RE: PH Fleet: Porsche Panamera Diesel
Discussion
Chris Harris said:
Clearly I'm not allowed to think that, but if that's the case, I suppose I'll just have to live with it.
Classic mistake - you've driven the cars and come to an informed opinion. This is the internet, it doesn't work like that! Uniformed rubbish followed by personal attacks are the order of the day.
toppstuff said:
I think this is nonsense. The PanAm diesel is plenty fast enough for the role of cross country GT.
If you seriously think a car that can cruise comfortably at 200 kmh is "blocking the left lane" then you have a problem. Or you are 15 years old, still look at the max MPH number on the speedo and get impressed if its a large number, or you are Jeremy Clarkson. It is a stupid thing to say.
Just drive it against one of the rival cars out of the BMW Audi or Benz range and you'll see where it reallx sits. I'd assume you don't have any first hand experience in either of them, lest on the Autobahn. But I do and stand by my my point. The Panamera is for badge snobs who want their Audi pizza warmed over on Hilton plates.If you seriously think a car that can cruise comfortably at 200 kmh is "blocking the left lane" then you have a problem. Or you are 15 years old, still look at the max MPH number on the speedo and get impressed if its a large number, or you are Jeremy Clarkson. It is a stupid thing to say.
Martin 480 Turbo
Martin 480 Turbo said:
Just drive it against one of the rival cars out of the BMW Audi or Benz range and you'll see where it reallx sits. I'd assume you don't have any first hand experience in either of them, lest on the Autobahn. But I do and stand by my my point. The Panamera is for badge snobs who want their Audi pizza warmed over on Hilton plates.
Martin 480 Turbo
Isn't that what Harris says he has done, on the same journey, with no difference in journey time?Martin 480 Turbo
EwenM 36 Sluggish
Martin 480 Turbo said:
toppstuff said:
I think this is nonsense. The PanAm diesel is plenty fast enough for the role of cross country GT.
If you seriously think a car that can cruise comfortably at 200 kmh is "blocking the left lane" then you have a problem. Or you are 15 years old, still look at the max MPH number on the speedo and get impressed if its a large number, or you are Jeremy Clarkson. It is a stupid thing to say.
Just drive it against one of the rival cars out of the BMW Audi or Benz range and you'll see where it reallx sits. I'd assume you don't have any first hand experience in either of them, lest on the Autobahn. But I do and stand by my my point. The Panamera is for badge snobs who want their Audi pizza warmed over on Hilton plates.If you seriously think a car that can cruise comfortably at 200 kmh is "blocking the left lane" then you have a problem. Or you are 15 years old, still look at the max MPH number on the speedo and get impressed if its a large number, or you are Jeremy Clarkson. It is a stupid thing to say.
Martin 480 Turbo
I did'nt think it was possible to say such stupid ill-informed things, only to add even more stupid ill-informed things on top. And with added incomprehensible metaphor, too.
You've done a great job of being even less credible than you were after your original post. Well done.
Chris Harris said:
So it was fast enough for the job?
Once you've eventually wound it up to almost as fast as it will go, yes. Not the best analogy though.I'm pretty indifferent towards the Panamera - it looks awful but I'm sure it's a very nice car and that the diesel is more than quick/fast enough for how the majority will ever use it. I still suspect most would expect a £70k Porsche to have more performance though.
Trommel said:
Once you've eventually wound it up to almost as fast as it will go, yes. Not the best analogy though.
I'm pretty indifferent towards the Panamera - it looks awful but I'm sure it's a very nice car and that the diesel is more than quick/fast enough for how the majority will ever use it. I still suspect most would expect a £70k Porsche to have more performance though.
I think that is the nub in reality. As a saloon with the Porsche badge, the natural expectation is that the product will rest in the top quartile of the performance window for this segment rather than in the lowest quartile. I'm pretty indifferent towards the Panamera - it looks awful but I'm sure it's a very nice car and that the diesel is more than quick/fast enough for how the majority will ever use it. I still suspect most would expect a £70k Porsche to have more performance though.
The turbo does exactly what you expect from the brand. The luxury of a big saloon and the handling and performance of the Porsche name.
But the real issue with this product is that Porsche have come to the diesel party with a rather weedy engine. What you'd expect from Porsche is a diesel that walks over the competition, not wheezes at the back of the queue struggling.
I'm sure it is a very good product but you expect far more from a brand of such a calibre as Porsche.
Stuart said:
You are entitled to say that it is ugly (it isn't pretty to me either) but slow? Really? By what objective measure is this a slow car?
Turn that on its head, by what objective measure is this car fast?As a PH Director bloke, I emplore you to ban anything ever written on this filthy vehicle again. Any utterance of it should not be on any self respecting petrol head site ...or anywhere for that matter.
JS100 said:
Turn that on its head, by what objective measure is this car fast?
As a PH Director bloke, I emplore you to ban anything ever written on this filthy vehicle again. Any utterance of it should not be on any self respecting petrol head site ...or anywhere for that matter.
Bad news chap. He's running this as a fleet car, so you'll be reading a lot more about it. Like a lot of people here, I'm looking forward to that.As a PH Director bloke, I emplore you to ban anything ever written on this filthy vehicle again. Any utterance of it should not be on any self respecting petrol head site ...or anywhere for that matter.
0-60 in sub 7 seconds and a top speed of 150mph, with all the in gear acceleration that over 400lb ft of torque gives you is by any objective measure a fast car. Yes, it is slower than Porsche sports cars, but it has no pretence at being a 911, a Cayman or a Boxster. Despite this, it is resolutely and objectively not a slow car.
Stuart said:
JS100 said:
Turn that on its head, by what objective measure is this car fast?
As a PH Director bloke, I emplore you to ban anything ever written on this filthy vehicle again. Any utterance of it should not be on any self respecting petrol head site ...or anywhere for that matter.
Bad news chap. He's running this as a fleet car, so you'll be reading a lot more about it. Like a lot of people here, I'm looking forward to that.As a PH Director bloke, I emplore you to ban anything ever written on this filthy vehicle again. Any utterance of it should not be on any self respecting petrol head site ...or anywhere for that matter.
0-60 in sub 7 seconds and a top speed of 150mph, with all the in gear acceleration that over 400lb ft of torque gives you is by any objective measure a fast car. Yes, it is slower than Porsche sports cars, but it has no pretence at being a 911, a Cayman or a Boxster. Despite this, it is resolutely and objectively not a slow car.
Is 400lb ft of in gear torque in the diesel providing any more punch than say, the 295lb ft of torque in a well known turbo charged petrol? No.
Eg - diesel max rpm 5k,petrol 7k. Both have top gear going to 200mph say. Put foot down at 80mph (40% max rpm) in each car.
Diesel - (405x2k) / 5252 =154bhp
Petrol - (295x2800) / 5252 = 157bhp.
But oh, the diesel has more torque so must be quicker "in gear"
I REALLY like the Panam, and 250bhp IS enough for day to day driving. But a 70k car should have more than "enough" in my opinion. As said, even 740d power would make a big difference imo.
Edit - its sub 60 so I take that back. But it's still less powerful and less economical than a 740d....i know they're sort of different cars but if you want a long distance cruiser you have to ask.... If you want a decent steer for fun as well as good GT, will you be satisfied with 250bhp?
Edited by E38Ross on Wednesday 22 August 20:40
Stuart said:
Bad news chap. He's running this as a fleet car, so you'll be reading a lot more about it. Like a lot of people here, I'm looking forward to that.
I must admit that I'm looking forward to future reports as well. The one single great thing about this car is that it clearly annoys people who are not just fun to annoy but should be annoyed at every opportunity.
Stuart said:
Bad news chap. He's running this as a fleet car, so you'll be reading a lot more about it. Like a lot of people here, I'm looking forward to that.
0-60 in sub 7 seconds and a top speed of 150mph, with all the in gear acceleration that over 400lb ft of torque gives you is by any objective measure a fast car. Yes, it is slower than Porsche sports cars, but it has no pretence at being a 911, a Cayman or a Boxster. Despite this, it is resolutely and objectively not a slow car.
Poor bast*rd is all I can say! Horses for courses though, you're right. There's a market for fat birds in porn out there. They go fine apparently, not to my taste I must admit, but each to their own. If you, Mr Harris et al choose to go down this route and people want to read about it, fair play.0-60 in sub 7 seconds and a top speed of 150mph, with all the in gear acceleration that over 400lb ft of torque gives you is by any objective measure a fast car. Yes, it is slower than Porsche sports cars, but it has no pretence at being a 911, a Cayman or a Boxster. Despite this, it is resolutely and objectively not a slow car.
p.s. your rationale that I am allowed to think it is pig ugly, (which you apparently somewhat agree with), but not fast, (which you don't), is also somewhat flawed.
DonkeyApple said:
I must admit that I'm looking forward to future reports as well.
The one single great thing about this car is that it clearly annoys people who are not just fun to annoy but should be annoyed at every opportunity.
Were you bullied at school or something? There really are more ways to enjoy your life than trying to annoy people.The one single great thing about this car is that it clearly annoys people who are not just fun to annoy but should be annoyed at every opportunity.
JS100 said:
p.s. your rationale that I am allowed to think it is pig ugly, (which you apparently somewhat agree with), but not fast, (which you don't), is also somewhat flawed.
That isn't what I said. I asked by what objective measure it could be considered slow. There are plenty of things it is "not as fast as" but that by itself does not mean that it is slow.Stuart said:
JS100 said:
p.s. your rationale that I am allowed to think it is pig ugly, (which you apparently somewhat agree with), but not fast, (which you don't), is also somewhat flawed.
That isn't what I said. I asked by what objective measure it could be considered slow. There are plenty of things it is "not as fast as" but that by itself does not mean that it is slow.It's not slow, but find me a few cars which are 65k+ which are slower. It's not a slow car, but is it slow for what you'd expect for that price, even if it is a big luxobarge?
It's not only slower than the other Germany barges, it's less economical too.
I'd love a Panamera S, maybe a standard one, but the diesel would need more oomph for the price for my personal preference.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff