RE: Porsche Macan facelift: Driven
Discussion
Sport220 said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Its not got a great deal of torque either, I can't imagine this engine offering much in this application. I look forward to the other engine options in the future.
Probably doesn't get much better mpg than the S V6 I guessI remember when Porsche used to be associated with high performance, its all about volume sales nowadays. I do like the Macan though and I bet its a very nice thing to live with.
Pretty much the same as the old one then, prefer the rear of the older one.
My wife brought a 2ltr of the current shape, originally was thinking diesel but short runs so no no, looked at the V6 but woeful MPG, forget what Porsche claim, and what Autotrader says mpg on these isn't great.
Anyhow we test drove 2.0 and as we assumed it would be too slow, but it was actually fine, pretty surprising when you think it will really struggle. More power is always nice but as a daily its fine. The thinking was if she wants to go for a blast she can take the weekender Porsche out, daily and weekender balance.
The note of handling, with PASM these corner really well, through the lanes its just like a big car but grips really well with very little rolling around at all.
My wife brought a 2ltr of the current shape, originally was thinking diesel but short runs so no no, looked at the V6 but woeful MPG, forget what Porsche claim, and what Autotrader says mpg on these isn't great.
Anyhow we test drove 2.0 and as we assumed it would be too slow, but it was actually fine, pretty surprising when you think it will really struggle. More power is always nice but as a daily its fine. The thinking was if she wants to go for a blast she can take the weekender Porsche out, daily and weekender balance.
The note of handling, with PASM these corner really well, through the lanes its just like a big car but grips really well with very little rolling around at all.
cerb4.5lee said:
Sport220 said:
cerb4.5lee said:
Its not got a great deal of torque either, I can't imagine this engine offering much in this application. I look forward to the other engine options in the future.
Probably doesn't get much better mpg than the S V6 I guessI remember when Porsche used to be associated with high performance, its all about volume sales nowadays. I do like the Macan though and I bet its a very nice thing to live with.
My friend has a MK7.5 Golf GTI and honestly speaking, putting the cars handling and everything else aside, the engine isn’t at exciting and it doesn’t pull as nicely as I thought, but then again I’m used to a 3.0 diesel.
People in this market all probably come from diesels and I can imagine the 2.0 version feeling very gutless. Even compared to a 2.0 diesel.
6.7 0-60 doesn’t in any way show this cars every day capability. A 320i will be faster than a 320d on paper but the 320d will probably walk away from it in most real world scenarios and have much better ingear acceleration, torque is key in cars like these.
I think the pricing may be a marketing tactic, pay 2500 extra for the V6, which makes them more money and if someone decides to go for the 2.0, Porsche are still making money as it’s over priced, engine straight out the parts bin.
People in this market all probably come from diesels and I can imagine the 2.0 version feeling very gutless. Even compared to a 2.0 diesel.
6.7 0-60 doesn’t in any way show this cars every day capability. A 320i will be faster than a 320d on paper but the 320d will probably walk away from it in most real world scenarios and have much better ingear acceleration, torque is key in cars like these.
I think the pricing may be a marketing tactic, pay 2500 extra for the V6, which makes them more money and if someone decides to go for the 2.0, Porsche are still making money as it’s over priced, engine straight out the parts bin.
JayK12 said:
Anyhow we test drove 2.0 and as we assumed it would be too slow, but it was actually fine, pretty surprising when you think it will really struggle. More power is always nice but as a daily its fine.
I would like a go in one to see what it's like for sure. I do usually prefer more performance than what this 4 cylinder offers, however I don't find SUV's very engaging or involving to drive because of their shape/height/weight. So I would imagine that it's more than enough in this type of vehicle in fairness. I love the old Macan Turbo PP for its performance, but I have a nagging doubt in my mind that it would just be a complete waste in a vehicle of this shape/height/weight. Although much slower I did love the engine in my old X5 4.8iS, but that engine/performance was a complete waste(imo) in a vehicle of that type.
Chestrockwell said:
My friend has a MK7.5 Golf GTI and honestly speaking, putting the cars handling and everything else aside, the engine isn’t at exciting and it doesn’t pull as nicely as I thought, but then again I’m used to a 3.0 diesel.
People in this market all probably come from diesels and I can imagine the 2.0 version feeling very gutless. Even compared to a 2.0 diesel.
6.7 0-60 doesn’t in any way show this cars every day capability. A 320i will be faster than a 320d on paper but the 320d will probably walk away from it in most real world scenarios and have much better ingear acceleration, torque is key in cars like these.
I think the pricing may be a marketing tactic, pay 2500 extra for the V6, which makes them more money and if someone decides to go for the 2.0, Porsche are still making money as it’s over priced, engine straight out the parts bin.
I guess those who are bothered will buy the pricer versions, I wouldnt imagine you could call it gutless though, 270 odd lb ft of torque from 1600 rpm, ok , its not light but that should do the job fine like JK says, I think we tend to go for ridiculous levels of overkill when it comes to power and acceleration, this car still has more power than most people have at their disposal.People in this market all probably come from diesels and I can imagine the 2.0 version feeling very gutless. Even compared to a 2.0 diesel.
6.7 0-60 doesn’t in any way show this cars every day capability. A 320i will be faster than a 320d on paper but the 320d will probably walk away from it in most real world scenarios and have much better ingear acceleration, torque is key in cars like these.
I think the pricing may be a marketing tactic, pay 2500 extra for the V6, which makes them more money and if someone decides to go for the 2.0, Porsche are still making money as it’s over priced, engine straight out the parts bin.
I find that for people who arent all that interested, there is a basic level of grunt that does the job, and even if they have more, they rarely use it anyway as they dont need to, but go below that level and the further below it you go thats when people get frustrated, cant image for most owners they will need to flog this to death to make progress.
Sport220 said:
Just noticed the price difference is only 2.5k, why would anyone buy the 4 pot one? Seeing as it doesn't get much better mpg anyways.
A very different story in countries where taxes are heavily based in displacement and CO2, 16000€ difference here in Portugal.
Now that would stop me looking at an S.A very different story in countries where taxes are heavily based in displacement and CO2, 16000€ difference here in Portugal.
Don't Italy have a 2.0 litre cut off point for car tax?
cerb4.5lee said:
I love the old Macan Turbo PP for its performance, but I have a nagging doubt in my mind that it would just be a complete waste in a vehicle of this shape/height/weight. Although much slower I did love the engine in my old X5 4.8iS, but that engine/performance was a complete waste(imo) in a vehicle of that type.
Try a Macan, its really in a different league chassis wise, and more like a hot hatch on steroids, its really quite impressive. I had a test drive of the old V6 diesel, and a V6 petrol S, back in late 2016, and I was very impressed by the drive.Sadly, neither engine option did much for me, and in my mind, what the Macan needed was the V6 diesel and V6 S petrol both replaced by a Macan with the diesel V6 from the Audi SQ5.....which would have made far more sense of the badge IMHO.
The SQ5 had a great engine, but disappointed in every other way.
cerb4.5lee said:
JayK12 said:
Anyhow we test drove 2.0 and as we assumed it would be too slow, but it was actually fine, pretty surprising when you think it will really struggle. More power is always nice but as a daily its fine.
I would like a go in one to see what it's like for sure. I do usually prefer more performance than what this 4 cylinder offers, however I don't find SUV's very engaging or involving to drive because of their shape/height/weight. So I would imagine that it's more than enough in this type of vehicle in fairness. I love the old Macan Turbo PP for its performance, but I have a nagging doubt in my mind that it would just be a complete waste in a vehicle of this shape/height/weight. Although much slower I did love the engine in my old X5 4.8iS, but that engine/performance was a complete waste(imo) in a vehicle of that type.
aeropilot said:
Try a Macan, its really in a different league chassis wise, and more like a hot hatch on steroids, its really quite impressive. I had a test drive of the old V6 diesel, and a V6 petrol S, back in late 2016, and I was very impressed by the drive.
Sadly, neither engine option did much for me, and in my mind, what the Macan needed was the V6 diesel and V6 S petrol both replaced by a Macan with the diesel V6 from the Audi SQ5.....which would have made far more sense of the badge IMHO.
The SQ5 had a great engine, but disappointed in every other way.
The reviews say that the Macan is an excellent drive as you mention. I've test drove the diesel SQ5 and I did like it and I liked the engine, I just thought it looked a little bland(which is strange for me because I usually love the way Audi's look). I will have to get a drive in the Macan. Sadly, neither engine option did much for me, and in my mind, what the Macan needed was the V6 diesel and V6 S petrol both replaced by a Macan with the diesel V6 from the Audi SQ5.....which would have made far more sense of the badge IMHO.
The SQ5 had a great engine, but disappointed in every other way.
JayK12 said:
We thought this as we looked at 3L and Turbo's also but its just a daily to go to work and back. I'd understand if you were buying a 911, you'd have a mind for performance as a priority. So as a daily it does the job, if you want to go quick and have fun/driver involvement use a different Porsche or car all together.
Yes, agree. Andy JB said:
Well 2x observations for a start - firstly, why is the 4 pot quoted as heavier than the V6 - doesn't make any sense. if this is correct then no doubt performance will be blunted further whereas it should narrow the gap being lighter in reality.
Misprint. The S is 70kg heavier according to the Porsche website.I'd thought the price difference must be a misprint too, but that seems correct.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff