Blasphemy!: Revered driver's cars that you just don't get.
Discussion
white_goodman said:
I obviously opened a bit of a can of worms and sorry, it seems I was a bit inaccurate with regards to pricing. In fact, a new M5 (particularly at 60k seems a bit of a bargain), although still a lot of money to most people. I don't dislike super saloons or M5s. I would quite happily have a Quattroporte/Rapide/XFR/XFR-S/CLS AMG/Lotus Carlton but for some reason the new M5 doesn't appeal to me as much as the earlier cars. I doubt very much that it isn't brilliant though and I get that for the busy family man, it ticks all the boxes 
.
This car really doesn't make sense to me though.
I know the engineering and the drive will be first-rate and practical and well-built too but just look at it! Conversely, if I had to have one, it would have to be the fastest (Turbo S). Why would you buy a "base" V6 or diesel, just so you can say you have a Porsche?
I understand why Porsche produces a diesel - it must account for a vast majority of sales so it would completely irrational pf them not to meet that demand... but what I don't understand is why they don't develop a 'best in class' diesel drivetrain. They have the VAG Bi-TDI at their disposal surely? If they came up with something to rival the ~380bhp tri-turbo 3.0l that BMW put in the x550d it would make far more sense than just a run of the mill ~260bhp unit. Same with the Macan which might have best handling in its class but doesn't offer any way near the outright overtaking grunt of an X3 35d / XD3 / SQ5. If I bought a diesel Porsche I'd want it to at least offer class leading power/torque along with the more linear power delivery of the rival twin-turbo offerings..This car really doesn't make sense to me though.
I know the engineering and the drive will be first-rate and practical and well-built too but just look at it! Conversely, if I had to have one, it would have to be the fastest (Turbo S). Why would you buy a "base" V6 or diesel, just so you can say you have a Porsche?
Not sure what the cost of the panamera is but if I were in that market I'd really have to want the badge to take their diesel over a 640d GC or 740d.
ETA they offer a thumping great V8 diesel in the Cayenne do they not?
Edited by theboss on Monday 20th April 10:20
ORD said:
Mr2Mike said:
How stupid car manufacturers must be for spending millions carefully engineering these engines when they could just "crank up the turbo" and be done with it.
That is exactly what they do. You may have to mess a bit with cooling, but otherwise it is just bigger turbo or crank up the pressure on the existing one. This is how most manufacturers now produce loads of variants of an engine with different bhp and torque figures (or, strangely, they just set the redline lower in the lower bhp versions). If you think a major manufacturer is going to bother producing a new engine for each variant in its line-up, you wouldn't make much money running Audi, VW, etc. To take the venerable 20vT 1.8 VW engine as an example, there are a huge number of internal differences between the 150bhp derivative, and the 225bhp Audi and 235bhp SEAT versions. You cannot just "wind up" the 150bhp version and get the same level of power as it is possible to tune the higher output versions to. The differences are internal and external bolt-ons (Turbo, injectors, software etc).
It's correct to say that these engines share the same architecture, and there is much commonality in the castings, for example. Lots of money saving goes on here, by the manufacturer. The detail component changes are huge, however, including oil spray nozzles, different cranks, rods, pistons, grades of material used in the castings, valve materials etc.
It's incorrect to think that there is a warehouse full of thousands of engines, being stuck into a huge range of vehicles, and each one leaving the factory with their performance dictated by the level of boost that the target market requires.
mat205125 said:
There are a huge number of detail changes to the levels of tune of "the same engine", to the extent to which makes this statement far from correct.
To take the venerable 20vT 1.8 VW engine as an example, there are a huge number of internal differences between the 150bhp derivative, and the 225bhp Audi and 235bhp SEAT versions. You cannot just "wind up" the 150bhp version and get the same level of power as it is possible to tune the higher output versions to. The differences are internal and external bolt-ons (Turbo, injectors, software etc).
It's correct to say that these engines share the same architecture, and there is much commonality in the castings, for example. Lots of money saving goes on here, by the manufacturer. The detail component changes are huge, however, including oil spray nozzles, different cranks, rods, pistons, grades of material used in the castings, valve materials etc.
