW do. Porsche especially.

The SLK 32 supercharged is ridiculously fast and the same engine size as mine

[Oliverk]

Originally Posted by 1998CLK320

Merc just needs to stop making huge engines and americanizing themselves

Tell me why my 3.2 liter w208 engine is the same size as my bros e46 M3 3.2 as well?

His engine would destroy mine.

If they want to be more fuel efficient they need to get more out of the engine the same way Porsche and BMW do. Porsche especially.

The SLK 32 supercharged is ridiculously fast and the same engine size as mine

MB has a much much much larger product line than Porsche, and they need a fuel efficient, quiet, smooth engine for lower end cars, such as the 3.2L 6 or the 3.5L 6. They are not the most powerful, but they meet the needs of the consumer.

The standard engine in the boxster is not exactly mind blowing either.

That said, I agree to some extent about MB's purpose. They build executive led sleds. Big, heavy, with huge power. then again, thats what they are good at, so why not do it.

[vonbeeler]

[quote=vonbeeler;3797915] I guess for me the point is Porsche was always way above in performance and at the $100k base model its just mediocre.

So in summary as of late Porsche has been too much $ for not enough performance for me. QUOTE]

I am repeating myself because I don't think it came across the first time....
So In summary: AS OF LATE, Porsche has been too much $ for not enough performance for me.

Originally Posted by LSM777

Wow, i couldn't disagree more....your 4000lb M3 convertible handles better than a Carrera S which weighs 3200 lbs and has almost as much power Lack of power? what the 15-20 extra hp your M3 has with an extra 800lbs makes it more powerful?? i dont think so...Come on bro....And Porsche's are much more involving/better handling/sharper as well...the Carrerra S will beat the M3 in every single acceleration category as well...Its faster than the M3 coupe which weighs 400lbs less than your Cabrio but nontheless still a porker at 3600-3700lbs...The M3 has completely become a GT car increasing weight every year and losing some handling....Dont get me wrong the M3 is a great car, I love it, but its in a different stratosphere than any Porsche....You want louder opt for PSE....

I wasn't trying to compare head to head even though they almost do. I was using the M3 as illustration that the Porsche is too much $ for the performance or lack thereof at its price point.

Originally Posted by LSM777

Someone mentioned the Panamera's lackluster performance on the standard models...Yea its 400hp,....The carrera S runs sub 4 second 60 times with 385 hp....

Lou

To further the debate of too much $ for not enough performance. Here is another illustration: I just sold a base 5 year old Corvette with Z-51 pkg that was more HP, 3200lbs, a lot more torque, handled 95% as well, for a paltry $27 grand. So when I look at a brand new 911 S with less overall performance for $105,000 its just not very motivating and actually disappointing.

[1998CLK320]

That's true
I have the Merc cuz its a status car

As far as performance it can dance but I dont hang my hat on it.
However no car can be as comfortable and quiet as a Merc, NO CAR

I am young and just looking to get a bit more thrill out of my ride, thats all

[Oliverk]

Originally Posted by vonbeeler

To further the debate of too much $ for not enough performance. Here is another illustration: I just sold a base 5 year old Corvette with Z-51 pkg that was more HP, 3200lbs, a lot more torque, handled 95% as well, for a paltry $27 grand. So when I look at a brand new 911 S with less overall performance for $105,000 its just not very motivating and actually disappointing.

Using the corvette comparison renders just about every sports car out there as not enough performance for the price. Its a great bang for the buck, but thats not what all sports cars are about.

[Carl Lassiter]

[quote=vonbeeler;3799289]

Originally Posted by vonbeeler

I guess for me the point is Porsche was always way above in performance and at the $100k base model its just mediocre.

So in summary as of late Porsche has been too much $ for not enough performance for me. QUOTE]

I am repeating myself because I don't think it came across the first time....
So In summary: AS OF LATE, Porsche has been too much $ for not enough performance for me.



I wasn't trying to compare head to head even though they almost do. I was using the M3 as illustration that the Porsche is too much $ for the performance or lack thereof at its price point.



To further the debate of too much $ for not enough performance. Here is another illustration: I just sold a base 5 year old Corvette with Z-51 pkg that was more HP, 3200lbs, a lot more torque, handled 95% as well, for a paltry $27 grand. So when I look at a brand new 911 S with less overall performance for $105,000 its just not very motivating and actually disappointing.

You are confusing power with performance. The former is 0-60, 0-100 etc while the latter involves suspension geometry, braking, throttle response, steering feel etc, the combination of which adds up to a fun car that can turn in quick lap times. A 997 S does not have "less overall performance" than a C5. At all.

Until you realize performance is not all BHP, torque and drag racing then there is not much that can be done. If you are after hp/$ then Porsche is not the brand for you, but then if you want hp/lb then I don't think MB is either.

[vonbeeler]

[quote=Carl Lassiter;3799376]

Originally Posted by vonbeeler

You are confusing power with performance. The former is 0-60, 0-100 etc while the latter involves suspension geometry, braking, throttle response, steering feel etc, the combination of which adds up to a fun car that can turn in quick lap times. A 997 S does not have "less overall performance" than a C5. At all.

Until you realize performance is not all BHP, torque and drag racing then there is not much that can be done. If you are after hp/$ then Porsche is not the brand for you, but then if you want hp/lb then I don't think MB is either.

Good points Carl. I understand hp is not performance. However the power delivery is part of the overall package. When considering $100k+ purchase if one element of the overall performance (hp) is disappointing and a prospective customer comes away unsatisfied then it will certainly affect the purchase decision. I am generally disappointed, at the price, that there is not more of that part of the overall package.

[Oliverk]

Its all a trade off. Porsche gives you less power, but better handling, braking, and steering feel than almost anything on the planet. MB gives you power, but huge weight, quiet, and dodgy steering and handling.

Corvettes give you good power, almost zero steering feel, decent handling, and pretty sad interior materials and build quality.

[vonbeeler]

Originally Posted by Carl Lassiter

A 997 S does not have "less overall performance" than a C5. At all.

Its C6 and yes a 997 S does have less overall performance. Its tough to swallow but thats how weak 911's have become while everyone else is increasing their game.

If I wanted a paltry 385 hp with the best handling and true passion, I would just buy a 15 year old Ferrari ala F355.

385 is weak by todays standards. WEAK

[usctrojans1]

Originally Posted by Oliverk

Its all a trade off. Porsche gives you less power, but better handling, braking, and steering feel than almost anything on the planet. MB gives you power, but huge weight, quiet, and dodgy steering and handling.

Corvettes give you good power, almost zero steering feel, decent handling, and pretty sad interior materials and build quality.

Excellent point on the Corvette, especially on the steering feel.

[13pauls]

Originally Posted by jtanoyo1

Guys, it's a Porsche. No matter what you say, a Porsche will always be cooler than a Merc.

Nuff said.

It is a horrible looking vehicle, Porsche may be cool to you, but I would never buy one in any range, there is a Mercedes which is always better, all the way from Boxter to Carrerra GT to C class to SLR. IMHO.

[carsnob]

As an S 600 and 911 C4S driver, I can tell you that both are fantastic.
The 911 is a true sports car. However, I'd never change my S sedan for a Panamera. The Panamera is meant to be a sports car with room for 4. That's it.
The S class has comfort, lots of room and everything you could want in a car.
Just ask WSH and he'll give you all the adjectives/slashes/descriptions/ you need to realize that the S is at the top of the heap of sedans. The Panamera won't hold a candle to an S sedan.

[Oliverk]

Originally Posted by 13pauls

It is a horrible looking vehicle, Porsche may be cool to you, but I would never buy one in any range, there is a Mercedes which is always better, all the way from Boxter to Carrerra GT to C class to SLR. IMHO.

Um, what car does mercedes make that is better than a 911, a 911 S, a 911 turbo, 911 GT2, 911 GT3, or 911 GT3-RS.

The SL? The CLK BS? Never in a million years.