Somewhat OT - Cayenne.
06-30-2003, 03:46 PM
#31
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Thread Starter
The disconnect here is that we are referring to the actual wording of the tax code v.s. a one page list of vehicles put together by someone at an accountant's office...the law stands at 6000 lbs and it is a simple matter to read the label in the doorjamb to see if it qualifies or not.
The tax code allows you to depreciate as much of the value as you want (multiplied by the % use for business and within the limits mentioned above). There are no other restrictions (other than weight)....and documentation should be kept.
The tax code allows you to depreciate as much of the value as you want (multiplied by the % use for business and within the limits mentioned above). There are no other restrictions (other than weight)....and documentation should be kept.
06-30-2003, 03:51 PM
#32
Addict
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
Lifetime Rennlist
Member
I have an article from Porsche to their dealers stating that the Cayenne does qualify and that they should use the Section 179 as a selling point.
The Cayenne, the X5, the ML, the sequoia all qualify.
The Cayenne, the X5, the ML, the sequoia all qualify.
06-30-2003, 04:01 PM
#33
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a 4.4 (wife's) and have driven the new Range Rover and a Cayenne Turbo. I, personally, still prefer the X5. The RR is very nice inside, but is a bit pokey compared to the X5, even though it is the same engine (due to the weight, I'm sure). The Cayenne is sure fast and nice, but can't justify the price tag. But what it comes down to is the handling of the X5 with the sports package. I think it's by far the best out of the 3. The X5 has it all.
06-30-2003, 04:09 PM
#34
You should definitely at least drive the Lexus LX 470. Ours is the first-year '98 model and is still eerily quiet and rock solid at 5 years and nearly 70k miles. The only unexpected service problem we've had in that entire time was a nail in the tire!
The engine is closer to an electric motor than a V-8--utterly smooth, silent and tons of torque. IMHO it's an amazing machine, and with dealer service and courtesy that will remind you how Porsche should treat customers.
Good luck whatever you decide, you have some great choices! ;-)
The engine is closer to an electric motor than a V-8--utterly smooth, silent and tons of torque. IMHO it's an amazing machine, and with dealer service and courtesy that will remind you how Porsche should treat customers.
Good luck whatever you decide, you have some great choices! ;-)
06-30-2003, 04:33 PM
#37
Drifting
Hey Sodly,
When I stated that the X5 is bigger than the Pepper, I wasn't going by dealer specs. You might be right and it wouldn't surprise me if the Pepper did have a bigger interior dimension on paper. But when i sat in the Pepper, the seats seemed tighter. Although I liked the "Grab Bars" they seemed to waste valuable space.
Now lets keep in mind when I talk about space I'm not just thinking about head room and leg room. I'm thinking about the fact that the SUV is my comfort vehicle. I like to have a place for my cell phone, cigarettes, lighter, drink, headset and what ever other misc items i need to have handy in my daily commutes.
When I say the Pepper is smaller, maybe what I should say is, it's not as practical.
I really like map pockets, ash trays, cup holders, sunglass holders, etc. None of which I have in the 993. So when I mount the X5 it is nice to have a place for everything.
The Pepper did not feel like it was designed for the same level of creature comforts. Yes, it had some storage. But the overall feeling was like being in a sports car vs a truck.
sorry for the confusion in my response.
When I stated that the X5 is bigger than the Pepper, I wasn't going by dealer specs. You might be right and it wouldn't surprise me if the Pepper did have a bigger interior dimension on paper. But when i sat in the Pepper, the seats seemed tighter. Although I liked the "Grab Bars" they seemed to waste valuable space.
Now lets keep in mind when I talk about space I'm not just thinking about head room and leg room. I'm thinking about the fact that the SUV is my comfort vehicle. I like to have a place for my cell phone, cigarettes, lighter, drink, headset and what ever other misc items i need to have handy in my daily commutes.
When I say the Pepper is smaller, maybe what I should say is, it's not as practical.
I really like map pockets, ash trays, cup holders, sunglass holders, etc. None of which I have in the 993. So when I mount the X5 it is nice to have a place for everything.
The Pepper did not feel like it was designed for the same level of creature comforts. Yes, it had some storage. But the overall feeling was like being in a sports car vs a truck.
sorry for the confusion in my response.
06-30-2003, 04:53 PM
#38
Addict & Guru
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
DC
Getting back to your real question (long):
As it happens, this past Sat I participated in a GM/Hummer promotion ("Hummer Days") in which a friend, my 20 yr old son & I picked up a new H2 from a local dealer & convoyed about 2 hrs w/our group of 9 H2s to a ranch for a day of activities incl. 3.5 rated off-road trails. I did lenghty stints as a passenger & as a driver for highway, back roads & off road segments. My assessment:
Exterior: it's ... a baby Hummer. More attention to marketing than the H1's focus on function. Our convoy attracted a great deal of attention, thumbs up & some horn blowing from others.