It's incorrect to think that there is a warehouse full of thousands of engines, being stuck into a huge range of vehicles, and each one leaving the factory with their performance dictated by the level of boost that the target market requires.
Fair point. Cranking up the turbo does often (but not always) require other hardware changes. But it is often a pretty easy and cost-effective process, especially as it is often already planned in when the engine is designed and built - i.e. it is built to accommodate changes for different states of tune.To take the venerable 20vT 1.8 VW engine as an example, there are a huge number of internal differences between the 150bhp derivative, and the 225bhp Audi and 235bhp SEAT versions. You cannot just "wind up" the 150bhp version and get the same level of power as it is possible to tune the higher output versions to. The differences are internal and external bolt-ons (Turbo, injectors, software etc).
It's correct to say that these engines share the same architecture, and there is much commonality in the castings, for example. Lots of money saving goes on here, by the manufacturer. The detail component changes are huge, however, including oil spray nozzles, different cranks, rods, pistons, grades of material used in the castings, valve materials etc.
It's incorrect to think that there is a warehouse full of thousands of engines, being stuck into a huge range of vehicles, and each one leaving the factory with their performance dictated by the level of boost that the target market requires.
theboss said:
I understand why Porsche produces a diesel - it must account for a vast majority of sales so it would completely irrational pf them not to meet that demand... but what I don't understand is why they don't develop a 'best in class' diesel drivetrain. They have the VAG Bi-TDI at their disposal surely? If they came up with something to rival the ~380bhp tri-turbo 3.0l that BMW put in the x550d it would make far more sense than just a run of the mill ~260bhp unit. Same with the Macan which might have best handling in its class but doesn't offer any way near the outright overtaking grunt of an X3 35d / XD3 / SQ5. If I bought a diesel Porsche I'd want it to at least offer class leading power/torque along with the more linear power delivery of the rival twin-turbo offerings.
Not sure what the cost of the panamera is but if I were in that market I'd really have to want the badge to take their diesel over a 640d GC or 740d.
ETA they offer a thumping great V8 diesel in the Cayenne do they not?
OK, I can kind of see the case of diesel engines in the SUVs. These customers are pretty wealthy and probably have a "proper" Porsche too but need something more economical and practical too. Why would they want their customers to go elsewhere? A diesel Panamera though? The only thing that it has going for it is that the Turbo is f****** fast and yes, I agree the specs on the diesel seems pretty unexceptional. One of my goals in life used to be that I would own a Porsche by the time I was 30. It never crossed my mind that I really want one but do they do it in a diesel? Maybe applying some of their hybrid technology to the turbo to enhance performance, whilst lowering emissions and fuel consumption would be more appropriate in a Porsche? (Incidentally, with the M5, I would have liked to have seen more of an effort to cut weight to increase performance rather than just adding more power. Perhaps a twin-turbo straight six with some hybrid trickery?)Not sure what the cost of the panamera is but if I were in that market I'd really have to want the badge to take their diesel over a 640d GC or 740d.
ETA they offer a thumping great V8 diesel in the Cayenne do they not?
Edited by theboss on Monday 20th April 10:20
What I would like to see from Porsche is a new-age 928-style GT car and a successor to the 944/968. A 4-pot Turbo 2+2 with RWD that fits in slightly below the Boxster/Cayman.
Are we going to be getting diesel Astons, Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis next? Oh wait...
Edited by white_goodman on Monday 20th April 16:56
white_goodman said:
OK, I can kind of see the case of diesel engines in the SUVs. These customers are pretty wealthy and probably have a "proper" Porsche too but need something more economical and practical too. Why would they want their customers to go elsewhere? A diesel Panamera though? The only thing that it has going for it is that the Turbo is f****** fast and yes, I agree the specs on the diesel seems pretty unexceptional. One of my goals in life used to be that I would own a Porsche by the time I was 30. It never crossed my mind that I really want one but do they do it in a diesel? Maybe applying some of their hybrid technology to the turbo to enhance performance, whilst lowering emissions and fuel consumption would be more appropriate in a Porsche? (Incidentally, with the M5, I would have liked to have seen more of an effort to cut weight to increase performance rather than just adding more power. Perhaps a twin-turbo straight six with some hybrid trickery?)
