New Porsche Cayenne Diesel

[James B]

D1ckie said:

James B said:

Around 10% more than I was expected to spend on the Cayenne. Pretty happy with the deal.

I think the RR will depreciate far quicker than the Cayenne Diesel and will end up costing you a lot more in the long term. Great cars but sooooo different to the Cayenne in so many ways

I completely agree that they're very different cars. The difference is akin to the DB9 vs the V12 Vantage. Same platform and general layout but for almost two entirely different purposes. My wife decided that she would prefer a RR at some stage so I did the sums and decided that we would lose a packet on a specced Cayenne when shifting on in 2-3 years as she would, undoubtedly, decide she really wanted a RR after all and we would end up changing.

I am happy with the decision and have enjoyed driving the car. Will see how it goes this winter too. Meant to be a mean one for us up here!

[D1ckie]

James B said:

I completely agree that they're very different cars. The difference is akin to the DB9 vs the V12 Vantage. Same platform and general layout but for almost two entirely different purposes. My wife decided that she would prefer a RR at some stage so I did the sums and decided that we would lose a packet on a specced Cayenne when shifting on in 2-3 years as she would, undoubtedly, decide she really wanted a RR after all and we would end up changing.

I am happy with the decision and have enjoyed driving the car. Will see how it goes this winter too. Meant to be a mean one for us up here!

Different and the new RR is an awsome car, but again suppose what you want it for. Think they are better spec'd and a more comfy ride, but definately less fun to drive IMO

Knowing what 2nd hand Cayenne Diesels are selling for now, they will hold their value much better than the RR no mater how well you spec the new car, either of them. Was told about a 2 year 66K mile Cayene that was about 12K off list, for such a high mileage car thats a low depreciation.

[cayman-black]

D1ckie said:

Different and the new RR is an awsome car, but again suppose what you want it for. Think they are better spec'd and a more comfy ride, but definately less fun to drive IMO

Knowing what 2nd hand Cayenne Diesels are selling for now, they will hold their value much better than the RR no mater how well you spec the new car, either of them. Was told about a 2 year 66K mile Cayene that was about 12K off list, for such a high mileage car thats a low depreciation.

And you believe that? No way.

[Geneve]

NomduJour said:

The whole SUV/lifestyle thing is ultimately fashion-driven, none of them are an objective choice in terms of 99% of the use they get.

Really?

[Younez]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbetkMgQJC8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9q1BqxtjgyY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtxfbc6MZKw

Cayenne more capable than people think.

[Rocky Road]

Ultimately I think the decision on which car we all buy is driven far more by emotions and brand loyalty than on rationale.

I am sure the RR is a great car but I just don't like them. No rational reason. Over the years they have had a pretty awful reliability record and I have other qualms too but they are a lot better these days, my prejudices are all probably ill-founded but I still wouldn't buy one. Porsche aren't perfect and these days are more mass produced but I identify with the brand, love the things that are good and close my eyes to the things which may be not so good. All emotions and very little rationale but as humans we are emotional beings. If we bought everything based on reasoning we probably wouldn't buy either.

Happy motoring James.

[Cobnapint]

James B said:

... but longterm the cost to own the RR vs the specced Cayenne will be significantly lower.

James

Nice looking car James, and I'm sure it'll be very nice to waft around in, but even if you were to remove the word 'significantly' from the above statement,
I'd still have to question the state of the batteries in the calculator you used to come to that conclusion.

[Cobnapint]

NomduJour said:

Not so sure about depreciation. Agree they're different - a Cayenne is ultimately a compromised estate car, it could be a hell of a lot better than it already is if it wasn't pretending to be an off-roader - the compromises of the Range Rover at least give it more ability elsewhere. The whole SUV/lifestyle thing is ultimately fashion-driven, none of them are an objective choice in terms of 99% of the use they get.

Using your logic then, an estate car is a compromised SUV.

And I disagree with your statement that the Cayenne is pretending to be an off-roader. It's not pretending anything - it can go off-road.

And your last statement is a bit creaky too. I bought mine because of the load capacity it provides for holidays, it's high driving position, the real world performance/economy it offers, and the comfort it provides on all journey types. Oh, and I like driving it too. It had nothing to do with fashion whatsoever.

[J-P]

D1ckie said:

James B said:

Around 10% more than I was expected to spend on the Cayenne. Pretty happy with the deal.

I think the RR will depreciate far quicker than the Cayenne Diesel and will end up costing you a lot more in the long term. Great cars but sooooo different to the Cayenne in so many ways

Why would you feel the need to post that? James has just bought the car, he's not thinking about buying it, what possible benefit is there to giving your opinion on depreciation whether accurate or not at this stage?

Congratulations, James! Looks like a lovely car. I tried the RRS recently and thought it was a great piece of kit.

I'm waiting for the Cayenne SE hybrid. Should be free on tax and also a free commute for the Mrs (provided we remember to recharge it). If it turns out to be awful, we may well get the RRS.

[Geneve]

I think the new RRS will be a closer threat to the Cayenne (although the 'facelift' Cayenne will keep the competition tight).

The RRS will be popular with those who want to be seen in the latest 'must have' SUV and will therefore have strong residuals for a couple of years.

But, as a long term LR and Porsche customer, you'd need to have more patience with the quality of the LR product, especially a brand new model in its first year.

[NomduJour]

Cobnapint said:

Using your logic then, an estate car is a compromised SUV.

And I disagree with your statement that the Cayenne is pretending to be an off-roader. It's not pretending anything - it can go off-road.

And your last statement is a bit creaky too. I bought mine because of the load capacity it provides for holidays, it's high driving position, the real world performance/economy it offers, and the comfort it provides on all journey types. Oh, and I like driving it too. It had nothing to do with fashion whatsoever.

The SUV element is a red-herring. None of them go off-road, the worst they'll see is a playing field on school sports day. The Cayenne of course can go off-road, but you're likely to get stuck due to the wholly-inappropriate 100% road-biased summer tyres they all come on (do you know anyone who even ticked the all-season tyre option?). Without air suspension they don't have brilliant ground clearance, or axle articulation (without PDCC), no low-range etc. The original with the Advanced Off Road Technology package was clearly very effective, but you can't specify that now.

SUVs as a sector are currently very popular, hence Bentley, Maserati, Lamborghini, Jaguar etc. all wanting a piece of the action, but a generation ago the majority of current SUV buyers would have had an estate car because that's what suited their needs. Something like an E-Class (or even 5 Series) estate is far more spacious than a Cayenne and if you just want a high driving position (just to be on a similar level to all the other off-roaders) you could always have an S-Max or a Transit Tourneo or something ...

Everyone knows Cayennes are useful family cars and are good to drive - point is, how much better would it be if it didn't have to put up the pretence of being a jacked-up off-roader?

[edo]

NomduJour said:

do you know anyone who even ticked the all-season tyre option?).

[Koln-RS]

NomduJour said:

The SUV element is a red-herring. None of them go off-road, the worst they'll see is a playing field on school sports day. The Cayenne of course can go off-road, but you're likely to get stuck due to the wholly-inappropriate 100% road-biased summer tyres they all come on (do you know anyone who even ticked the all-season tyre option?). Without air suspension they don't have brilliant ground clearance, or axle articulation (without PDCC), no low-range etc. The original with the Advanced Off Road Technology package was clearly very effective, but you can't specify that now.

SUVs as a sector are currently very popular, hence Bentley, Maserati, Lamborghini, Jaguar etc. all wanting a piece of the action, but a generation ago the majority of current SUV buyers would have had an estate car because that's what suited their needs. Something like an E-Class (or even 5 Series) estate is far more spacious than a Cayenne and if you just want a high driving position (just to be on a similar level to all the other off-roaders) you could always have an S-Max or a Transit Tourneo or something ...

Everyone knows Cayennes are useful family cars and are good to drive - point is, how much better would it be if it didn't have to put up the pretence of being a jacked-up off-roader?

I think that's just one person's, slightly prejudiced and generalised, opinion.

[NomduJour]

No prejudice here. Just seems slightly silly pretending to need an off-roader, with the compromises it inevitably brings, when 99% don't.

What does a Cayenne (or a RR Sport, or whatever) offer, other than a high driving position, if the supposed off-road ability is never, ever used? If Porsche made a similarly-sized estate car it would certainly be a better thing to drive, but they won't because everyone wants an "SUV".

[edo]

There are all sorts of reasons that people buy them. Different strokes for different folks. Makes the world go round eh?

[Younez]

NomduJour said:

No prejudice here. Just seems slightly silly pretending to need an off-roader, with the compromises it inevitably brings, when 99% don't.

What does a Cayenne (or a RR Sport, or whatever) offer, other than a high driving position, if the supposed off-road ability is never, ever used? If Porsche made a similarly-sized estate car it would certainly be a better thing to drive, but they won't because everyone wants an "SUV".

For one speed bumps.

[D1ckie]

J-P said:

D1ckie said:

James B said:

Around 10% more than I was expected to spend on the Cayenne. Pretty happy with the deal.

I think the RR will depreciate far quicker than the Cayenne Diesel and will end up costing you a lot more in the long term. Great cars but sooooo different to the Cayenne in so many ways

Why would you feel the need to post that? James has just bought the car, he's not thinking about buying it, what possible benefit is there to giving your opinion on depreciation whether accurate or not at this stage?

Congratulations, James! Looks like a lovely car. I tried the RRS recently and thought it was a great piece of kit.

I'm waiting for the Cayenne SE hybrid. Should be free on tax and also a free commute for the Mrs (provided we remember to recharge it). If it turns out to be awful, we may well get the RRS.

My post was not saying James had bought a bad car, but he had made his decison partly based on depreciation, which I didnt agree with his conclusion.

Also, I dont feel comparing the Cayenne to the RR is a like for like comparison, one is a sports 4x4 the other is a luxury 4x4, if you wanted to compare a Cayenne to another similar 4x4 then its the RRS not the RR you would use for comparison. The RRS is supposed to be a sports 4x4, although a slower one!!!

[J-P]

D1ckie said:

J-P said:

D1ckie said:

James B said:

Around 10% more than I was expected to spend on the Cayenne. Pretty happy with the deal.

I think the RR will depreciate far quicker than the Cayenne Diesel and will end up costing you a lot more in the long term. Great cars but sooooo different to the Cayenne in so many ways

Why would you feel the need to post that? James has just bought the car, he's not thinking about buying it, what possible benefit is there to giving your opinion on depreciation whether accurate or not at this stage?

Congratulations, James! Looks like a lovely car. I tried the RRS recently and thought it was a great piece of kit.

I'm waiting for the Cayenne SE hybrid. Should be free on tax and also a free commute for the Mrs (provided we remember to recharge it). If it turns out to be awful, we may well get the RRS.

My post was not saying James had bought a bad car, but he had made his decison partly based on depreciation, which I didnt agree with his conclusion.

Also, I dont feel comparing the Cayenne to the RR is a like for like comparison, one is a sports 4x4 the other is a luxury 4x4, if you wanted to compare a Cayenne to another similar 4x4 then its the RRS not the RR you would use for comparison. The RRS is supposed to be a sports 4x4, although a slower one!!!

I get that - all I'm saying is that if he hadn't thought of it, it's too late to do anything about it, whether he's right or wrong. If you are correct and he thinks "hmm Dickie has a point there", wouldn't that take a bit of the shine off his new purchase? If he was still thinking about it then fine but once bought - what's the point?

It's always possible to pick holes in any car purchase, especially at Cayenne level as there must be at least some emotional content to the purchase or you'd get a Touareg and be done with it. Just my 2p

[Cobnapint]

Mine had it's first service yesterday at the OPC. It was the 20,000 (done at 19,330) intermediate service with an oil change. Got stiffed for £480 but they did the 2 yearly brake fluid change into the deal as a sweetener.

One interesting thing came to light though. They told me my tyres needed replacing (which I knew) and offered a set at £332.00 each. I refused on the basis that black circles etc were cheaper. They also pointed out that one of the tyres, the OSR, was not an N rated tyre, but was in fact an MO (Merc). It was the same size (295/35 R21 107Y), same make (Pirelli P Zero), and had exactly the same tread pattern. The only difference was that it had a 'Z' on it as it's speed rating.

Coincidently, I had a puncture repair carried out on this wheel about 8 months ago, but marked the tyre before I had it carried out and watched the chap carry out the repair when he did it, so it's definitely the original tyre that came with the car from new.

So, somehow, one (or more!) MO rated tyres have either been mistakenly sent to Leipzig from one of Pirelli's numerous plants, or the tyre was damaged and replaced in a hurry before I collected it. I strongly suspect the former, and as a consequence, suggest that you all check your own tyres - because for all intents and purposes, for the last 18 months I've unknowingly been running around with something that could have invalidated my Porsche warranty.

It's too late to complain now because, obviously, I could have swopped the tyre myself (I haven't) without Porsche's knowledge, and although I've done it on two previous second hand Porsche purchases, checking the side walls for a little 'N' isn't something you think about doing when you buy a new vehicle.

Get checking folks.

[mad ferret]

Going slightly off topic here, spoekn to DMS yesterday regarding a remap, they quote figures of 302bhp and 496ib/ft (the figure we are really interested in), has anyone had this done?
I have used DMS on several porka's and they have been excellent even to the extent when I had an issue with a car which had to go to the OPC and I was a bit itchy just in case the map was spotted and they drove from Southampton and put my standard map back on and then once the warranty work was done they popped in and put the remap on