Interior: decently appointed for an SUV, but not up to what I'd expect in a $50k vehicle. Seats were typical GM, w/too little support & not well suited to a long trip. The body structure resulted in a limited rear view. There is also much less cargo space than I expected from such a large package.
Paved road ride/handling: less body roll than I expected for a 6400# high cg SUV. The 60/40 AWD handled twisty back roads quite predictably, w/a bunch of understeer, but w/o surprises. We speculated whether it would roll or slide at the limit, but never found out. The steering is veeery loose w/much free play. Part of that may be the tires which have large soft, squishy, gum eraser blocks. I would rate the brakes as typical of many American cars - overassisted w/lots of pedal travel, not much feel, good ABS intervention & predictable. There is low frequency body movement that all of us found nauseating, especially when trying to read - an activity that usually causes me no trouble as a passenger. This is not a vehicle that I would want to occupy for a long trip.
Off road ride/handling: Simply unbelievable. I've never been intentionally off road on 4 wheels before. With differentials locked, AWD set at 50/50, & a switch to low gearing, I drove 30+ deg drops & inclines, forded streams, went through mud, over boulders, logs, & stumps, between trees w/inches to spare (the side mirrors fold in electrically), over fields, and it was all as easy & relaxed as doing 60mph on a highway in a 993. We were all amazed at the H2's off road capabilities, especially with novices at the wheel. Off roading was an unbelievable kick which I could easily get into.
Bottom line: If my primary goal were off road capability, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Otherwise, $50k would be better spent elsewhere.
I've also driven a Cayenne S, although not off road. I was quite impressed with its handling & especially its braking. I'm not too fond of the concept of a Porsche SUV, but I was impressed with its performance envelope & would put it in the running were I to be interested in an SUV. Since I'm sure you can get a test drive, I'll cut this short.
BTW, Aug 16-17 the STL PCA Region will hold a DE at GIR. The event is sponsored by Parktown Porsche & they plan to put a Cayenne S on the track driven by several of our instructors w/o restrictions other than good sense. I'll post the results.
Getting back to your real question (long):
As it happens, this past Sat I participated in a GM/Hummer promotion ("Hummer Days") in which a friend, my 20 yr old son & I picked up a new H2 from a local dealer & convoyed about 2 hrs w/our group of 9 H2s to a ranch for a day of activities incl. 3.5 rated off-road trails. I did lenghty stints as a passenger & as a driver for highway, back roads & off road segments. My assessment:
Exterior: it's ... a baby Hummer. More attention to marketing than the H1's focus on function. Our convoy attracted a great deal of attention, thumbs up & some horn blowing from others.
Interior: decently appointed for an SUV, but not up to what I'd expect in a $50k vehicle. Seats were typical GM, w/too little support & not well suited to a long trip. The body structure resulted in a limited rear view. There is also much less cargo space than I expected from such a large package.
Paved road ride/handling: less body roll than I expected for a 6400# high cg SUV. The 60/40 AWD handled twisty back roads quite predictably, w/a bunch of understeer, but w/o surprises. We speculated whether it would roll or slide at the limit, but never found out. The steering is veeery loose w/much free play. Part of that may be the tires which have large soft, squishy, gum eraser blocks. I would rate the brakes as typical of many American cars - overassisted w/lots of pedal travel, not much feel, good ABS intervention & predictable. There is low frequency body movement that all of us found nauseating, especially when trying to read - an activity that usually causes me no trouble as a passenger. This is not a vehicle that I would want to occupy for a long trip.
Off road ride/handling: Simply unbelievable. I've never been intentionally off road on 4 wheels before. With differentials locked, AWD set at 50/50, & a switch to low gearing, I drove 30+ deg drops & inclines, forded streams, went through mud, over boulders, logs, & stumps, between trees w/inches to spare (the side mirrors fold in electrically), over fields, and it was all as easy & relaxed as doing 60mph on a highway in a 993. We were all amazed at the H2's off road capabilities, especially with novices at the wheel. Off roading was an unbelievable kick which I could easily get into.
Bottom line: If my primary goal were off road capability, I'd buy it in a heartbeat. Otherwise, $50k would be better spent elsewhere.
I've also driven a Cayenne S, although not off road. I was quite impressed with its handling & especially its braking. I'm not too fond of the concept of a Porsche SUV, but I was impressed with its performance envelope & would put it in the running were I to be interested in an SUV. Since I'm sure you can get a test drive, I'll cut this short.
BTW, Aug 16-17 the STL PCA Region will hold a DE at GIR. The event is sponsored by Parktown Porsche & they plan to put a Cayenne S on the track driven by several of our instructors w/o restrictions other than good sense. I'll post the results.
06-30-2003, 09:00 PM
#39
Advanced
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've driven almost all of the "large" imported SUVs including quite a few miles this past weekend in a new Cayenne S.
The Cayenne is hands down the "sportiest" of them all. Much better handling and brakes than the ML55 and X5. I don't know what the test numbers show, but the Cayenne has the best real world handling and braking. It just feels right. The Range Rover, Lexus and Hummer all feel like the trucks that they are. The RR and Lexus are certainly more luxurious, but is that what you are really looking for?
The anti-Cayenne brigade on this Board needs to get over it. Porsche built an excellent SUV. It's done. No amount of whining is going to get the money you think was so poorly spent back into the coffers of the racing program or wherever else you think it would have been better spent. Before you all continue with your anti-Cayenne comments I suggest you actually drive one. Drive it in the real world, not on some 5 minute dealership test loop. Then maybe you will appreciate how well it stacks up against the "competition".
<img border="0" alt="[icon107]" title="" src="graemlins/icon107.gif" />
The Cayenne is hands down the "sportiest" of them all. Much better handling and brakes than the ML55 and X5. I don't know what the test numbers show, but the Cayenne has the best real world handling and braking. It just feels right. The Range Rover, Lexus and Hummer all feel like the trucks that they are. The RR and Lexus are certainly more luxurious, but is that what you are really looking for?
The anti-Cayenne brigade on this Board needs to get over it. Porsche built an excellent SUV. It's done. No amount of whining is going to get the money you think was so poorly spent back into the coffers of the racing program or wherever else you think it would have been better spent. Before you all continue with your anti-Cayenne comments I suggest you actually drive one. Drive it in the real world, not on some 5 minute dealership test loop. Then maybe you will appreciate how well it stacks up against the "competition".
<img border="0" alt="[icon107]" title="" src="graemlins/icon107.gif" />
06-30-2003, 10:24 PM
#40
Rennlist Member
This guy was at the Zone 1 DE at Watkins Glen this weekend. He also owns/tracks a Boxster...
<img src="http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/2pepper_sm.jpg" alt=" - " />
<img src="http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/2pepper_sm.jpg" alt=" - " />
06-30-2003, 10:26 PM
#41
Rennlist Member
ps - that's a turbo.
06-30-2003, 10:30 PM
#42
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by DC from Cape Cod:
<strong>I'm not the Escalade/Navigator type</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I completely agree! I think the Escalade "SUV" is a joke. To call it an SUV and speak in the same sentence as a Land Rover is injustice. Lexus/Toyota make a reliable ride and Land Rovers have proven (off-road) performance. I've never cared much for the Discovery but test drove one a few weeks ago and was impressed with it's overall abilities. Looks tall but low center of gravity.
The Range Rover is my personal favorite for an SUV but since I like spirited driving I'd certainly give the Cayenne a spin. My personal opinion of course, which is what a web forum is all about ...
<strong>I'm not the Escalade/Navigator type</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I completely agree! I think the Escalade "SUV" is a joke. To call it an SUV and speak in the same sentence as a Land Rover is injustice. Lexus/Toyota make a reliable ride and Land Rovers have proven (off-road) performance. I've never cared much for the Discovery but test drove one a few weeks ago and was impressed with it's overall abilities. Looks tall but low center of gravity.
The Range Rover is my personal favorite for an SUV but since I like spirited driving I'd certainly give the Cayenne a spin. My personal opinion of course, which is what a web forum is all about ...
07-01-2003, 11:13 AM
#43
Rennlist Member
Actually-I disagree with TrackMan-whining is good and healthy-passionate consumers help drive to create passionate products. As far as the Cayenne is concerned, marketing parameters have driven to create fluff. The old "Doc" himself must be rolling in his grave.....
07-01-2003, 11:58 AM
#44
Burning Brakes
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Singapore
Posts: 935
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That crunching sound you hear is an H2 driven by a soccer mum backing over your lowered 911 due to "limited rear view."
Honestly, I can't stand H2s and find them driven by egomaniacs who have to make up for something. Then again, I guess, others would say the same about Porsches.
Riddle me this:
Why do sportscar in the US have to be compromised by ugly bumpers and SUV-like ride heights due to safety laws on bumper heights, compromising their performance, but SUVs don't have to lower theirs for fear of compromising their off-road performance? Hey, at least we take ours to the track, or at least drive fast in 'em. When was the last time you saw an SUV caked in offroading mud?
<img border="0" alt="[soapbox]" title="" src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" />
Honestly, I can't stand H2s and find them driven by egomaniacs who have to make up for something. Then again, I guess, others would say the same about Porsches.
Riddle me this:
Why do sportscar in the US have to be compromised by ugly bumpers and SUV-like ride heights due to safety laws on bumper heights, compromising their performance, but SUVs don't have to lower theirs for fear of compromising their off-road performance? Hey, at least we take ours to the track, or at least drive fast in 'em. When was the last time you saw an SUV caked in offroading mud?
<img border="0" alt="[soapbox]" title="" src="graemlins/soapbox.gif" />
07-01-2003, 01:03 PM
#45
Instructor
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 175
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For what ever it is worth, I drove the new VW Touareg yesterday. My wife is looking to replace her 740 m-sport with a smallish SUV. I was really disapointed in the road feel. The overly powered power steering and brakes felt like it was modeled after a 1979 Buick Electra 225.