What I would like to see from Porsche is a new-age 928-style GT car and a successor to the 944/968. A 4-pot Turbo 2+2 with RWD that fits in slightly below the Boxster/Cayman.
Are we going to be getting diesel Astons, Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis next? Oh wait...
I think I jumped to a conclusion on the Panamera because I now see in current spec it is 300bhp / 479lb.ft which means it will just about hustle itself along with the rival bi-TDI / x40d units and is a lot better than the old ~250bhp unit I was thinking of.What I would like to see from Porsche is a new-age 928-style GT car and a successor to the 944/968. A 4-pot Turbo 2+2 with RWD that fits in slightly below the Boxster/Cayman.
Are we going to be getting diesel Astons, Ferraris, Lamborghinis and Maseratis next? Oh wait...
Edited by white_goodman on Monday 20th April 16:56
Conversely I do 'get' these cars - if you're in the market for a comfortable and relatively extravagant luxo-barge / 4-dour GT type thing with some consideration for fuelling costs over high mileage - then a diesel Panamera should, in theory, be a pretty good car for the job.
M5 - it is what it is - I certainly wouldn't want to sacrifice comfort or refinement for reduced weight, and I think it both steers and rides better than most other large exec saloons out there. If the M guys had succumbed to electric steering, run-flats etc. it would be a different proposition but as it stands, I don't think it wallows too badly. Don't believe me - go and do a ring taxi lap with two of your mates in the back, and try not to grin.
Edited by theboss on Monday 20th April 18:17
Any diesel car from a 'top end' manufacturer. Yes they have emissions laws etc. blah blah blah. but Porsche for example, they have VAG to cancel out their carbon don't they? so why build diesel panamera's, macan's, cayenne's? If you buy a diesel Porsche you haven't got the point of the brand right or you can barely afford one but want the badge.
In my mind If you go for a Porsche you probably care about luxury, speed and handling. And if you can afford one surely economy can sod off? So get the petrol N/A's or turbos. Those I completely get. Not the diesels. Hateful fuel at the best of times!
In my mind If you go for a Porsche you probably care about luxury, speed and handling. And if you can afford one surely economy can sod off? So get the petrol N/A's or turbos. Those I completely get. Not the diesels. Hateful fuel at the best of times!
theboss said:
M5 - it is what it is - I certainly wouldn't want to sacrifice comfort or refinement for reduced weight, and I think it both steers and rides better than most other large exec saloons out there. If the M guys had succumbed to electric steering, run-flats etc. it would be a different proposition but as it stands, I don't think it wallows too badly. Don't believe me - go and do a ring taxi lap with two of your mates in the back, and try not to grin.
OK, I'm happy to concede that having heard from someone that drives one (I haven't), the F10 M5 is a very good car in all respects. 2 tonnes for a 5-Series (BMW website says 1990kg) still seems excessive to me though. The benefits of reduced weight are huge. Better fuel economy, lower emissions, better performance and braking performance and less wear on tyres, brakes and transmission etc. Jaguar manage to make a car (XJR LWB) that is 7% longer (similar width and height) and yet 5% lighter (1881kg) through use of aluminium etc and I don't think you would be compromising on comfort and refinement in one of those! Sorry, the F10 M5 is a fantastic car but as an Engineer, this just frustrates me because BMW with cars like the i3/i8 are capable of some very smart engineering. To be fair, the XJ is a lower volume car and more expensive in its "base" form, so I guess BMW have to consider keeping production costs of the lesser 5-Series down to stay competitive. No reason they can't go in a different direction with the M5 though Edited by theboss on Monday 20th April 18:17
.blueg33 said:
white_goodman said:
This car really doesn't make sense to me though.
I know the engineering and the drive will be first-rate and practical and well-built too but just look at it! Conversely, if I had to have one, it would have to be the fastest (Turbo S). Why would you buy a "base" V6 or diesel, just so you can say you have a Porsche?
Same reason people buy Cayenne's I guess. VW Toureg is basically the same carI know the engineering and the drive will be first-rate and practical and well-built too but just look at it! Conversely, if I had to have one, it would have to be the fastest (Turbo S). Why would you buy a "base" V6 or diesel, just so you can say you have a Porsche?
