RE: Driven: Porsche Panamera Turbo S
Discussion
I'm a thrilled U.S. 2010 Panamera 4S owner with now over 23,000 frequently hard earned miles. True the looks are idiosyncratic, but: I wonder about the aesthetes who pan Panameras on the looks thing: have they ever walked up to a 356, especially from behind? Did they think "bathtub" -- as applied to the cars that literally made brand -- was a synonym for beautiful?
Which gets me to the main point: 'witchcraft' is really a synonym for epic achievement, isn’t it? Despite mostly glowing reviews, I still don’t think the car sufficiently understood, for to distill the essence of all reviews; words like "witchcraft" are a recurring theme. Here is a practical 4 door sedan that shames -- in critical function -- many supercars. In Turbo or Turbo S, as noted, most fall to its 0-60 times. My 4S, with no U.S. fuel guzzler tax -- and ultra low emissions, gets 4.4 in 0-60 (sport chrono), has a range of 650 miles if I pushed it (26.4 gal tank); and both stops and corners doing an excellent impression of a 911! The brief on this car was to carry 4 six foot three inch tall adults and their luggage (or 2 bicycles in the folded rear seats!), at 175 mph (190 in turbo S; not that I'd ever....) in extraordinary comfort, within a strikingly beautiful and technological advanced cabin, and this they've done. The look simply wraps this achievement beautifully, and isn't that the essence of Porsche? The car is so aerodynamic I like to ride with the windows open on the freeways. Put another way; if changing one surface feature would degrade any of the above, forget it! To me, Porsche grandly eschewed the "box with evolving brand cues" approach of most luxury sedans (for years BMWs rears looked like a vacuum sucked their trunk lids into partial collapse). Audi interiors, often touted as "tops," look to me to be stuck in 1990, albeit refined to the max: mine looks like a next gen Ferrari. Finally, its stark and substantial presence radiates a positive aura; "thumbs up" from all walks of life: I'm amazed at the comments. Rapide went for beauty and is being panned on practicality: for Porsche the choice was both easy, and the correct one for Porsche!
I stretched to get it and no earthly possession comes close to giving me as much satisfaction (although my 2004 XJR, an earlier stretch I never regretted, came pretty close in its day).
Which gets me to the main point: 'witchcraft' is really a synonym for epic achievement, isn’t it? Despite mostly glowing reviews, I still don’t think the car sufficiently understood, for to distill the essence of all reviews; words like "witchcraft" are a recurring theme. Here is a practical 4 door sedan that shames -- in critical function -- many supercars. In Turbo or Turbo S, as noted, most fall to its 0-60 times. My 4S, with no U.S. fuel guzzler tax -- and ultra low emissions, gets 4.4 in 0-60 (sport chrono), has a range of 650 miles if I pushed it (26.4 gal tank); and both stops and corners doing an excellent impression of a 911! The brief on this car was to carry 4 six foot three inch tall adults and their luggage (or 2 bicycles in the folded rear seats!), at 175 mph (190 in turbo S; not that I'd ever....) in extraordinary comfort, within a strikingly beautiful and technological advanced cabin, and this they've done. The look simply wraps this achievement beautifully, and isn't that the essence of Porsche? The car is so aerodynamic I like to ride with the windows open on the freeways. Put another way; if changing one surface feature would degrade any of the above, forget it! To me, Porsche grandly eschewed the "box with evolving brand cues" approach of most luxury sedans (for years BMWs rears looked like a vacuum sucked their trunk lids into partial collapse). Audi interiors, often touted as "tops," look to me to be stuck in 1990, albeit refined to the max: mine looks like a next gen Ferrari. Finally, its stark and substantial presence radiates a positive aura; "thumbs up" from all walks of life: I'm amazed at the comments. Rapide went for beauty and is being panned on practicality: for Porsche the choice was both easy, and the correct one for Porsche!
I stretched to get it and no earthly possession comes close to giving me as much satisfaction (although my 2004 XJR, an earlier stretch I never regretted, came pretty close in its day).
toppstuff said:
Yep. Slower. No 4WD so much, much slower in adverse weather. Less room. Thirstier. Not as reliable. Not as well made.
Oh, and massively slower.
It simply does not compete. The Panamera Turbo S is in a different class ( which it should be given that it costs more ) and on a wet country road the Maserati would not see the back of the Porsche as it disappears into the distance..
In my imaginary world, I would like to think that if I suddenly decided that I wanted to visit my house in St Tropez tomorrow and drive, I would need a fast car to carry my luggage and a couple of underwear models. No car better fits this brief than a Panamera Turbo S !
And then I woke up..
I don't get the comments about performance. Both cars are more than capable of breaking the speed limit by a massive margin. It's not like one is slow and the other one fast. The only time you would really notice is if you were racing each otehr, which would be the hight of stupidity on a public road.Oh, and massively slower.
It simply does not compete. The Panamera Turbo S is in a different class ( which it should be given that it costs more ) and on a wet country road the Maserati would not see the back of the Porsche as it disappears into the distance..
In my imaginary world, I would like to think that if I suddenly decided that I wanted to visit my house in St Tropez tomorrow and drive, I would need a fast car to carry my luggage and a couple of underwear models. No car better fits this brief than a Panamera Turbo S !
And then I woke up..
As for wet country roads, driving on the public road at speed in wet conditions is a bit daft in my humble opinion.
I'm sure the Porsche is technically a better car. I'm sure that behind the wheel it is technically better to drive. But it's ugly.
I wouldn't marry an ugly woman no matter how good she was in bed, but I'd marry a beautiful woman who was only average between the sheets
hgeorge said:
I'm a thrilled U.S. 2010 Panamera 4S owner with now over 23,000 frequently hard earned miles. True the looks are idiosyncratic, but: I wonder about the aesthetes who pan Panameras on the looks thing: have they ever walked up to a 356, especially from behind? Did they think "bathtub" -- as applied to the cars that literally made brand -- was a synonym for beautiful?
Which gets me to the main point: 'witchcraft' is really a synonym for epic achievement, isn’t it? Despite mostly glowing reviews, I still don’t think the car sufficiently understood, for to distill the essence of all reviews; words like "witchcraft" are a recurring theme. Here is a practical 4 door sedan that shames -- in critical function -- many supercars. In Turbo or Turbo S, as noted, most fall to its 0-60 times. My 4S, with no U.S. fuel guzzler tax -- and ultra low emissions, gets 4.4 in 0-60 (sport chrono), has a range of 650 miles if I pushed it (26.4 gal tank); and both stops and corners doing an excellent impression of a 911! The brief on this car was to carry 4 six foot three inch tall adults and their luggage (or 2 bicycles in the folded rear seats!), at 175 mph (190 in turbo S; not that I'd ever....) in extraordinary comfort, within a strikingly beautiful and technological advanced cabin, and this they've done. The look simply wraps this achievement beautifully, and isn't that the essence of Porsche? The car is so aerodynamic I like to ride with the windows open on the freeways. Put another way; if changing one surface feature would degrade any of the above, forget it! To me, Porsche grandly eschewed the "box with evolving brand cues" approach of most luxury sedans (for years BMWs rears looked like a vacuum sucked their trunk lids into partial collapse). Audi interiors, often touted as "tops," look to me to be stuck in 1990, albeit refined to the max: mine looks like a next gen Ferrari. Finally, its stark and substantial presence radiates a positive aura; "thumbs up" from all walks of life: I'm amazed at the comments. Rapide went for beauty and is being panned on practicality: for Porsche the choice was both easy, and the correct one for Porsche!
I stretched to get it and no earthly possession comes close to giving me as much satisfaction (although my 2004 XJR, an earlier stretch I never regretted, came pretty close in its day).
Is your surname Piëch?Which gets me to the main point: 'witchcraft' is really a synonym for epic achievement, isn’t it? Despite mostly glowing reviews, I still don’t think the car sufficiently understood, for to distill the essence of all reviews; words like "witchcraft" are a recurring theme. Here is a practical 4 door sedan that shames -- in critical function -- many supercars. In Turbo or Turbo S, as noted, most fall to its 0-60 times. My 4S, with no U.S. fuel guzzler tax -- and ultra low emissions, gets 4.4 in 0-60 (sport chrono), has a range of 650 miles if I pushed it (26.4 gal tank); and both stops and corners doing an excellent impression of a 911! The brief on this car was to carry 4 six foot three inch tall adults and their luggage (or 2 bicycles in the folded rear seats!), at 175 mph (190 in turbo S; not that I'd ever....) in extraordinary comfort, within a strikingly beautiful and technological advanced cabin, and this they've done. The look simply wraps this achievement beautifully, and isn't that the essence of Porsche? The car is so aerodynamic I like to ride with the windows open on the freeways. Put another way; if changing one surface feature would degrade any of the above, forget it! To me, Porsche grandly eschewed the "box with evolving brand cues" approach of most luxury sedans (for years BMWs rears looked like a vacuum sucked their trunk lids into partial collapse). Audi interiors, often touted as "tops," look to me to be stuck in 1990, albeit refined to the max: mine looks like a next gen Ferrari. Finally, its stark and substantial presence radiates a positive aura; "thumbs up" from all walks of life: I'm amazed at the comments. Rapide went for beauty and is being panned on practicality: for Porsche the choice was both easy, and the correct one for Porsche!
I stretched to get it and no earthly possession comes close to giving me as much satisfaction (although my 2004 XJR, an earlier stretch I never regretted, came pretty close in its day).
Im not denying the dynamics, although at two tonnes it's a struggle, just stating it is really ugly.
It shouldn't have got past the clay model as it is. Have you seen the Aston Rapide? Porsche should have done better with the styling, maybe they should have let the Italians have a go with this one?
I'd hate to see the ones they didnt approve
Bratwurst with doors?Devil2575 said:
I wouldn't marry an ugly woman no matter how good she was in bed, but I'd marry a beautiful woman who was only average between the sheets
Is that like trying to choose between a 500hp Porker Panamera 
and 240hp Dino 206SP 
? 
Edited by alexpa on Monday 12th September 16:07
hgeorge said:
I'm a thrilled U.S. 2010 Panamera 4S owner with now over 23,000 frequently hard earned miles. True the looks are idiosyncratic, but: I wonder about the aesthetes who pan Panameras on the looks thing: have they ever walked up to a 356, especially from behind? Did they think "bathtub" -- as applied to the cars that literally made brand -- was a synonym for beautiful?
Which gets me to the main point: 'witchcraft' is really a synonym for epic achievement, isn’t it? Despite mostly glowing reviews, I still don’t think the car sufficiently understood, for to distill the essence of all reviews; words like "witchcraft" are a recurring theme. Here is a practical 4 door sedan that shames -- in critical function -- many supercars. In Turbo or Turbo S, as noted, most fall to its 0-60 times. My 4S, with no U.S. fuel guzzler tax -- and ultra low emissions, gets 4.4 in 0-60 (sport chrono), has a range of 650 miles if I pushed it (26.4 gal tank); and both stops and corners doing an excellent impression of a 911! The brief on this car was to carry 4 six foot three inch tall adults and their luggage (or 2 bicycles in the folded rear seats!), at 175 mph (190 in turbo S; not that I'd ever....) in extraordinary comfort, within a strikingly beautiful and technological advanced cabin, and this they've done. The look simply wraps this achievement beautifully, and isn't that the essence of Porsche? The car is so aerodynamic I like to ride with the windows open on the freeways. Put another way; if changing one surface feature would degrade any of the above, forget it! To me, Porsche grandly eschewed the "box with evolving brand cues" approach of most luxury sedans (for years BMWs rears looked like a vacuum sucked their trunk lids into partial collapse). Audi interiors, often touted as "tops," look to me to be stuck in 1990, albeit refined to the max: mine looks like a next gen Ferrari. Finally, its stark and substantial presence radiates a positive aura; "thumbs up" from all walks of life: I'm amazed at the comments. Rapide went for beauty and is being panned on practicality: for Porsche the choice was both easy, and the correct one for Porsche!
I stretched to get it and no earthly possession comes close to giving me as much satisfaction (although my 2004 XJR, an earlier stretch I never regretted, came pretty close in its day).
Good post from someone who has actual experience of the car rather than the armchair experts. Which gets me to the main point: 'witchcraft' is really a synonym for epic achievement, isn’t it? Despite mostly glowing reviews, I still don’t think the car sufficiently understood, for to distill the essence of all reviews; words like "witchcraft" are a recurring theme. Here is a practical 4 door sedan that shames -- in critical function -- many supercars. In Turbo or Turbo S, as noted, most fall to its 0-60 times. My 4S, with no U.S. fuel guzzler tax -- and ultra low emissions, gets 4.4 in 0-60 (sport chrono), has a range of 650 miles if I pushed it (26.4 gal tank); and both stops and corners doing an excellent impression of a 911! The brief on this car was to carry 4 six foot three inch tall adults and their luggage (or 2 bicycles in the folded rear seats!), at 175 mph (190 in turbo S; not that I'd ever....) in extraordinary comfort, within a strikingly beautiful and technological advanced cabin, and this they've done. The look simply wraps this achievement beautifully, and isn't that the essence of Porsche? The car is so aerodynamic I like to ride with the windows open on the freeways. Put another way; if changing one surface feature would degrade any of the above, forget it! To me, Porsche grandly eschewed the "box with evolving brand cues" approach of most luxury sedans (for years BMWs rears looked like a vacuum sucked their trunk lids into partial collapse). Audi interiors, often touted as "tops," look to me to be stuck in 1990, albeit refined to the max: mine looks like a next gen Ferrari. Finally, its stark and substantial presence radiates a positive aura; "thumbs up" from all walks of life: I'm amazed at the comments. Rapide went for beauty and is being panned on practicality: for Porsche the choice was both easy, and the correct one for Porsche!
I stretched to get it and no earthly possession comes close to giving me as much satisfaction (although my 2004 XJR, an earlier stretch I never regretted, came pretty close in its day).
I think the Panamera is a remarkable engineering achievement. Only Mercedes with their big AMG's get close, but they lack the all round security of 4WD.
thewheelman said:
Dagnut said:
thewheelman said:
I can't say i hate the Panamera, i'm sure it's a very capable car. Better looking than pictures suggest. If i was in the market for this type of car, i could probably spend a fraction the cost of the Porsche on a used barge & enjoy it just as much. Give it 5 years & these will probably make great value used car buys. Right now, i'd take a 5 year old S8 & play Ronin when i'm on my own.
http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3015834.htm
What about an RS6?http://www.pistonheads.com/sales/3015834.htm
alexpa said:
Is your surname Piëch?
Im not denying the dynamics, although at two tonnes it's a struggle, just stating it is really ugly.
It shouldn't have got past the clay model as it is. Have you seen the Aston Rapide? Porsche should have done better with the styling, maybe they should have let the Italians have a go with this one?
I'd hate to see the ones they didnt approve Bratwurst with doors?
Thanks, kinda. Shall I say something unflattering about the car to assert my independance from uncle Ferdie (just kidding; in fact let's put it this way: this is my first German car and my parents did not arrive in the U.S. in 1948 under the best of circumstances), but ok, I'll take the bait: even with the 12-way seat option, I would have liked a little more of a forward tilt, also, I would prefer the cruise control lock in a speed with more precision: the slight over-rev that occurs after engagement got me a ticket on an entrance ramp once: the cop felt I was slowing down becuase I saw him: no: cruise control was just setteling in. OK, I'm done: TAKE THAT, STUTTGART!Im not denying the dynamics, although at two tonnes it's a struggle, just stating it is really ugly.
It shouldn't have got past the clay model as it is. Have you seen the Aston Rapide? Porsche should have done better with the styling, maybe they should have let the Italians have a go with this one?
I'd hate to see the ones they didnt approve
Bratwurst with doors?As to my having seen the Rapide: yes: please see explicit reference to it in my note.
And in case I did not make this clear after glancing at some of the other comments, I LOVE the way my bassalt black S4 looks; in fact my heart skips a beat as I approach it from the rear, wing up: (hold the puns please); I really can't believe its actually mine to get in and drive. I think it is stunning -- even if the front end does look a little too faimiliar -- the way Astons started to about 5 years ago). Can you really walk up to a 7 series and say: wow man; how do they do it!!
BUT I SAY THIS ONCE AGAIN: seriously folks, have you taken the "look at the 356 Continental again" test? Would you have scorned her then, or are you functioning under new "asthetic priciples" now?
And by the way, thank you Toppstuff: very rewarding given the source.
Edited by hgeorge on Monday 12th September 19:14
Edited by hgeorge on Monday 12th September 19:26
E21_Ross said:
Riggers said:
Good points, all. Fortunately, we'll find out soon whether the new M5 is a belter or not (I know which way my money is going)...
of course the new M5 will be a belter...they always are 
i really doubt whether this panamera is worth £50k more than the new M5.
...the one and only Flying Egg...
sadly, rumour has it there will be a 4WD M5. wonder if it'll cost >£120k?Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff