RE: PH Fleet: Porsche Panamera Diesel

[whitevancam]

If it was your own money and you were buying new, would you have this over a 535d??

A new M Sport 535d would be £12k cheaper, seat 5, has 60bhp and 50nm more power and torque and although I haven't driven one is not too shabby in the bends either.

[Ocellia]

I can think of one other rival in the cross-continent sense, and that's a Citroen C6. Supreme ride quality.
But before you all start huffing....the ride is all!
It's comfy etc, but not at all close in the power etc stakes!

Not being a Porsche fan, I have no problem with the Panny looks.
Like others, I'd be tempted by a 4 year old cheapie!

[monthefish]

'bout time for a change of car.
I was sick of being bombarded with all of the updates about the last one.....

[Chrisw666]

whitevancam said:

If it was your own money and you were buying new, would you have this over a 535d??

A new M Sport 535d would be £12k cheaper, seat 5, has 60bhp and 50nm more power and torque and although I haven't driven one is not too shabby in the bends either.

If I could afford a Panamera and needed 4 doors but not the space of an estate car then I'd 100% pick on over the options from BMW or Audi.

[excel monkey]

whitevancam said:

If it was your own money and you were buying new, would you have this over a 535d??

I'd say the X6 40d is BMW's nearest competitor to the Panamera.

Uber-competent as it is, the 5-series is a fairly common sight on the road, and some people will be happy to pay a premium for a car that does a similar job but with a different approach.

[Tonberry]

30MPG at 120mph!



Couldn't stand these when they were released but now having given it time, I can't think of many better ways to travel.

[Bill Carr]

toppstuff said:

Itsallicanafford said:

Its Desirable, it has premium product stamped all over it, but is it really a good looking object?

Yes. I can't think of any other genuinely spacious 4 seat, 4 door up market saloon that equals it.

Allow me to venture the Aston Rapide and Bentley Continental Flying Spur.

[Chrisw666]

Bill Carr said:

Allow me to venture the Aston Rapide and Bentley Continental Flying Spur.

Both of which would be good to compare with the Turbo or Turbo S but neither of them have an engine that will please the accountant and both will depreciate more in 3/4 years than the Panamera diesel costs to buy.

[excel monkey]

Bill Carr said:

toppstuff said:

Itsallicanafford said:

Its Desirable, it has premium product stamped all over it, but is it really a good looking object?

Yes. I can't think of any other genuinely spacious 4 seat, 4 door up market saloon that equals it.

Allow me to venture the Aston Rapide and Bentley Continental Flying Spur.

Both starting at a much higher price than the Panamera!

[toppstuff]

Bill Carr said:

Allow me to venture the Aston Rapide and Bentley Continental Flying Spur.

The Aston is a pretty but silly car. It fails the test of carrying 4 adults in comfort over long distances. It is therefore pointless.

The Bentley is a good shout, especially in Speed version. But it's very thirsty , much more expensive and isn't a hatchback.

[Bill]

toppstuff said:

Bill said:

... When I say they're not meant to be beautiful I mean that no one cares if they're ugly.

I care more. We have to look at them everyday.

I don't think anyone else is that bothered.

[andyps]

So the problem with the Jag was an iPhone which had nothing to do with Jaguar? Strange complaint. Maybe it will turn out there is a problem with Nike shoes which ruin the way the Porsche feels.

I am sure the Panamera is a very accomplished car and a great tourer, but the compromised looks would mean it very unlikely to be on my wish list at any time.

Good to know a petrolhead can get on with a diesel I guess, but would it be as satisfying if it was the only car you had? Chris is lucky enough to have a 599 and access to all sorts of other cars for the type of blast that only a petrol is likely to give. For many people it would be the only car they would drive a lot of the time - how would it be then? Genuinely interested to know the answer to that, and it is something which I often think when magazines discuss long term test cars (not that long term means long term in relation to many owners).

[tomoleeds]

its good to read reviews of new cars like this but not many PH readers will be buying one,when ever i look at what readers own (There Gareage) there is a cross between 10 year old Golfs/Rovers/Seats, or 5 year old Range Rovers/X5/cayene,with a mini as a second car,or a 2004 911 and a 911 trackcar,but i dont come across many readers who have 2011-2012 £65k car whatever the make.Obviously they will be some but i hope PH does not turn in to Top Gear,i hate it,Every show reviews cars costing £50-£150k (or more)that do 15mpg,with the cost of fuel, most second hand car buyers are looking at fuel economy more than ever.maybe PH could do more used car reviews and use one for a few days giving there own views?

[Cacatous]

Chris Harris said:

The semantics of torque - and how it, and its effects, are expressed is a pedants paradise on which far too much time is wasted.

Should be "pedant's paradise".

[FWDRacer]

andyps said:

So the problem with the Jag was an iPhone which had nothing to do with Jaguar? Strange complaint. Maybe it will turn out there is a problem with Nike shoes which ruin the way the Porsche feels..

Touche

Next Harris will be using his simian charms to wax lyrically and proclaim this is a better and prettier car than the Jag.

Seriously? Credibility on the slide.

[seawise]

no one needs to transport 4 adults over great distances, they use a bloody plane for that. but you might need to transport the wife and three children, even over short distances. the Panamera can't do that so it's not even on the list, let alone a short list, which is a pity, because i'd quite like a Porsche as a daily driver, but their quest to be 'luxury' has made the car completely impractical for anyone stupid enough to have more than two offspring. their loss, Mercedes gain in my case.

[sjabrown]

At least Porsche are being different. Not to everyone's taste but if I had that sort of money I'd consider one.

[Bill]

Cacatous said:

Chris Harris said:

The semantics of torque - and how it, and its effects, are expressed is a pedants paradise on which far too much time is wasted.

Should be "pedant's paradise".

"Pedants' paradise" surely. It's no fun being a pedant on your own, is it?

[E38Ross]

Chris Harris said:

E38Ross said:

Chris,

Can you please explain what you mean by it compensates for having 250bhp by having over 400lb ft of torque? That makes no sense. What's the difference between the diesel, say making 400lb ft at 2k rpm and a petrol making 300lb ft at 3k rpm (both a bit under 1/2 max rpm).... The laws of physics suggest you wouldn't feel any difference in acceleration. So what exactly do you mean? To feel the same as the petrol turbo it would need even more torque because of rpm difference.

You've said this about lot in recent posts but it doesn't really add up. Especially when you briefly compared the turbo diesel to the turbo petrol.

It makes sense. Its torque output is large compared to its power output. Drive the car and its low-effort performance is a corollary of instant, low-rpm torque.

The semantics of torque - and how it, and its effects, are expressed is a pedants paradise on which far too much time is wasted.

This car has more everyday poke than its performance figures suggest. I think I've made that clear.

But would it be different from a turbo petrol engine with a similar torque curve? (I.e. Peak torque at very low % of max rpm) or would it be quicker low down than if it had, say, the engine from a 535i/335i in it, which produces less torque but produces it from very low rpm (Like the diesel) and in any given gear its probably making more power.

Just curious,

Thanks again

Ross.

[squirejo]

Perhaps the reason it is only a 4seater is to sell you a cayenne diesel instead,a car about which most points of this panamera review are also true!