I'm pretty much of this opinion - on a track car I'll pay for performance because I'll use it, but on a road car I couldn't really care a less about straight line speed to be honest, because I buy road cars for handling, comfort and practicality, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. As for saying that you've "got a Porsche", I'm sure that's bit beneath someone that can afford a brand new Cayenne or Panamera 
ORD said:
Re the Panamera - I don't get it. Probably never will. It is a nice car, but I don't really know what the point is buying the best handling luxo-barge. The whole point of a luxo-barge is to be a luxo-barge.
You seem like a reasonably switched on sort of guy but I'm really struggling with this.The point of this sort of car is incredibly simple. It's for people who *need* useable rear seats but who *want* to accelerate and corner well. That's it - that's all there is to it.
Luxo-barges are 1 trick ponies. They are good at trundling along in a straight line at a steady speed but are otherwise completely uninvolving.
People who buy a 'best handling luxo-barge' as you put it don't kid themselves that they have a racing car and frankly they don't want or need a racing car. They do need to be capable of carrying 4 or 5 humans but aren't quite ready to consign themselves to pipe and slippers just yet.
I'm sure a guy like you could get his head around that balance of needs and wants if you could for a moment put yourself in the position of someone with a decent income, a family, an enthusiasm for driving but without the time, inclination or use of a race track on his doorstep to go round and round in a single seater every weekend.
RobM77 said:
Everyone likes different things about cars - not everyone is after straight line performance. I'm sure that some people would rather save a bit of money by not paying for performance they'll never use. Not buying the fastest Cayenne would probably pay for a whole raft of extras on your GT2 I'm pretty much of this opinion - on a track car I'll pay for performance because I'll use it, but on a road car I couldn't really care a less about straight line speed to be honest, because I buy road cars for handling, comfort and practicality, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. As for saying that you've "got a Porsche", I'm sure that's bit beneath someone that can afford a brand new Cayenne or Panamera
Really well put, Rob. I think your closing statement extends to buyers of used vehicles too. I'm pretty much of this opinion - on a track car I'll pay for performance because I'll use it, but on a road car I couldn't really care a less about straight line speed to be honest, because I buy road cars for handling, comfort and practicality, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. As for saying that you've "got a Porsche", I'm sure that's bit beneath someone that can afford a brand new Cayenne or Panamera It's really interesting how people automatically assume or presume that the only reason that someone selects a certain choice of vehicle is purely for vane or vulgar reasons.
It's perfectly conceivable that someone would like the Panamera from the point of view of the size/comfort/quality/performance(adequate for 99% of normal driving in the diesel), and even the looks ..... it's definitely a striking design.
Why should they choose not to buy it (new or used), or feel pressure to defend their choice of vehicle, because of what others think? In my opinion, it's the "others" that judge, comment or deride a persons choice who show their personality more than the driver of a certain vehicle.
LivewareProblem said:
Golf R - I just don't understand who is paying that amount of money for a f
king Golf
Nobody's actually bought one technically ho hum.king GolfCan I have another pop at people who buy large super powerful estate cars that do 90mph on the motorway like the rest of us, or 30mph when going to Cornwall?
white_goodman said:
OK, I'm happy to concede that having heard from someone that drives one (I haven't), the F10 M5 is a very good car in all respects. 2 tonnes for a 5-Series (BMW website says 1990kg) still seems excessive to me though. The benefits of reduced weight are huge. Better fuel economy, lower emissions, better performance and braking performance and less wear on tyres, brakes and transmission etc. Jaguar manage to make a car (XJR LWB) that is 7% longer (similar width and height) and yet 5% lighter (1881kg) through use of aluminium etc and I don't think you would be compromising on comfort and refinement in one of those! Sorry, the F10 M5 is a fantastic car but as an Engineer, this just frustrates me because BMW with cars like the i3/i8 are capable of some very smart engineering. To be fair, the XJ is a lower volume car and more expensive in its "base" form, so I guess BMW have to consider keeping production costs of the lesser 5-Series down to stay competitive. No reason they can't go in a different direction with the M5 though .
