All three look much better and more stealth to me, M758. The only justifications I can think of to explain the Cayenne's approach to the same thing is that either they determined they needed a more substantial unit to withstand higher top speed and drag forces, or it somehow swings out of the way of the rear hatch glass. Just guesses, though. Surely they wouldn't design something that ugly for no reason, right?

 

John the unit pictured swings out of the way of the hatch on single pivot point that is supported by what looks like a wheel bearing. Since I installed the unit my self I can tell you that it is STOUT. It is made for Jeep guys who use their rigs on the trails. The bumper is replaced by a steel unit that is about 3/8 to 1/2" thick rectangular tube. The carrier is made from thick tube steel. I have no doubt that I will stand-up to any punishment I can throw at it with a 100lbs tire on it. Only draw back is that is about 120lbs (no tire) with 70 of that being the bumper.

Strength does not Need to be ugly

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by M758:
<strong>The bumper is replaced by a steel unit that is about 3/8 to 1/2" thick rectangular tube. The carrier is made from thick tube steel. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Ah ha! Maybe that's it, M758. Perhaps Porsche wanted to avoid installing more heavy steel in the rear, which would disrupt the carefully planned "sports car dynamics" of the thing. So, in order to use a lighter material on both the bumper and the tire holder they had to design an octopus-like holder with multiple attachment points, a large cradle, and many arms.

 

Well, this thing electrically folds down/swings in order to open the hatch. The rear window, hatch and tire holder swing back and lock into place by a push of a button.

There is also a few cover options that attach to this.

Still don't like it...

 

All it needs now is a Porsche design chainsaw, Brush guards and a big butt ugly winch in the front

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by over1g:
<strong>Does it matter? You'd say it was really ugly regardless of what it looks like...
Ahmet</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Exactly. Porsche could develop the most wonderful thing ever, but if it's associated with the Cayenne, the haters will find something wrong with it.

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by M758:
<strong> Sure an external tire can be useful, but the carrier could have been done MUCH better,
Here is an couple picture of the aftermarket one I installed on my Cherokee.
While I prefer the cleaner look of the tire inside I could not fit the 31" tire in there.

<img src="http://www.jeepin.com/gallery/estevens2.jpg" alt=" - " /></strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">That looks something like my 94 Cherokee. I've got a 4.5" lift with 32" Bridgestone Dueler ATs. No ARB yet though. Tire on the back of course.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Difference Engine:
<strong>Exactly. Porsche could develop the most wonderful thing ever, but if it's associated with the Cayenne, the haters will find something wrong with it...</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">I disagree. If it was something that looks stylish, nice, good... I'd say so.

Even though I don't like the Cayenne that doesn't mean I'd say somethink looks bad if it doesn't. but that thing doe NOT look good.

I assume you guys think it looks good?

BTW, we can turn things around.

It seems that some of you like everything that comes from Porsche.

No matter if it's SUV, pipe (they do make those nowadays also) or whatever, looks good or bad, doesn't matter, it's ok 'cause it's Porsche.

 

</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Originally posted by Difference Engine:
<strong>
That looks something like my 94 Cherokee. I've got a 4.5" lift with 32" Bridgestone Dueler ATs. No ARB yet though. Tire on the back of course.</strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Cool! Another XJ owner! <img border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" title="" src="graemlins/bigok.gif" />
Being able to fit 32's on 4.5, need to do any fender trimming?
Mine 98 XJ has 4.5" lift and my 31 BFG's still rub under full flex even after some front plastic trimming. Mine is open in front with factory trac-loc in the rear. Has not stopped me yet!

Here is mine before the I installed the tire carrier.
<img src="http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/DSC0036a.jpg" alt=" - " />

 

Ofcourse not knowing you this is sure to be an incorrerrect assumption, but here it goes:

I don't think that you have an open mind about the cayenne, regardless of if you deny that or not. I think this because of your tone about all things cayenne. I'm not a huge fan of the 911 aside from the pre 74 cars, the 928, or the cayenne. I have no more sympathy towards a 911 or a 928 then any other "good" sports or gt car of the same caliber, personally.

Also, why would you compare an electrically operated spare tire holder to an aftermarket piece in a jeep (assuming that's what it is)? I do not have a big problem with the thing if you must know. I wonder how many of you would own your cars if it was a little bit uglier, or if more people thought they were ugly... So what if this isn't the best looking SUV out there, it's the fastest by far, and that's quite fitting IMO, I don't care for the cayenne any more than I care for a Honda accord. I just don't think it deserves the hundreds of negative comments you post about it regarding only it's styling, or how it's not fitting for Porsche to be making it.
Ahmet

 

Ahmet,

Personally, I would not have paid for a 993TT if it was clothed in an ugly body. If I was willing to accept an ugly design, I could get similar performance, while saving a ton of cash, by going with a Mitsubishi Evo.

To me, design is as important as performance. It's what makes me glance back over my shoulder and smile.

If an enthusiast only cares about performance, and not appearance, that's cool, too. I can't help it but I am a sucker for beautiful lines.

 

Ahmet,

I admit. I'm like Amir when it comes to beauty.

I love 911's curves. Sometimes I just stare at it & think how great it looks (even new 996s are starting to look good). I remember looking at my -72 911 last summer & wondering how dam good it still looks!

However, there are more into sportscars than look, defenately.

I don't 'hate' Cayenne because it doesn't look great, n o t a t a l l (that's last of my 'problems' when it comes to Cayenne).

I don't like it because it is not sportscar and because I believe it's at least partly the reason Porsche is not racing.
Whether it looks great or not, doesn't change that.
I'll take ugly, but othervise great sportscar anyday over great looking SUV (no matter what kind of SUV).

I'm sorry if you think I should accept any kind of vechile Porsche offers, but I just can't.

Why would I compare electric tyre holder to an aftermarket one?

Well, I'm not but I'm sure you can design nice looking electric tyre holder, I know I could.

 

I compared the Cayenne holder to my Jeep Aftermaket one simply because I wanted to show that a tire carrier can be made to be much better looking than cayenne version.

To me the Cayenne carrier is "styled" while the jeep version is 90% functional 10% styled. This is one of my problems with their carrier and much of Porsche "Design" in recent years. In the past the function of the car or part of the car was largest factor in what it looked like. Today things are "styled" first and then made to try to work around this. To me this is not part of the history of Porsche.

If the C must have an external tire carrier then its visual execution could have been done MUCH better by determining the pure fuctional requirements and performing only minor styling influences on that form. To me something more subtle like the jeep aftermarket unit or many of the others out there could have been used.

Lets face it Poor Design is Poor Design whether from Porsche or Not.

 

Here is another fine tire carrier... <img src="http://www.elvisswift.com/Cayenne/tirecarrier.jpg" alt=" - " />

 

that just says "here's my ****ing spare"

 

Hey..... wait a minute... what's that sittin' on top of the tire???