John from WA

My beef with the Cayenne has nothing to do with its technical competence (though it appears some car rags have some comments in that department). I am sure that it will be competitive with the X5 and Discovery's.

Rather is has to do with its existence in the first place. I don't like the thinking that went into this and the sacrifices made to build it. Porsche now has a stale model line in dire need of updating. It has relied on the Boxster for much too long and is now paying that price. Of course the Cayenne may help cash flow now... but if they updated the other cars it may not have been neccessary. The economy may hurt Porsche, but just as likely the board-room decisions are as well. Not to mention the whole racing issue. aagh.

At least I don't own any stock.

Rob in WA

$16.00 a year is an excellent value for becoming a rennlist member.

The Cayennes will be in on Saturday so we all can see them first hand and post on reality based impressions.

I just wanted to comment on the new Rover. I've got 76k miles on my '98 4.6 and have no complaints/major problems; I love it. I test drove the new one a few times to see what all the hype was about. I'll say this first, I wanted to not like it. My portfolio doesn't look so great and the hit I'd take on a trade is very unattractive. The interior is beautiful and I really liked the "natural" wood. I also liked the way the steering wheel moves in and out automatically. What I didn't like and what I don't get, is why did they make it bigger? It felt really big and heavy compared to mine. The steering wheel is smaller so it adds to that effect. There's still no third row seat and the cargo room looks about the same. The only reason the salesman could come up w/is that BMW wanted to differentiate it from the X5. When mine's lowered (highway setting) with the sport transmission engaged it handles/drives pretty well. I didn't get that feeling w/the new one. I'm sure it would just take some getting used to. I also noticed that the headrests were not powered anymore. That pretty much killed the deal. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />

John from WA

Trade in values really are poor for our trucks. I guess you don't buy them as an investment. So far so good on my '03. The ride is nice, just firm enough for my taste (for a truck, my 930 is stiff as hell).

Yeah, those manual headrests drive me crazy, but the logic 7 stereo makes up for it somewhat

Difference Engine

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">Originally posted by John H. in DC Area:
<strong>I wonder if Porsche has the ability and the will to force the Cayenne allocations onto PCNA and the dealers for next year, and the year after that, and so on ad infinitum? Heck, they could perpetually claim that the Cayenne is sold out for its entire existence. Also, does the first year "sold out" claim apply to model year 2003 Cayennes or one year's worth of Cayennes starting from its introduction at the end of calendar 2002/beginning of 2003 (to include MY 2003 and 2004 Cayennes)?

All of these "virtual" sales accomplishments have me baffled.

Going to see and drive the C tomorrow evening.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Helvetica">I'm not sure if things will change, but currently, we do not have to take our allocation if we don't want to. Obviously, every month we get our allocation. If we don't want the vehicles, we simply don't order them. They will sit there available to us if we do want to order them. However, if another dealer is looking for a car, and we have ours sitting, they can take that order away.

For example, we have 5 Cayenne S's available for May production. We ordered all 5. Now, if our sales of Cayenne sucked and we couldn't sell any of them, we might only order 3. At which point, 2 would be available to any dealership.

Hopefully that made sense.

Enjoy your test drive! Our first ones arrived a few hours ago and are being PDI'd as I type this. Hopefully taking one for a nice drive later on.

Anir

Judging by all the deleted John Murray posts, it looks like I missed some action today on the Cayenne board.

John from Wa,

Let me start by saying the Clinton analogy was priceless! <img border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" title="" src="graemlins/bigok.gif" />

I used to feel like you do about Porsche's foray into the SUV world, but not so much anymore. It's hard to blame them for venturing into SUV's when SUV's / minivans / trucks account for more sales than all cars put together (last year was the first for this, I believe).

If the Cayenne Turbo is really the most technically competent SUV in the world, then Porche has done their name proud. I just wish they had made it more desirable in the process - better looking, more functional (e.g. 3rd row seat, which BTW, I agree with Rob the RR should have standard), and with a higher quality interior.

Porsche's GT3 and Carrera GT are some fine offerings, and it's my hope that the 997 spawns some lust in my heart for a new Porsche. If Porsche takes the Cayenne to the Dakar or Baja, and gets back into top-level sports car racing (e.g. with the Carrera GT in GTS), my faith will be fully restored.

My biggest gripe about Porsche: that they never gave the Boxster an engine worthy of its chassis. I know it's bad marketing to parasitize sales from the more expensive 996 line-up, but it's still a shame from an engineering / car nut perspective.

Have a great day, all.

dawktah

But doesn't third row seating take the "sport" out of SUV!!! You just have a van or suburban.

Anir

Actually, I bought the Range Rover to have a "truck". I was actually thinking of getting a Yukon or Suburban or Land Cruiser, but thought the Range Rover was a better quality vehicle.

Although "SUV" is the hot marketing buzzword, I really still look at these things as enclosed trucks, except for the X5 / Cayenne / new Volvo etc, which are really tall station wagons.

I'd rather have utility than sport in my "SUV".

John from WA

Anir, thanks for the comments on my Clinton analogy. I thought it was particularily well done myself when I wrote it

I picked up the Rover after turning in my '97 Suburban. I would have kept the Suburban but the lease company wanted too much money for it. The Rover is my truck, great for hauling the kids to a lake, or commuting to work in the rain. I looked at all the same vehicles you did and came to the same conclusion, the Rover is a great looking and riding car. And better yet from a company that sticks to it's vision (the best 4X4 by far).

OTOH my Porsche is my passion, and that is why I so dislike the way the factory has gone with the Cayenne. To me they have successfully destroyed much of the allure of the marque. It just isn't as much fun to drive the car as it was a couple of years ago.

This has made me start looking around a bit, Ferrari looks good, so does Aston (especially the new AMV8). But for now I keep my ol' 930. Built in the glory days of Porsche.

BTW: Did you ever get the dealer to customize the computer for you (like matching the key to the seat and mirrors)?

Rob in WA

"It just isn't as much fun to drive the car as it was a couple of years ago."

I don't like the Cayenne, or any SUV idea from Porsche anymore then the next guy, but it doesn't take away from the enjoyment I get out my P-car. Do you really think about the P-fish as you power through a turn at obscene speeds?

No need to to "customize" the computer to get the seats and mirrors into the memory in my Rover; each key corresponds to a memory setting.

"I guess you don't buy them as an investment."

No, but the value has actually faired better then several other of my "investments." Maybe I should've bought a whole fleet of Rovers. <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" /> We need about 100 more days like yesterday.

"I'd rather have utility than sport in my "SUV"."

I call the Rover my "truck" too, keep the sport part for the P-CARS.