I don't think anyone would disagree that from an engineering standpoint the M5's weight is a little disappointing... my point is that as an all-round package it works extremely well and this fact becomes an irrelevance when driving around. I'm not sure if Jag and BMW define their weights by the same criteria but BMW are known for including a full tank and a driver - completely unladen weight of the M5 is <1900 and with a car of this sort I really don't think tens or even a hundred kilos means anything. I've put 250kg of people and goods in mine and it really doesn't all fall apart in dynamic terms - in fact I think you'd be hard pushed to notice the difference unless you were really hooning/tracking it..Quite a nice review and comparison with a lighter, older icon here:
http://www.evo.co.uk/bmw/5-series/14115/bmw-m5-vs-...
EVO said:
"The M5 has proved to be a magnificent blend of malevolence and mellowness. Big and brutally fast, it’ll carouse with the best of them, yet cosset you in genuine luxury. Yes it’s heavy, but it finds loopholes in the Laws of Physics like no other car in its class."
Think that sums it up well for me. You really can't make a judgement based on the on-paper specs. Instead of assessing it as an engineer, get in one and assess it as a driver Edited by theboss on Tuesday 21st April 13:41
jamieduff1981 said:
You seem like a reasonably switched on sort of guy but I'm really struggling with this.
The point of this sort of car is incredibly simple. It's for people who *need* useable rear seats but who *want* to accelerate and corner well. That's it - that's all there is to it.
Luxo-barges are 1 trick ponies. They are good at trundling along in a straight line at a steady speed but are otherwise completely uninvolving.
People who buy a 'best handling luxo-barge' as you put it don't kid themselves that they have a racing car and frankly they don't want or need a racing car. They do need to be capable of carrying 4 or 5 humans but aren't quite ready to consign themselves to pipe and slippers just yet.
I'm sure a guy like you could get his head around that balance of needs and wants if you could for a moment put yourself in the position of someone with a decent income, a family, an enthusiasm for driving but without the time, inclination or use of a race track on his doorstep to go round and round in a single seater every weekend.
I still think I would save my fun driving for when I don't have a car full of kids, but I suppose I would end up buying the P after doing test drives and thinking the others handle like crap (even if I wouldn't really need the better handling).The point of this sort of car is incredibly simple. It's for people who *need* useable rear seats but who *want* to accelerate and corner well. That's it - that's all there is to it.
Luxo-barges are 1 trick ponies. They are good at trundling along in a straight line at a steady speed but are otherwise completely uninvolving.
People who buy a 'best handling luxo-barge' as you put it don't kid themselves that they have a racing car and frankly they don't want or need a racing car. They do need to be capable of carrying 4 or 5 humans but aren't quite ready to consign themselves to pipe and slippers just yet.
I'm sure a guy like you could get his head around that balance of needs and wants if you could for a moment put yourself in the position of someone with a decent income, a family, an enthusiasm for driving but without the time, inclination or use of a race track on his doorstep to go round and round in a single seater every weekend.
I suppose I disprove my own argument in that I argued really strongly for a 3 series touring as the family car (over SUVs and FWD cars) on the basis that I didn't want to drive 200 miles on a family trip in something that didn't have nice balance, etc.
mat205125 said:
RobM77 said:
Everyone likes different things about cars - not everyone is after straight line performance. I'm sure that some people would rather save a bit of money by not paying for performance they'll never use. Not buying the fastest Cayenne would probably pay for a whole raft of extras on your GT2 I'm pretty much of this opinion - on a track car I'll pay for performance because I'll use it, but on a road car I couldn't really care a less about straight line speed to be honest, because I buy road cars for handling, comfort and practicality, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. As for saying that you've "got a Porsche", I'm sure that's bit beneath someone that can afford a brand new Cayenne or Panamera
Really well put, Rob. I think your closing statement extends to buyers of used vehicles too. I'm pretty much of this opinion - on a track car I'll pay for performance because I'll use it, but on a road car I couldn't really care a less about straight line speed to be honest, because I buy road cars for handling, comfort and practicality, and I'm sure I'm not the only one. As for saying that you've "got a Porsche", I'm sure that's bit beneath someone that can afford a brand new Cayenne or Panamera It's really interesting how people automatically assume or presume that the only reason that someone selects a certain choice of vehicle is purely for vane or vulgar reasons.
It's perfectly conceivable that someone would like the Panamera from the point of view of the size/comfort/quality/performance(adequate for 99% of normal driving in the diesel), and even the looks ..... it's definitely a striking design.
Why should they choose not to buy it (new or used), or feel pressure to defend their choice of vehicle, because of what others think? In my opinion, it's the "others" that judge, comment or deride a persons choice who show their personality more than the driver of a certain vehicle.
People tend to see the world through their eyes, so if they would buy a Porsche 'because it's a Porsche' to make their £10-15k budget look more impressive, they assume someone with £100-150k to splurge on a brand new Panamera has done the same thing. That's obviously a rather sweeping assumption, and probably isn't true, because surely someone image focused could buy a whole range of exotic cars for that money (used 458, 599, DBS, MP4-12C etc).
You get the same annoying trend with 'BMW vs the rest' in saloon car threads and 'Apple vs the rest' in mobile phone threads - you generally get some people posting on such threads who've bought a Ford or Samsung (respectively in each case) who did so because they're obsessed with image and didn't want to be seen as showing off, but what those people then do is assume that everyone who buys a BMW car or Apple device is buying it to show off, and it's that jump of logic that's so flawed. I've been told this so many times about my BMW and to some extent my iPhone and it's quite ludicrous that people are that short sighted and self centered. Sure, everyone buys things for different reasons and 'peacocks' are a percentage of any owner group, but it's far from a given, especially with a bog standard £10k BMW or a £700 basic iPhone 6 - especially with those because both are absolutely everywhere in dull shades of grey and black. There's probably someone somewhere who thinks I bought my Bosch washing machine to show off to guests that come round - such a person probably deliberately buys some obscure brand of washing machine just to show that he's made an 'intelligent' choice and not followed the crowd.
Personally, the last time I saw a Panamera I didn't give a second thought to the owner or why he bought it. I can't see why it interests people so much, but then that proves the above point for me too - I can't see why it interests people because I myself am not interested. At least I'm actually aware of that though...
Edited by RobM77 on Tuesday 21st April 17:52
theboss said:
Think that sums it up well for me. You really can't make a judgement based on the on-paper specs. Instead of assessing it as an engineer, get in one and assess it as a driver
Thanks, that's a pretty well-reasoned arguement and I respect that you are defending your choice of car (but no-one should really need to). If someone was being a bit disparaging about Impreza WRXs (my favourite car that I have owned), I would be the same Edited by theboss on Tuesday 21st April 13:41
.Thanks for not just telling me I'm wrong and calling me an idiot!
RobM77 said:
Thanks. Oh yes, your closing statement should be displayed at the top of all forum threads on General Gassing! I couldn't agree more! I wish more people understood that.
People tend to see the world through their eyes, so if they would buy a Porsche 'because it's a Porsche' to make their £10-15k budget look more impressive, they assume someone with £100-150k to splurge on a brand new Panamera has done the same thing. That's obviously a rather sweeping assumption, and probably isn't true, because surely someone image focused could buy a whole range of exotic cars for that money (used 458, 599, DBS, MP4-12C etc).
You get the same annoying trend with 'BMW vs the rest' in saloon car threads and 'Apple vs the rest' in mobile phone threads - you generally get some people posting on such threads who've bought a Ford or Samsung (respectively in each case) who did so because they're obsessed with image and didn't want to be seen as showing off, but what those people then do is assume that everyone who buys a BMW car or Apple device is buying it to show off, and it's that jump of logic that's so flawed. I've been told this so many times about my BMW and to some extent my iPhone that it's quite ludicrous people are that short sighted and self centered. Sure, everyone buys things for different reasons and 'peacocks' are a percentage of any owner group, but it's far from a given, especially with a bog standard £10k BMW or a £700 basic iPhone 6 - especially with those because both are absolutely everywhere in dull shades of grey and black. There's probably someone somewhere who thinks I bought my Bosch washing machine to show off to guests that come round - such a person probably deliberately buys some obscure brand of washing machine just to show that he's made an 'intelligent' choice and not followed the crowd.
Personally, the last time I saw a Panamera I didn't give a second thought to the owner or why he bought it. I can't see why it interests people so much, but then that proves the above point for me too - I can't see why it interests people because I myself am not interested. At least I'm actually aware of that though...
