RE: Chris Harris video: Panamera Diesel
Discussion
Dave Hedgehog said:
i can
it looks fugly as hell, even worse in the metal
its an oil burner
its very slow
its an oil burner in a porsche!!
you can get a GTR for the same money
if you can afford one you can afford extra money for petrol
so in the context of a pistonhead forums its an ugly smelly old duffers car
Very slow?it looks fugly as hell, even worse in the metal
its an oil burner
its very slow
its an oil burner in a porsche!!
you can get a GTR for the same money
if you can afford one you can afford extra money for petrol
so in the context of a pistonhead forums its an ugly smelly old duffers car
tyrewrecker said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
i can
it looks fugly as hell, even worse in the metal
its an oil burner
its very slow
its an oil burner in a porsche!!
you can get a GTR for the same money
if you can afford one you can afford extra money for petrol
so in the context of a pistonhead forums its an ugly smelly old duffers car
Very slow?it looks fugly as hell, even worse in the metal
its an oil burner
its very slow
its an oil burner in a porsche!!
you can get a GTR for the same money
if you can afford one you can afford extra money for petrol
so in the context of a pistonhead forums its an ugly smelly old duffers car
Cobnapint said:
davepoth said:
Cobnapint said:
Can we get rid of this ridiculous myth that everybody who buys a diesel must only be doing so to get better mpg!?
Quite ridiculous.
They do so because sometimes, in certain vehicles, in certain circumstances, they drive (thanks to the torque) quite a bit better than petrol cars do. On top of that variable, you also get something called 'personal choice' thrown into the mix.
Alot of the time, mpg has f
k all to do with it.
If you can name a single car where the diesel engine hasn't been introduced on the basis that it can provide better emissions numbers over the EU cycle, I shall eat a hat.Quite ridiculous.
They do so because sometimes, in certain vehicles, in certain circumstances, they drive (thanks to the torque) quite a bit better than petrol cars do. On top of that variable, you also get something called 'personal choice' thrown into the mix.
Alot of the time, mpg has f
k all to do with it.-edit-
I say "a hat" because I don't own one; I will have to go and buy a hat.
And I'm not on about the reasons given for introducing a car, I'm on about the reasons for somebody wanting to buy one.
But in answer to your hat-eating pub quiz forfeit question, how about the recently announced V8 Cayenne diesel S. That kicks out higher emmisions than the existing diesel does.
Humble pie flavoured hats now available to order online.
Take an extreme example : The Range Rover. Now everyone buys the diesel because it gives reasonable performance and doesn't cost the earth to fuel. But the supercharged petrol is faster and would sound better but would cost far too much to run over here. So you choose the diesel purely because of the mpg's
tyrewrecker said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
10 secs is the acceptable target time for a normal road car, for me of course
for a biker this would be considered very slow
My mates exige m3 360 Ferrari we not quick then for a biker this would be considered very slow
and the 360 reportedly does a 9.2 and looks bloody gorgeous 
Dave Hedgehog said:
tyrewrecker said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
by my standards 100 in 15 is very slow
What is quick then? What are your standards?for a biker this would be considered very slow
Dave Hedgehog said:
the series 2 exige does a sub 10 sec 100, so it is acceptable and the 360 reportedly does a 9.2
So anything slower than a Ferrari 360 is slow? and the 360 reportedly does a 9.2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_360
Nearer ten
tyrewrecker said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
the series 2 exige does a sub 10 sec 100, so it is acceptable and the 360 reportedly does a 9.2
So anything slower than a Ferrari 360 is slow? and the 360 reportedly does a 9.2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ferrari_360
Nearer ten
Dave Hedgehog said:
R300will said:
10 secs to 100? you mean 60 or 62 right?
no 100 mph, my personal acceptable benchmark, others are free to choose their own of course jubus the 2012 GTR does a 7.1 100!!!
i think i need to go drive one
Our caterham is supposed to take around 12 seconds but i'd say its bloody quick.
R300will said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
R300will said:
10 secs to 100? you mean 60 or 62 right?
no 100 mph, my personal acceptable benchmark, others are free to choose their own of course jubus the 2012 GTR does a 7.1 100!!!
i think i need to go drive one
Our caterham is supposed to take around 12 seconds but i'd say its bloody quick.
Dave Hedgehog said:
being extremely exposed makes for a very thrilling driving experience, add in superior braking and cornering from its low mass and that takes the enjoyment factor to 11, and there are plenty of 7s that will decimate 10 seconds, however 7s arnt really relevant to this thread since its in relation to a 4 seater porker, not the ultimate in raw driving experience type cars
It is relevant as he is responding to youVery slow!? Get a grip
People on here act as if anything less than a £50k gtr id just not good enough, it's insanity
Plenty of decently fast, aspirational cars are far slower than 10 to 100mph
The demographic on here seems to split between those wanting to run old barges/classics and those that have afternoon tea at the Ritz (or talk like it...)
What happened to an overall love/appreciation for all things automotive
Yes the Panemera is ugly and yes it's a diesel but it certainly isn't slow and has to be appreciated as a piece of engineering...
People on here act as if anything less than a £50k gtr id just not good enough, it's insanity
Plenty of decently fast, aspirational cars are far slower than 10 to 100mph
The demographic on here seems to split between those wanting to run old barges/classics and those that have afternoon tea at the Ritz (or talk like it...)
What happened to an overall love/appreciation for all things automotive
Yes the Panemera is ugly and yes it's a diesel but it certainly isn't slow and has to be appreciated as a piece of engineering...
tyrewrecker said:
Dave Hedgehog said:
being extremely exposed makes for a very thrilling driving experience, add in superior braking and cornering from its low mass and that takes the enjoyment factor to 11, and there are plenty of 7s that will decimate 10 seconds, however 7s arnt really relevant to this thread since its in relation to a 4 seater porker, not the ultimate in raw driving experience type cars
It is relevant as he is responding to youbut i would also add that i am personally not masochistic enough to be able to use a seven every day, or small enough to fit in one
but if i did i would shove a busa engine in it
R300will said:
Rubbish. You only buy a diesel for the MPG or emissions (amounts to the same thing). If you want performance you go for petrol as the engines are lighter and offer more power therefore giving better balance and power to weight. If you want lazy fake performance you go diesel because you get that surge of torque for a few hundred revs.
Take an extreme example : The Range Rover. Now everyone buys the diesel because it gives reasonable performance and doesn't cost the earth to fuel. But the supercharged petrol is faster and would sound better but would cost far too much to run over here. So you choose the diesel purely because of the mpg's
You need to chuck modern auto boxes into the equation these days. Take an extreme example : The Range Rover. Now everyone buys the diesel because it gives reasonable performance and doesn't cost the earth to fuel. But the supercharged petrol is faster and would sound better but would cost far too much to run over here. So you choose the diesel purely because of the mpg's
It's these that have actually removed the downside of diesel.
I'm never going to be a fan of diesel in small cars but in barges nowadays I think they are the smarter choice over petrol.
In a barge you are not hustling but wafting for many miles and modern 8 speed boxes play wonderfully into the hands of a big torquey diesel. In today's world diesel is a superior option to petrol in certain types of cars meant for certain types of driving.
Back to the Porsche, is it ok for them to put a diesel in their cars? Damn right. Would be odd in the sports cars but in their two barge models it's a must as it's the right engine choice for the job at hand.
Am I surprised that they've fitted an engine that requires journalists to make special videos to try and justify, explain, demonstrate that it has some kind of performance? Yes. Very. The Porsche brand expects more. It's not a Passat, it is a close cousin to what is probably the finest all round sports car legacy ever created. The diesel engine used by such a company should never require anyone to try and explain or prove that it can do a job, it should just sime be apparent from the outset that it's awesome.
The new diesel in the Cayenne does this. It has a set of numbers that from the moment you read them you know that it will do what a car carrying the Porsche badge should be capable of doing.
As with most things in life, the simple golden rule is that if it needs to be explained or justified then something isn't right with it.
Chr1sch said:
Very slow!? Get a grip
People on here act as if anything less than a £50k gtr id just not good enough, it's insanity
Plenty of decently fast, aspirational cars are far slower than 10 to 100mph
The demographic on here seems to split between those wanting to run old barges/classics and those that have afternoon tea at the Ritz (or talk like it...)
What happened to an overall love/appreciation for all things automotive
Yes the Panemera is ugly and yes it's a diesel but it certainly isn't slow and has to be appreciated as a piece of engineering...
budget only becomes relevant in terms of comparison to this particular panamera, in that its reasonably closely priced to the GTR which is substantially faster. If i had to pick between the 2 i wouldn't even think about the porsche, but then personally i would rather have an RS4 avant (or the AMG C63 Estate) over both of these cars as a personal choice as a road car.People on here act as if anything less than a £50k gtr id just not good enough, it's insanity
Plenty of decently fast, aspirational cars are far slower than 10 to 100mph
The demographic on here seems to split between those wanting to run old barges/classics and those that have afternoon tea at the Ritz (or talk like it...)
What happened to an overall love/appreciation for all things automotive
Yes the Panemera is ugly and yes it's a diesel but it certainly isn't slow and has to be appreciated as a piece of engineering...
and you can get similar sort of performance on a much lower budget, a sapphire cosworth running 280bhp+ should be very close etc
as of a love of all things automotive, sorry i cant, i have driven a base polo which is just horrific
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff