RE: Porsche Cayenne GTS unveiled

[Dusty964]

Carfolio said:

TheDeadPrussian said:

Long may Porsche continue to sell these (and the Panamera) by the boat load; it means they can keep developing and building the GT3 and GT2 cars.

'Cash cow' they might be, but without them Porsche would not have the funds to invest in the development of the 'more exciting' Porsches and to continue to support the race program.

They are also very good cars if you want or need something of their ilk.

If nobody made them, no-one would buy them.

Good point- well thought out.

[Hitch78]

Carfolio said:

TheDeadPrussian said:

Long may Porsche continue to sell these (and the Panamera) by the boat load; it means they can keep developing and building the GT3 and GT2 cars.

'Cash cow' they might be, but without them Porsche would not have the funds to invest in the development of the 'more exciting' Porsches and to continue to support the race program.

They are also very good cars if you want or need something of their ilk.

Short-sighted argument.

1. Demand for SUVs was artificially inflated due to CAFE regulation loopholes. The world did not need anything more than Range Rovers, Gelandewagens, Land Cruisers and Pajeros.
2. If nobody made them, no-one would buy them.
3. Porsche and others are throwing away decades of tradition and heritage for short term cash gains and in Porsche's case end up being swallowed by a giant corporate anyway.


These vehicles and those who buy them are completely made from fail.

What utter tosh.

1. If manufacturers only made what 'the world' needed we'd all be riding bicycles and using public transport for longer journeys.
2. What does this even mean? If nobody made cars no-one would buy them...but somebody would then invent them, make them and sell them. These sales would encourage innovation and eventually a taller, fast, comfortable car with all wheel drive would be developed and would sell. Because people like them and find that they meet their needs. Your needs might just be different.
3. Tradition and heritage is only one factor in driving sales; Porsche is a business, not a museum. Their aim is to identify and exploit markets for their products, not keep the anoraks happy.

[Carfolio]

Hitch78 said:

What utter tosh.

1. If manufacturers only made what 'the world' needed we'd all be riding bicycles and using public transport for longer journeys.
2. What does this even mean? If nobody made cars no-one would buy them...but somebody would then invent them, make them and sell them. These sales would encourage innovation and eventually a taller, fast, comfortable car with all wheel drive would be developed and would sell. Because people like them and find that they meet their needs. Your needs might just be different.
3. Tradition and heritage is only one factor in driving sales; Porsche is a business, not a museum. Their aim is to identify and exploit markets for their products, not keep the anoraks happy.

You're missing the point, especially in regards to number 3. Porsche has traded heritage - something that newer manufacturers crave and need more than anything else, and the one thing they can't simply manufacture with all the resources in the world - for a short term buck. Long-term, I'm absolutely certain this will be an own goal.

Equally, in point 1, the argument was that the demand was inflated so this class went from being simply a utilitarian vehicle to being a status symbol driven by the desire for manufacturers to circumvent economy rules by exploiting a massive loophole in the CAFE regulations.

Point 2 needs to be read in that context.

[Carfolio]

Dusty964 said:

Good point- well thought out.

Clearly your reading is as selective as your quoting

[Dusty964]

Carfolio said:

Dusty964 said:

Good point- well thought out.

Clearly your reading is as selective as your quoting

No disrespect, but stating that 'if nobody built them nobody would buy them' is, at best, obvious.

[Powerhound]

Wills2 said:

Powerhound said:

Dusty964 said:

Powerhound said:

Why do people buy these? One of life's great puzzles. ML63 is better, faster, more comfortable, more airbags, better brakes, etc etc. Even X5M, execrable creation that it is, does a better job. Can a badge be that great a lure?? At that price?! Is it just an enormous practical joke - Porsche says, "Look, we can paint it diarrhoea green, and the colour-blind, quality-blind, badge worshippers will still cough up the dough!"

I really don't like it...

Would the 'quality blind, badge worshippers' be better ploughing the cash into the Merc or BMW that you mention that are 10k or so more expensive than the Porsche???
Dont take it the wrong way, but 'its an enormous practical joke' whereas the two cars that you mention are of course the very pinnacle of quality and taste?

I don't equate "execrable" (my word for the X5M) with the "pinnacle of good taste" (yours), so, no. I think the X5M sullies the M brand in the same way the Cayenne does Porsche's. My wife drives an atmo engined ML63 because it is, in our view, a much less pretentious and "off-brand" car than the Cayenne (which, btw, does not have rear airbags and suffers from a truly horrible ride, a cheap interior and an absence of power, at comparable price points to the ML). Horses for courses, I understand, what I find the most objectionable is the way Porsche tries to pretend this abomination is "sporty". Which it just isn't.

You gotta love PH, you slag off the Cayenne/X5M, then start justifying your ML63!!!!!!!

Your point is entirely justified... it's not like the ML63 is a paragon of great taste! It does however tick a lot of boxes when you're looking to accommodate a family and tonnes of luggage, and find yourself comparing Cayenne S, X5M and ML. The Cayenne Turbo is in another league price-wise (at least in Australia) and the Cayenne S feels like a very poor, slow, truck-like cousin compared to the others. But what I mean when I say the ML is "less pretentious" is that it doesn't pretend to be something it's not. It's just a big, comfortable, fast, safe, thirsty, overweight car. The Cayenne is a cynical, dishonest play on the reputation of a company that has made some of the nicest cars in history. The Cayenne is about as sporty as the Titanic, while being marketed as a sports car. That's pretentious.

[Dusty964]

Powerhound said:

Wills2 said:

Powerhound said:

Dusty964 said:

Powerhound said:

Why do people buy these? One of life's great puzzles. ML63 is better, faster, more comfortable, more airbags, better brakes, etc etc. Even X5M, execrable creation that it is, does a better job. Can a badge be that great a lure?? At that price?! Is it just an enormous practical joke - Porsche says, "Look, we can paint it diarrhoea green, and the colour-blind, quality-blind, badge worshippers will still cough up the dough!"

I really don't like it...

Would the 'quality blind, badge worshippers' be better ploughing the cash into the Merc or BMW that you mention that are 10k or so more expensive than the Porsche???
Dont take it the wrong way, but 'its an enormous practical joke' whereas the two cars that you mention are of course the very pinnacle of quality and taste?

I don't equate "execrable" (my word for the X5M) with the "pinnacle of good taste" (yours), so, no. I think the X5M sullies the M brand in the same way the Cayenne does Porsche's. My wife drives an atmo engined ML63 because it is, in our view, a much less pretentious and "off-brand" car than the Cayenne (which, btw, does not have rear airbags and suffers from a truly horrible ride, a cheap interior and an absence of power, at comparable price points to the ML). Horses for courses, I understand, what I find the most objectionable is the way Porsche tries to pretend this abomination is "sporty". Which it just isn't.

You gotta love PH, you slag off the Cayenne/X5M, then start justifying your ML63!!!!!!!

Your point is entirely justified... it's not like the ML63 is a paragon of great taste! It does however tick a lot of boxes when you're looking to accommodate a family and tonnes of luggage, and find yourself comparing Cayenne S, X5M and ML. The Cayenne Turbo is in another league price-wise (at least in Australia) and the Cayenne S feels like a very poor, slow, truck-like cousin compared to the others. But what I mean when I say the ML is "less pretentious" is that it doesn't pretend to be something it's not. It's just a big, comfortable, fast, safe, thirsty, overweight car. The Cayenne is a cynical, dishonest play on the reputation of a company that has made some of the nicest cars in history. The Cayenne is about as sporty as the Titanic, while being marketed as a sports car. That's pretentious.

I will actually leap to your defence- I owuld have an ML63 in a heartbeat!! i couldnt have the BM as i just dont like the styling, but AMG rarely produce a duffer. That it is large, thirsty and anything other point that makes people dislike them- all the better, I have never bought a car to fit in with other peoples views. I will organize a drive in the GTS when available though.
I can sort of see the view on the Porsche front, but the launch of the Cayenne did allow funds for development of its core models. Granted, the first model was hardly a looker, but this new one does look a great deal better in the metal.

Either way, you pays your money, you takes your choice- I do appreciate the fact that you actually had the cash to spend on something like the ML though, rather than write it off as ste from the comfort of your Focus 0as often seems the way on here).
I would argue the 'cheap interior' though, the new one is lovely inside.

[cayman-black]

Would have one of these over the ML6.3, plus at the moment the Cayenne is the best car Porsche make and certainly at holding its value. Who would have thought.

[k-ink]

Cayenne - Is there a more chav car on sale right now?

[bobberz]

k-ink said:

Cayenne - Is there a more chav car on sale right now?

WRX STi, Evo X, Golf-R, Astra VXR, 370Z.

[Sierra Mike]

bobberz said:

k-ink said:

Cayenne - Is there a more chav car on sale right now?

WRX STi, Evo X, Golf-R, Astra VXR, 370Z.

Arguably:
Range Rover Sport
Bentley Continental GT
Nissan GTR
BMW 3 Series M Sport (Inc M3)

The Cayenne is simply an excellent car which handles way better than anything of this size should. It's incredibly nimble and 'chuckable'. The only issue is that you have to keep in mind that it weighs considerably more than it feels when it comes to braking. Every other 'SUV' drives and handles like a van; there's no comparison if you want an 'SUV' and enjoy driving. For anyone who doubts that's true, test drive one before you pass judgement. So far as image goes, each to their own.

[Hitch78]

Carfolio said:

Hitch78 said:

What utter tosh.

1. If manufacturers only made what 'the world' needed we'd all be riding bicycles and using public transport for longer journeys.
2. What does this even mean? If nobody made cars no-one would buy them...but somebody would then invent them, make them and sell them. These sales would encourage innovation and eventually a taller, fast, comfortable car with all wheel drive would be developed and would sell. Because people like them and find that they meet their needs. Your needs might just be different.
3. Tradition and heritage is only one factor in driving sales; Porsche is a business, not a museum. Their aim is to identify and exploit markets for their products, not keep the anoraks happy.

You're missing the point, especially in regards to number 3. Porsche has traded heritage - something that newer manufacturers crave and need more than anything else, and the one thing they can't simply manufacture with all the resources in the world - for a short term buck. Long-term, I'm absolutely certain this will be an own goal.

Equally, in point 1, the argument was that the demand was inflated so this class went from being simply a utilitarian vehicle to being a status symbol driven by the desire for manufacturers to circumvent economy rules by exploiting a massive loophole in the CAFE regulations.

Point 2 needs to be read in that context.

I'm missing nothing, especially in regards to number 3. The Cayenne has been on sale for what, eight years now? In that time sales of Boxster, Cayman and 911 have continued to thrive. Nobody cares about heritage but motoring enthusiast anoraks. And the vast majority of them are generally not in a position to buy brand new Porsche products.

With a new 911, newish Cayenne and new Boxster and Cayman Porsche will sell more cars in 2012 than in any year previously. They'll make more money doing so, which as a business is their aim. I don't see what the issue with that is - where is the own goal in increasing your customer base?