I'm sorry I didn't really mean it that way. As I said earlier, an aim of mine was to own a Porsche by the time I was 30 (sadly this didn't happen). This was not because of the badge but the engineering and performance, although I wouldn't have been happy with just any old Porsche (i.e. it had to be a sports car not a big saloon or SUV). Diesel Porsches seem like a bit of an anathema to me and I think if my first Porsche had been a diesel Panamera, that dream would have seemed like a bit of a hollow one, even if technically I had achieved my aim! Similar to wanting an Aston Martin and buying a Cygnet really!People tend to see the world through their eyes, so if they would buy a Porsche 'because it's a Porsche' to make their £10-15k budget look more impressive, they assume someone with £100-150k to splurge on a brand new Panamera has done the same thing. That's obviously a rather sweeping assumption, and probably isn't true, because surely someone image focused could buy a whole range of exotic cars for that money (used 458, 599, DBS, MP4-12C etc).
You get the same annoying trend with 'BMW vs the rest' in saloon car threads and 'Apple vs the rest' in mobile phone threads - you generally get some people posting on such threads who've bought a Ford or Samsung (respectively in each case) who did so because they're obsessed with image and didn't want to be seen as showing off, but what those people then do is assume that everyone who buys a BMW car or Apple device is buying it to show off, and it's that jump of logic that's so flawed. I've been told this so many times about my BMW and to some extent my iPhone that it's quite ludicrous people are that short sighted and self centered. Sure, everyone buys things for different reasons and 'peacocks' are a percentage of any owner group, but it's far from a given, especially with a bog standard £10k BMW or a £700 basic iPhone 6 - especially with those because both are absolutely everywhere in dull shades of grey and black. There's probably someone somewhere who thinks I bought my Bosch washing machine to show off to guests that come round - such a person probably deliberately buys some obscure brand of washing machine just to show that he's made an 'intelligent' choice and not followed the crowd.
Personally, the last time I saw a Panamera I didn't give a second thought to the owner or why he bought it. I can't see why it interests people so much, but then that proves the above point for me too - I can't see why it interests people because I myself am not interested. At least I'm actually aware of that though...
That's my feeling on the subject anyway. Conversely, Porsche know what they're doing and I'm sure wouldn't build a vehicle if there was no business case or demand for it and Panameras/Macans/Cayennes generate the revenue that Porsche need to build the lower volume specials that us enthusiasts revere and at the end of the day, more choice is not a bad thing (people will ultimately vote with their feet).
I think it's a bit naive to discount the effect of the Porsche badge though on Panamera/Macan/Cayenne sales. Sure, most people will buy them because they like them/meet their needs the best but others will buy them for the badge (and I think the Porsche marketing department are counting on this a little bit). I used to work in an Audi/VW dealership selling VWs and if I could have a pound for every time someone bought an A3 over a Golf "because it's an Audi", not because it's a vastly better product and certainly not better value (back then anyway)!
I've spent some significant time in the last 2 years new car shopping (albeit at a lower price point) and in both cases, I looked at several similar vehicles and no vehicle stood head and shoulders over the rest in terms of the drive. It came down to styling, spec, availability and price mostly but I would be lying if the badge didn`t factor in as well. The Kia I looked at had more power, was better equipped, had a better warranty and the deal was at least as good as the Toyota we ended up buying but well, it`s a Kia and my perception was that the Toyota was a better `quality`car (and had a nicer interior). I`m sure that I would have been just as happy driving the Kia now though and I would certainly consider one next time, as I`m not particularly loyal to any one manufacturer. All I`m saying is, the equivalent BMW, Mercedes or Audi may be as good as the Porsche but human nature will kick in and say, well I quite like the idea of owning a Porsche more than the others.
Caterhams, Westfields and everything of that ilk.
Just never appealed to me whatsoever. I'm sure they're fun but they don't look great and are an awful prospect unless you actually want to be on it which isn't very often lets face it.
You could obviously take them on a track which is fine but I'd much rather have a normal sportscar instead.
Just never appealed to me whatsoever. I'm sure they're fun but they don't look great and are an awful prospect unless you actually want to be on it which isn't very often lets face it.
You could obviously take them on a track which is fine but I'd much rather have a normal sportscar instead.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff