Quick pics. New 2012 with the new upgrades
#31
Burning Brakes
Very nice specs and beautiful color choices! Enjoy it in good health!
#33
Race Director
No disrespect to the V6 intended, as it is wonderful, and may meet your needs perfectly. But you overstate the case. The difference in performance between the V6 and V8 is greater than the difference between the V8 and Turbo, according to factory specs.
#34
The 2012 cayenne (sept. delivery) i have right now doesn't have aluminum pedals. Did you add it as an option or was it standard? I'm also really irritated that right after mines was built, they changed it. I'm really hoping they will offer a retrofitted clock.
I LOVE the interior and the black trims on the exterior!!!
I LOVE the interior and the black trims on the exterior!!!
#35
Rennlist Member
Yeah but not in terms of "feel". Both naturally aspirated engines are much more similar in feel as they can't compare to the effortless part-throttle thrust of the Turbo. I agree completely with the OP.
#36
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
The 2012 cayenne (sept. delivery) i have right now doesn't have aluminum pedals. Did you add it as an option or was it standard? I'm also really irritated that right after mines was built, they changed it. I'm really hoping they will offer a retrofitted clock.
I LOVE the interior and the black trims on the exterior!!!
I LOVE the interior and the black trims on the exterior!!!
#37
Race Director
Ah, the elusive "feel". All I know is that, TT notwithstanding, a V8 Tip is almost 2 seconds faster to 60 than a V6 tip, which is what the OP owned. A pretty significant difference, that one also ought to be able to "feel".....
#38
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
i have driven the three variants of the 958, and daily drive the v6 with pleasure... the previous v6 was very sluggish and made the v8 the go to engine...
either way i know those who paid 14k more for their engine would like to feel like they got "the best damn engine" so i wont go on anymore, but i suggest you go to local dealer and try and test drive a v6 with sport mode on around town and you'll see the difference is very tight... on the highway however the extra displacement and power shows up clearly at speeds above 60... the v6 will still drop down and go but the v8 does it much better.
i drive my cayenne very spirited but for daily use, the v6 is more than sufficient, I rarely even find a time where I need "more engine" unless im on the highway passing someone, but highway driving is still a breeze and the car gets to cruising speeds with ease and stays there without much added effort.. (some small engine vehicles dont wanna easily cruise @ 100+, the v6 cayenne easily cruises at highway speed with ease..
#39
Race Director
1.5 seconds, yes it's "felt" but with the 958 mostly because of weight loss i feel, the gap is much tighter between v6/v8 than in the previous chassis.
i have driven the three variants of the 958, and daily drive the v6 with pleasure... the previous v6 was very sluggish and made the v8 the go to engine...
either way i know those who paid 14k more for their engine would like to feel like they got "the best damn engine" so i wont go on anymore, but i suggest you go to local dealer and try and test drive a v6 with sport mode on around town and you'll see the difference is very tight... on the highway however the extra displacement and power shows up clearly at speeds above 60... the v6 will still drop down and go but the v8 does it much better.
i drive my cayenne very spirited but for daily use, the v6 is more than sufficient, I rarely even find a time where I need "more engine" unless im on the highway passing someone, but highway driving is still a breeze and the car gets to cruising speeds with ease and stays there without much added effort.. (some small engine vehicles dont wanna easily cruise @ 100+, the v6 cayenne easily cruises at highway speed with ease..
i have driven the three variants of the 958, and daily drive the v6 with pleasure... the previous v6 was very sluggish and made the v8 the go to engine...
either way i know those who paid 14k more for their engine would like to feel like they got "the best damn engine" so i wont go on anymore, but i suggest you go to local dealer and try and test drive a v6 with sport mode on around town and you'll see the difference is very tight... on the highway however the extra displacement and power shows up clearly at speeds above 60... the v6 will still drop down and go but the v8 does it much better.
i drive my cayenne very spirited but for daily use, the v6 is more than sufficient, I rarely even find a time where I need "more engine" unless im on the highway passing someone, but highway driving is still a breeze and the car gets to cruising speeds with ease and stays there without much added effort.. (some small engine vehicles dont wanna easily cruise @ 100+, the v6 cayenne easily cruises at highway speed with ease..
Cheers.
#42
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
Actually 1.8 seconds between tip V6 and V8 but who's counting...... Seriously, in no way do I mean to disparage the V6. Is it more than adequate for almost any situation? Absolutely. You might notice the difference on occasion when towing, or in certain highway situations as you've described, but in any case it's not a big deal. FWIW, I think it's just as possible that someone who spent $14K less for their V6 might be trying to justify their decision as much as the person who spent more for a V8; it's human nature. But to the point, is 1.8 seconds and a few extra standard features worth the price difference? I guess one could ask whether it's worth it to spend $60-150K on an SUV in the first place. Purely a matter of subjective taste. V6, V8, or TT we're all pretty fortunate to be able to indulge ourselves with this kind of purchase.
Cheers.
Cheers.
i forgot the 7.1 was the manual trans..
#43
Being a bit "off topic", Riley, you may love that one :
Recently, a French magazine did a test on a cargo runway (long) and tried different cars to see which can do 0 to 300 km/h (close to 200mph), and ..the Pan Turbo S, did it, in 40.7 sec, or : quite brilliantly, ..i.e.: better than an R8 V10 !
Note that they went over, up to 310, ..which is quite close to 200mph (about 320)
Note that they went over, up to 310, ..which is quite close to 200mph (about 320)
Last edited by GVA-SFO; 01-11-2012 at 12:11 AM.
#44
Nordschleife Master
Thread Starter
Being a bit "off topic", Riley, you may love that one :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXRP0525SzQ
Recently, a French magazine did a test on a cargo runway (long) and tried different cars to see which can do 0 to 300 km/h (close to 200mph), and ..the Pan Turbo S, did it, in 40.7 sec, or : quite brilliantly, ..i.e.: better than an R8 V10 !
Note that they went over, up to 310, ..which is quite close to 200mph (about 320)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXRP0525SzQ
Recently, a French magazine did a test on a cargo runway (long) and tried different cars to see which can do 0 to 300 km/h (close to 200mph), and ..the Pan Turbo S, did it, in 40.7 sec, or : quite brilliantly, ..i.e.: better than an R8 V10 !
Note that they went over, up to 310, ..which is quite close to 200mph (about 320)
#45
285 km/h is the most I achieved with my 2011 CT
Might be able to hit 300 when I get my GIAC Ecu upgrade...
The CT does not stop pulling till about 255-260..then it takes a good mile to eek out the rest of the speed it has to give
PTV is very useful for getting into and out of turns harder than you thought possible...after which those ceramics do come in handy