RE: PH Fleet: Porsche Panamera Diesel
Discussion
Something oddly appealing about seeing an expensive car covered in the grime of proper use.
I spent far too long sat in the Panamera at the PH Sunday Service at the Porsche centre. I fell in love with the interior and the driving position. I long to have a drive in one. I can't decide on the looks - sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't. But I'm glad there are many who don't like how it looks - hopefully that will keep used values low, and I can afford one in the future
now, if only the sport design wheels came in 19"...
I spent far too long sat in the Panamera at the PH Sunday Service at the Porsche centre. I fell in love with the interior and the driving position. I long to have a drive in one. I can't decide on the looks - sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't. But I'm glad there are many who don't like how it looks - hopefully that will keep used values low, and I can afford one in the future
now, if only the sport design wheels came in 19"...mikEsprit said:
mik_jg said:
JS100 said:
mik_jg said:
JS100 said:
mik_jg said:
Fantastic thing. Generally people who criticise vehicles like this so strongly are those who can't afford them.
Sorry but your comment is utterly groundless and stupid IMO. The fact that the car is a f*cking ugly, fat, slow, over-priced, heavy old barge probably has more to do with it I would hypothesise...
As for the remainder of your hypothesis, I would challenge your description of the vehicle in question as you have not made a direct comparison between the other vehicles available to a prospective customer, ergo it cannot be a valid argument.
Stand by my description of it, but you are entitled to think otherwise. Help me out in understanding what it is you think the Panamera is trying to be and I might, time pending, be able to help you with your quest. Personally I would not want to take the liberty of assuming it has direct comparators to anything in fear of grossly offending someone who doesn't deserve the association to the monstorsity.
The article is written by someone who has lived with this particular car for several months and subjected it to the kind of driving that it was designed for. He has also experienced the other, higher powered models in the range and used this experience to come up with the conclusion that this diesel model a very fine vehicle indeed. I do not dispute this as it's a well-informed opinion. Mr Harris goes on to mention others who have experienced this car and been very impressed by it, despite not being enamored by the looks.
If you cannot understand what this car is trying to be then I respect your opinions even less. These should be obvious to someone with an interest in cars that transcends the mere "ooh it's a lovely colour" mentality and understands the subtler aspects, such as brand ethos, engineering integrity and marketing nous. It is meant to make extra profit in a new (for the manufacturer) and booming market sector for a globally-respected manufacturer of sports cars, whilst retaining many of the core values of the brand. As such it had to have recognisably-Porsche styling, which it does. Like the original and commercially-successful Cayenne, it may not be as elegantly designed as other vehicles on the market, but it will never be mistaken for another brand from the key visual impact points.
As for the rest of the design brief, it had to have the ability to carry four normal-sized adults long distances at speed, in comfort, in a luxurious environment, while offering the driver an entertaining driving experience, and all aimed at the Porsche buyer who doesn't want an SUV or a normal saloon and would have had to look to other premium marques to fulfill these criteria; in short, a 4-seater sports car. Mr Harris concludes that it covers those briefs well, by the way. Based on said criteria, one would assume natural rivals for the Panamera to include the Mercedes CLS, BMW GranCoupe, Aston Rapide, Maserati Quattroporte, Audi A7 and suchlike, assumption borne out by many comparison tests carried out across the motoring press.
I hugely respect the Panamera for what it is. Having driven it I have to say it's a very fine vehicle indeed. However, I wouldn't buy one. Why? I don't need a four-seater sports car and I'm not a Porsche fan. Hell, I'm not even that sold on the looks. It's like the wonderful-in-every-respect girl who I just don't fancy; just not for me but that doesn't stop me respecting her core values and worth to someone else. You may have a very strong anti-Panamera agenda, but don't let that blinker you to the fact that it's very good at what it sets out to be.
Personally, I expected the Panamera to be ugly based upon all I had read about it. Who didn't? I guess I fall in the unpolarized middle ground because I think they are neat looking. I don't think they are ugly at all, but I can see why many do, and I sure don't think they are exceptionally pretty, but I'd go that direction over ugly.
Gather me some information as to the demographic of the people posting STRONG, and I emphasise that word as it provides the basis of my original statement, criticism of the CAR and not just it's appearance and I'll be prepared to retract my original statement if I'm proven wrong. The sales success of the vehicle in it's target market sector across the globe certainly seems to indicate a favourable opinion of the car from those in a position to afford it. My whole original point is based on criticism of the vehicle as a whole, not just the appearance of it, by people who have never driven it and most likely will never be in a position to do so. I tend to ignore such opinion and instead take on board that made by better qualified sources, most of which tends to be favourable, which brings me back to the original point I made...
Your second paragraph made much more sense though.
mik_jg said:
I, indeed 'drew first blood' (a harsh accusation in itself, as that implies I was intending to start an fight, which is never my intention) with my first comment, but I did qualify later, when challenged, by stating the obvious fact that the vast majority of the motoring masses and critical public cannot afford to buy the Panamera; it's a specialist car by a premium brand. Such logic should be obvious enough not to warrant my having to state it at a later date. Does this make my original statement 'stupid' or does it say more about the critics' intelligence than mine?
Gather me some information as to the demographic of the people posting STRONG, and I emphasise that word as it provides the basis of my original statement, criticism of the CAR and not just it's appearance and I'll be prepared to retract my original statement if I'm proven wrong. The sales success of the vehicle in it's target market sector across the globe certainly seems to indicate a favourable opinion of the car from those in a position to afford it. My whole original point is based on criticism of the vehicle as a whole, not just the appearance of it, by people who have never driven it and most likely will never be in a position to do so. I tend to ignore such opinion and instead take on board that made by better qualified sources, most of which tends to be favourable, which brings me back to the original point I made...
Your second paragraph made much more sense though.
Someone summarise plsGather me some information as to the demographic of the people posting STRONG, and I emphasise that word as it provides the basis of my original statement, criticism of the CAR and not just it's appearance and I'll be prepared to retract my original statement if I'm proven wrong. The sales success of the vehicle in it's target market sector across the globe certainly seems to indicate a favourable opinion of the car from those in a position to afford it. My whole original point is based on criticism of the vehicle as a whole, not just the appearance of it, by people who have never driven it and most likely will never be in a position to do so. I tend to ignore such opinion and instead take on board that made by better qualified sources, most of which tends to be favourable, which brings me back to the original point I made...
Your second paragraph made much more sense though.
jackal said:
Beautiful cars and bettered only by the cayenne which is the undisputed best car in the world.
the choice of the cognoscenti rather than the wally/kerry katona (who are too busy buying avants, beemers and rrsports)
Well said that Man ............... Hit the nail, well and truly on the head the choice of the cognoscenti rather than the wally/kerry katona (who are too busy buying avants, beemers and rrsports)
Every time I'd get out of it, I'd hate it and curse the beluga whale hunchback.
Every time I drove the vast beluga whale hunchback I'd curse its vastness in traffic.
Every time I thought about it I'd think about how it symbolized the deathblow of Porsche as an independent manufacturer.
Every time I'd remember how it was created for the giant ego of the worthless piece of human garbage named Wiedeking who had it shaped that way so he could fit in the back seat.
Every time I would think about its debut in Shanghai. For an audience of buyers who wanted a Porsche the wouldn't drive, but with a big back seat so they could be driven around in one.
Every time I drove it I'd remember Ferry Porsche's vow that Porsche would only ever make sports cars, because that's what Porsche was all about. I'd remember that I could deal with the Cayenne because it was a SPORTS Utility Vehicle. But this abomination? No. No. NO!
Die, Panamera, die.
Every time I drove the vast beluga whale hunchback I'd curse its vastness in traffic.
Every time I thought about it I'd think about how it symbolized the deathblow of Porsche as an independent manufacturer.
Every time I'd remember how it was created for the giant ego of the worthless piece of human garbage named Wiedeking who had it shaped that way so he could fit in the back seat.
Every time I would think about its debut in Shanghai. For an audience of buyers who wanted a Porsche the wouldn't drive, but with a big back seat so they could be driven around in one.
Every time I drove it I'd remember Ferry Porsche's vow that Porsche would only ever make sports cars, because that's what Porsche was all about. I'd remember that I could deal with the Cayenne because it was a SPORTS Utility Vehicle. But this abomination? No. No. NO!
Die, Panamera, die.
markcollings7890 said:
mik_jg said:
I, indeed 'drew first blood' (a harsh accusation in itself, as that implies I was intending to start an fight, which is never my intention) with my first comment, but I did qualify later, when challenged, by stating the obvious fact that the vast majority of the motoring masses and critical public cannot afford to buy the Panamera; it's a specialist car by a premium brand. Such logic should be obvious enough not to warrant my having to state it at a later date. Does this make my original statement 'stupid' or does it say more about the critics' intelligence than mine?
Gather me some information as to the demographic of the people posting STRONG, and I emphasise that word as it provides the basis of my original statement, criticism of the CAR and not just it's appearance and I'll be prepared to retract my original statement if I'm proven wrong. The sales success of the vehicle in it's target market sector across the globe certainly seems to indicate a favourable opinion of the car from those in a position to afford it. My whole original point is based on criticism of the vehicle as a whole, not just the appearance of it, by people who have never driven it and most likely will never be in a position to do so. I tend to ignore such opinion and instead take on board that made by better qualified sources, most of which tends to be favourable, which brings me back to the original point I made...
Your second paragraph made much more sense though.
Someone summarise plsGather me some information as to the demographic of the people posting STRONG, and I emphasise that word as it provides the basis of my original statement, criticism of the CAR and not just it's appearance and I'll be prepared to retract my original statement if I'm proven wrong. The sales success of the vehicle in it's target market sector across the globe certainly seems to indicate a favourable opinion of the car from those in a position to afford it. My whole original point is based on criticism of the vehicle as a whole, not just the appearance of it, by people who have never driven it and most likely will never be in a position to do so. I tend to ignore such opinion and instead take on board that made by better qualified sources, most of which tends to be favourable, which brings me back to the original point I made...
Your second paragraph made much more sense though.
I have one.
I want one.
I'm considerably richer than youw.
I'm more intelligent than youw.
I work for an interested party.
My opinion matters/is right, yours doesn't/isn't.
I'm inherently argumentative.
I quite possibly don't have quite the view of the world I believe I have.
Everything a motoring journalist submits to print is 100% accurate and free of even the remotest hint of influence, future, local sensibilities and the like.
or maybe, just maybe,
I have a genuine view and trying to defend it, albeit in a somewhat misguided fashion.
and so on
However, the majority rulz (and are probably closer to that harsh reality). It does ming heavily in the looks department in the eyes of more or less everyone & while it is a wannabee conservatory and is no doubt more than the old man in the handling, badge and general feel departments, a new & almost A6 Avant (with quattro/black consumption) plus a weekend ego booster will almost invariably do more for the same or less outlay.
TBH, even with a John Holmes length pocket I'd still go for something else.
Then again, I would, as someone who doesn't lust uncontrollably, appear to be hopelessly incapable of affording one, so what the f
k does ickle ole me know 
tommy vercetti said:
jackal said:
Beautiful cars and bettered only by the cayenne which is the undisputed best car in the world.
the choice of the cognoscenti rather than the wally/kerry katona (who are too busy buying avants, beemers and rrsports)
wtf are you on about?the choice of the cognoscenti rather than the wally/kerry katona (who are too busy buying avants, beemers and rrsports)
Magnificent looking car. Pictures never do them justice. Seeing them in the flesh adds another dimension. Would be my choice over any of the GT 4 doors on offer*, Quattroporte, Rapide etc.
The diseasel in a sports car is unfortunate but is nonetheless inevitable. We might as well get used it.
* In an alternate universe where I could afford it.
The diseasel in a sports car is unfortunate but is nonetheless inevitable. We might as well get used it.
* In an alternate universe where I could afford it.
I see them regularly in Chicago and still not a fan of the looks, however it is the sort of car that appeals to me in an odd way. Much like the Merc R-class actually.
I've not driven a Panamera yet and we won't get the diesel one over here which is a shame as modern diesel power trains are perfect for US roads.
I've not driven a Panamera yet and we won't get the diesel one over here which is a shame as modern diesel power trains are perfect for US roads.
OK, so I've just ordered one and in the light of all these observations it may be worth examining why I did so.
I've run two BMW 535d sport touring over the past five years, preceded by a 330d sport touring; I fancy something different. The car will be my regular 'drive' and I have a Caterham 7 and a Boxster S for when I want to go out and have fun. My criteria for a new car were (loosely) the following:-
Driving dynamics
Excitement i.e something different
Power /performance
Engineering integrity
Comfort
Styling
Because my wife is disabled I have to be able to carry a wheelchair or mobility scooter and this clearly limits the range of options, but I have a dislike of the 4x4/SUV type of vehicle having tried these in the past.
The Panamera was the closest match to my requirements, most particularly when I judged what I would ultimately enjoy driving on a daily basis. I was greatly impressed with the chassis of the demo cars I tried, the performance was all I could require in the daily 'real world' and the comfort and cabin ambience transcended the alternatives (Merc, BMW, Audi) The quality of the transmission particularly impressed given the poor reputation of past Tiptronics.
Does it have the 'look-back' quality? No. Will it be a good purchase financially? No. Do I mind? No. It's a car that appeals to me , ticks all the boxes for what I require and will offer driving enjoyment which is fast becoming a rare commodity.
Oh, and I'll never know whether the guy behind thinks the rear end is ugly!
I've run two BMW 535d sport touring over the past five years, preceded by a 330d sport touring; I fancy something different. The car will be my regular 'drive' and I have a Caterham 7 and a Boxster S for when I want to go out and have fun. My criteria for a new car were (loosely) the following:-
Driving dynamics
Excitement i.e something different
Power /performance
Engineering integrity
Comfort
Styling
Because my wife is disabled I have to be able to carry a wheelchair or mobility scooter and this clearly limits the range of options, but I have a dislike of the 4x4/SUV type of vehicle having tried these in the past.
The Panamera was the closest match to my requirements, most particularly when I judged what I would ultimately enjoy driving on a daily basis. I was greatly impressed with the chassis of the demo cars I tried, the performance was all I could require in the daily 'real world' and the comfort and cabin ambience transcended the alternatives (Merc, BMW, Audi) The quality of the transmission particularly impressed given the poor reputation of past Tiptronics.
Does it have the 'look-back' quality? No. Will it be a good purchase financially? No. Do I mind? No. It's a car that appeals to me , ticks all the boxes for what I require and will offer driving enjoyment which is fast becoming a rare commodity.
Oh, and I'll never know whether the guy behind thinks the rear end is ugly!
It's not pretty, but I think it has presence.
A few posts have anticipated poor residuals, but I don't think that is anywhere near the case. Cheapest used Pan D currently on the market is £58k and thats a 2011 with 22k on the clock. Even the poverty spec used cars are c£60k. List is £62k new on one of these, so as with the Cayenne D, dealers have done well so far to inflate/maintain values. Lease costs are exceptionally high as compared to CLS/6 GranCoupe. To me that would suggest that there is sufficient demand for Marmite.
Covering 6k a month in a 640d, I can definitely see the advantage of these big, quick, diesel brutes - I can comfortably do 700 miles between fill ups.
I bet it is a great drive (yet to try one admittedly) and will get better once they drop the V8 Diesel in they have just released in the Cayenne.
A few posts have anticipated poor residuals, but I don't think that is anywhere near the case. Cheapest used Pan D currently on the market is £58k and thats a 2011 with 22k on the clock. Even the poverty spec used cars are c£60k. List is £62k new on one of these, so as with the Cayenne D, dealers have done well so far to inflate/maintain values. Lease costs are exceptionally high as compared to CLS/6 GranCoupe. To me that would suggest that there is sufficient demand for Marmite.
Covering 6k a month in a 640d, I can definitely see the advantage of these big, quick, diesel brutes - I can comfortably do 700 miles between fill ups.
I bet it is a great drive (yet to try one admittedly) and will get better once they drop the V8 Diesel in they have just released in the Cayenne.
Trevor M said:
Every time I'd get out of it, I'd hate it and curse the beluga whale hunchback.
Every time I drove the vast beluga whale hunchback I'd curse its vastness in traffic.
Every time I thought about it I'd think about how it symbolized the deathblow of Porsche as an independent manufacturer.
Every time I'd remember how it was created for the giant ego of the worthless piece of human garbage named Wiedeking who had it shaped that way so he could fit in the back seat.
Every time I would think about its debut in Shanghai. For an audience of buyers who wanted a Porsche the wouldn't drive, but with a big back seat so they could be driven around in one.
Every time I drove it I'd remember Ferry Porsche's vow that Porsche would only ever make sports cars, because that's what Porsche was all about. I'd remember that I could deal with the Cayenne because it was a SPORTS Utility Vehicle. But this abomination? No. No. NO!
Die, Panamera, die.
Ferry Porsche probably said that before the 1970 family conference when they decided to let non-family managers run the company.Every time I drove the vast beluga whale hunchback I'd curse its vastness in traffic.
Every time I thought about it I'd think about how it symbolized the deathblow of Porsche as an independent manufacturer.
Every time I'd remember how it was created for the giant ego of the worthless piece of human garbage named Wiedeking who had it shaped that way so he could fit in the back seat.
Every time I would think about its debut in Shanghai. For an audience of buyers who wanted a Porsche the wouldn't drive, but with a big back seat so they could be driven around in one.
Every time I drove it I'd remember Ferry Porsche's vow that Porsche would only ever make sports cars, because that's what Porsche was all about. I'd remember that I could deal with the Cayenne because it was a SPORTS Utility Vehicle. But this abomination? No. No. NO!
Die, Panamera, die.
Already by then the purity was starting to be affected by 'rules', the rear reflectors of my 1970 'S' are a crude tack-on to the bumpers compared with the purity of the 1967 S trim.
Porsche is now a multi-model car maker, 'just get over it' as it says on the side of the bus.
I could be tempted to swap my 1970 2.2S for a diesel Panamera, they seem to cost about the same, but they don't appear to do air suspension or all-wheel drive on diesels, why?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff