Cayenne and P.D.E. (very long)
02-03-2003, 07:14 PM
#31
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I actually wasn't calling 928's 'turds' I was saying that some people are so phobic of anything other than something from Porsche that they bury their heads in the sand, don't do their research, and blindly buy Porsche no matter what Porsche might be serving them.
As for on track performance, I'll let my driving skills speak for themselves. The only 3 cars I had trouble with on the track this last year were Z06 vettes, 996TT's, and a RUF 996 GT3. I'm in the under 2 minute club too.
To my knowledge there are no 944,951 or 928's in that club on that track. (Heartland Park).
Brent,
I'll pass the pics and link on and give you his response...
As for on track performance, I'll let my driving skills speak for themselves. The only 3 cars I had trouble with on the track this last year were Z06 vettes, 996TT's, and a RUF 996 GT3. I'm in the under 2 minute club too.
To my knowledge there are no 944,951 or 928's in that club on that track. (Heartland Park).Brent,
I'll pass the pics and link on and give you his response...
02-03-2003, 10:25 PM
#32
Intermediate
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: CT
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Robert,
First I doubt many people know about any reliability history of 928's. Give me some statistical data about 928 reliability instead of your clever remarks. Second, this is my second 928 and other than maint. items they have been reliable. When I purchased my Boxster in September of 1998 the only thing I heard about was blown engines and I drove thinking "when is this going to happen to me". Its the only Porsche I have driven that I had doubts about its reliability and that includes the 16 year old 928.
First I doubt many people know about any reliability history of 928's. Give me some statistical data about 928 reliability instead of your clever remarks. Second, this is my second 928 and other than maint. items they have been reliable. When I purchased my Boxster in September of 1998 the only thing I heard about was blown engines and I drove thinking "when is this going to happen to me". Its the only Porsche I have driven that I had doubts about its reliability and that includes the 16 year old 928.
02-03-2003, 10:48 PM
#33
Pro
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Milton, MA
Posts: 579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
</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 Ken2KS:
<strong>In the few days that we've owned the FX45 we've had neighbors come over to visit to check out the car, people stop us at the grocery store and elsewhere to inquire about it, several "thumbs up" from other drivers, etc. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Hey, we're in...We get <img border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" title="" src="graemlins/bigok.gif" /> in the allroad all the time.
<strong>In the few days that we've owned the FX45 we've had neighbors come over to visit to check out the car, people stop us at the grocery store and elsewhere to inquire about it, several "thumbs up" from other drivers, etc. </strong></font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">Hey, we're in...We get <img border="0" alt="[thumbsup]" title="" src="graemlins/bigok.gif" /> in the allroad all the time.
02-04-2003, 01:33 AM
#35
Nordschleife Master
Holy cow those G pics in the Moab are pretty damn cool!!! Nice offroadin'!
Just to chime in on the 951/986/928 track day thing:
If the 951 runs some decent chips to minimize turbolag and has maybe a total of $3000 in chip/turbo/exhaust/tire mods, it will wipe the floor with any near stock 928 or 986. And this is a car not exceeding $10,000 USD.
The Boxster does handle like a train on rails, but you really do need an "S" to get that extra "oomph" on the track. How much do they go for? $30,000?
The 928GTS is a nice car, but these are still expensive to upkeep as mentioned above in this thread, and they are quite heavy. Although the torque is simply awsome. A good example runs in between the cost of a 944 Turbo and a Boxster S. And then you still need to do some $$$ in mods to make it track friendly.
Lasty, a driver on a track suited to a Boxster will not get as good a lap time in a 951 or 928. A 928 WILL annhiliate a 951 or Boxster on a track with long straights and sweeping curves.
But it is suited to the driver, jsut as much as the car and track and conditions.
What the hell is my point? Stop ragging on otehr P car owners. Whether it be a 928, Cayenne, or even a 924, they are all PORSCHES, maybe some are better suited to some people, but they are all great cars, even if you don't like a certain model. (Which probably means you have enough money to afford a more expensive model, with others cannot afford.) There are many circumstances which lead to why someone buys a certain car, so you can poke fun at 924s, but remember where those awsome 968 Turbo RSs came from, yep, that el-cheapo 924.
Who knows what will come of the Cayenne. Maybe a Paris-Dakar winner???
hint hint to Porsche GmBH!
Just to chime in on the 951/986/928 track day thing:
If the 951 runs some decent chips to minimize turbolag and has maybe a total of $3000 in chip/turbo/exhaust/tire mods, it will wipe the floor with any near stock 928 or 986. And this is a car not exceeding $10,000 USD.
The Boxster does handle like a train on rails, but you really do need an "S" to get that extra "oomph" on the track. How much do they go for? $30,000?
The 928GTS is a nice car, but these are still expensive to upkeep as mentioned above in this thread, and they are quite heavy. Although the torque is simply awsome. A good example runs in between the cost of a 944 Turbo and a Boxster S. And then you still need to do some $$$ in mods to make it track friendly.
Lasty, a driver on a track suited to a Boxster will not get as good a lap time in a 951 or 928. A 928 WILL annhiliate a 951 or Boxster on a track with long straights and sweeping curves.
But it is suited to the driver, jsut as much as the car and track and conditions.
What the hell is my point? Stop ragging on otehr P car owners. Whether it be a 928, Cayenne, or even a 924, they are all PORSCHES, maybe some are better suited to some people, but they are all great cars, even if you don't like a certain model. (Which probably means you have enough money to afford a more expensive model, with others cannot afford.) There are many circumstances which lead to why someone buys a certain car, so you can poke fun at 924s, but remember where those awsome 968 Turbo RSs came from, yep, that el-cheapo 924.
Who knows what will come of the Cayenne. Maybe a Paris-Dakar winner???
hint hint to Porsche GmBH!
02-04-2003, 09:05 AM
#36
Burning Brakes
Thanks for the comments Rich <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
My 951 had a mass flow conversion, chips, exhaust, coil overs, seat, blah blah blah. In that form, it was without a doubt faster than any Boxster S I encountered. The only cars getting away from it at Road America were 996TT's. Back when the car had stock power the S was a little quicker, though I could still beat it down a long straight. My 928 is not as fast as that car was when modified and, short of a supercharger or stroker motor, it wont be. So the S guys will probably beat me around tight courses. Of course I wasn't claiming that the 928 was a better track car. It CAN be vey competitive, but most are not. Besides the Boxster should be better, for twice the investement and running a decade or more newer design, it had better be.
Back to the FX45 and Cayenne. I am sure the FX is a good vehicle, maybe even great in some peoples opinions. When it comes to the whole package though the Porsche will be the most capable. That invariably makes it more expensive. If you don't need or want the off-road capabilities, heck, the FX is a better car. If you want that, more towing cpacity, and some off-road capability, the Cayenne will be the better choice. There are some obvious advantages held by the Cayenne, but the FX will be 3-4 tenths of a second quicker to 60, guess that makes it better
There is a good reason why there are a bunch of manufacturers out there. Everybody has a different set of needs and wants. The FX doesn't do it for me, the Cayenne does. If the FX fits your demographic better, hey, more power to ya! But to say it is a better vehicle is crazy talk.
My 951 had a mass flow conversion, chips, exhaust, coil overs, seat, blah blah blah. In that form, it was without a doubt faster than any Boxster S I encountered. The only cars getting away from it at Road America were 996TT's. Back when the car had stock power the S was a little quicker, though I could still beat it down a long straight. My 928 is not as fast as that car was when modified and, short of a supercharger or stroker motor, it wont be. So the S guys will probably beat me around tight courses. Of course I wasn't claiming that the 928 was a better track car. It CAN be vey competitive, but most are not. Besides the Boxster should be better, for twice the investement and running a decade or more newer design, it had better be.
Back to the FX45 and Cayenne. I am sure the FX is a good vehicle, maybe even great in some peoples opinions. When it comes to the whole package though the Porsche will be the most capable. That invariably makes it more expensive. If you don't need or want the off-road capabilities, heck, the FX is a better car. If you want that, more towing cpacity, and some off-road capability, the Cayenne will be the better choice. There are some obvious advantages held by the Cayenne, but the FX will be 3-4 tenths of a second quicker to 60, guess that makes it better
There is a good reason why there are a bunch of manufacturers out there. Everybody has a different set of needs and wants. The FX doesn't do it for me, the Cayenne does. If the FX fits your demographic better, hey, more power to ya! But to say it is a better vehicle is crazy talk.
02-04-2003, 10:39 AM
#38
Burning Brakes
Mike, I never timed my laps at RA. I can tell you what I ran at BIR (1:59) but, that probably isn't much help.
I think I would go for a Turbo S and run E class. They seem to be pretty competitive. As you probably know the S has bigger "S4" brakes and the bigger turbo with a better top end pull.
Before I sold my '86 I took the engine mods off, back to stock chips, it felt really slow
If I wanted to run "F" I would go with a 944S2, the big brakes were an option (M030) on that car, giving it an edge. Better low end vs a turbo too. Good Luck
I think I would go for a Turbo S and run E class. They seem to be pretty competitive. As you probably know the S has bigger "S4" brakes and the bigger turbo with a better top end pull.
Before I sold my '86 I took the engine mods off, back to stock chips, it felt really slow
If I wanted to run "F" I would go with a 944S2, the big brakes were an option (M030) on that car, giving it an edge. Better low end vs a turbo too. Good Luck
02-04-2003, 11:07 AM
#39
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Brent:
First the FX45 is .9 of a second faster 0-60 than the Cayenne S, 6.3 vs. 7.2 seconds, so I stand by my statement that the FX45 is the "performance" car for on-road driving. I will certainly concede that the Cayenne has better off-road potential than the FX45, but I don't think it is going to match up to the G-wagen or a Jeep. Here's the response from my off-road guru friend to your pictures:
"Nice pics! The trail report from the <a href="http://www.clubwagen.com" target="_blank">www.clubwagen.com</a> site had a particularly nice one of some old dude stacking rocks so his buddy won't
scuff his MB. Pretty funny! I'm not sure what they are calling Double
Whammy, but they bypassed the real Double Whammy. Maybe they *thought* they did it, but they didn't. There is a bypass, we used it, and they used it too.
Those trucks must be pretty tough, looks like the entire weight of the rear end of the silver one was supported by the back bumper going over the Crack.
I'll have to stand by my statement that a Cayenne doesn't make it without body damage. I hope this guy appreciates the fact that his G-wagen is much more capable off road than a Cayenne, since the latter doesn't have the approach and departure angles of the G-wagen, nor does it have the tire size, suspension travel or the locked front end.
BTW, funny how these idiots look down their noses at Jeepers, kinda like Land Rover owners that way. I guess you gotta justify spending all that coin somehow. But it's good to see the old boys out there using 'em!"
Porsche used to equal Performance. Performance on the track and performance on-road. Now Porsche is the off-road performance company? Hmmm maybe that will lead to interesting ads:
Cue Patrick Stewart
The all new 996 C4S for 2004! This all new Carrera model sports a new 4.6 liter Cummins-inspired diesel (optional twin turbo diesel available) that produces over 100 ft/lbs of torque more than last years model to provide for ample towing capacity. Wait, there's more. Thanks to new entry and departure angles (more than 5 degrees better than last year) derived from the Porsche Cayenne the C4S is a real off-road champ. Whether it is rock crawling, hill climbing or splashing through your favorite stream the new C4S will pull you through in style. Several safety enhancements have been made as well. Previously dangerous sub 5 second 0-60 times are gone thanks to cast iron welded towing support cross members that allow the C4S to double its towing capacity from previous years. Slippery aerodynamics are broken up to help keep vehicle speeds down to a more safer level through the inclusion of an all-new 3 speed steel cable winch mounted on the new front fascia. The all new C4S, going where no Porsche has gone before...
First the FX45 is .9 of a second faster 0-60 than the Cayenne S, 6.3 vs. 7.2 seconds, so I stand by my statement that the FX45 is the "performance" car for on-road driving. I will certainly concede that the Cayenne has better off-road potential than the FX45, but I don't think it is going to match up to the G-wagen or a Jeep. Here's the response from my off-road guru friend to your pictures:
"Nice pics! The trail report from the <a href="http://www.clubwagen.com" target="_blank">www.clubwagen.com</a> site had a particularly nice one of some old dude stacking rocks so his buddy won't
scuff his MB. Pretty funny! I'm not sure what they are calling Double
Whammy, but they bypassed the real Double Whammy. Maybe they *thought* they did it, but they didn't. There is a bypass, we used it, and they used it too.
Those trucks must be pretty tough, looks like the entire weight of the rear end of the silver one was supported by the back bumper going over the Crack.
I'll have to stand by my statement that a Cayenne doesn't make it without body damage. I hope this guy appreciates the fact that his G-wagen is much more capable off road than a Cayenne, since the latter doesn't have the approach and departure angles of the G-wagen, nor does it have the tire size, suspension travel or the locked front end.
BTW, funny how these idiots look down their noses at Jeepers, kinda like Land Rover owners that way. I guess you gotta justify spending all that coin somehow. But it's good to see the old boys out there using 'em!"
Porsche used to equal Performance. Performance on the track and performance on-road. Now Porsche is the off-road performance company? Hmmm maybe that will lead to interesting ads:
Cue Patrick Stewart
The all new 996 C4S for 2004! This all new Carrera model sports a new 4.6 liter Cummins-inspired diesel (optional twin turbo diesel available) that produces over 100 ft/lbs of torque more than last years model to provide for ample towing capacity. Wait, there's more. Thanks to new entry and departure angles (more than 5 degrees better than last year) derived from the Porsche Cayenne the C4S is a real off-road champ. Whether it is rock crawling, hill climbing or splashing through your favorite stream the new C4S will pull you through in style. Several safety enhancements have been made as well. Previously dangerous sub 5 second 0-60 times are gone thanks to cast iron welded towing support cross members that allow the C4S to double its towing capacity from previous years. Slippery aerodynamics are broken up to help keep vehicle speeds down to a more safer level through the inclusion of an all-new 3 speed steel cable winch mounted on the new front fascia. The all new C4S, going where no Porsche has gone before...
02-04-2003, 11:43 AM
#40
Nordschleife Master
Ken: Porsche used to equal performance huh? So the new GT2 and 996TT must be real slow dogs eh?
Then why do you own a newer car, if you say the old ones performed better?
Also, did you know Porsche's all wheel drive was developed for off-road use in the Paris-Dakar 1-2 winning (1985 or 86?) Porsche 959's!! Back when Ferry was making making 356s, 99% of local Gmund roads were gravel!
As far as off-roading the p-fish, I'm sure the air-supoorted adjustable suspension model will have ample ground clearance for any aplication. But, let's stop specualting right now, and wait for the real world results!!!!
also: 0-60 times from magazines don't mean squat. They are always driver, temperature, and road surface dependant. They are never consistant, and should never be taken as a serious measure of performance. A more precise and effective way to measure performance is plugging Horsepower, Torque, Weight, Cd, Tire Size, and Gear Ratios into a formula.
I don't want to read any more biased praise or bashing until the car has proven itself a winner or loser in the field.
Then why do you own a newer car, if you say the old ones performed better?
Also, did you know Porsche's all wheel drive was developed for off-road use in the Paris-Dakar 1-2 winning (1985 or 86?) Porsche 959's!! Back when Ferry was making making 356s, 99% of local Gmund roads were gravel!
As far as off-roading the p-fish, I'm sure the air-supoorted adjustable suspension model will have ample ground clearance for any aplication. But, let's stop specualting right now, and wait for the real world results!!!!
also: 0-60 times from magazines don't mean squat. They are always driver, temperature, and road surface dependant. They are never consistant, and should never be taken as a serious measure of performance. A more precise and effective way to measure performance is plugging Horsepower, Torque, Weight, Cd, Tire Size, and Gear Ratios into a formula.
I don't want to read any more biased praise or bashing until the car has proven itself a winner or loser in the field.
02-04-2003, 12:23 PM
#41
User
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Kentucky/indiana
Posts: 99
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of us should know that porche 0-60 times are understated from the factory anyway.
Ken2ks.....A G-wagen is SUPPOSED to be more capable off road than a Cayenne. Have you driven a G-wagen? It is definately a 30 min ride around town max.
It's hard for me to fathom your obvious enthusiasm for a nissan product here on a Porsche board. What's next? A comparison of the Subaru outback and Cayenne?
Peace
PS
Ken2ks.....A G-wagen is SUPPOSED to be more capable off road than a Cayenne. Have you driven a G-wagen? It is definately a 30 min ride around town max.
It's hard for me to fathom your obvious enthusiasm for a nissan product here on a Porsche board. What's next? A comparison of the Subaru outback and Cayenne?
Peace
PS
02-04-2003, 12:32 PM
#42
Burning Brakes
Ken you are using Porsches "conservative" factory number , 7.2 against a real world magazine test of 6.3. It wont hold up once it is actually tested. The gap will be half a second or less. So yep, yours is still faster.
Rich, I have to disagree with a formula. check C&D, they do a superb job of correcting numbers and always get the best of the car mags. They publish as close to "real" numbers as I have seen.
The old dude was stacking rocks for his own truck, look again, I took a different line and did not use those rocks. If you were driving a $130k truck around out there, you might stack some rocks too <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Obviously the G is far more capable than the Cayenne. I still think you are selling it well short of its capabilities.
BTW, we look down on Land Rovers too <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> The justification for the G is simple. I drove my truck 1500 miles each way, in MB comfort, and ran the trails just as it was. Nothing breaks, it is quiet, comfortable and supremely capable. NOTHING else out there posesses those qualities.
Rich, I have to disagree with a formula. check C&D, they do a superb job of correcting numbers and always get the best of the car mags. They publish as close to "real" numbers as I have seen.
The old dude was stacking rocks for his own truck, look again, I took a different line and did not use those rocks. If you were driving a $130k truck around out there, you might stack some rocks too <img border="0" title="" alt="[Wink]" src="wink.gif" />
Obviously the G is far more capable than the Cayenne. I still think you are selling it well short of its capabilities.
BTW, we look down on Land Rovers too <img border="0" title="" alt="[Eek!]" src="eek.gif" /> The justification for the G is simple. I drove my truck 1500 miles each way, in MB comfort, and ran the trails just as it was. Nothing breaks, it is quiet, comfortable and supremely capable. NOTHING else out there posesses those qualities.
02-04-2003, 12:58 PM
#43
Burning Brakes
""Have you driven a G-wagen? It is definately a 30 min ride around town max.""
Here is a pic of the so called 30 min ride, looks pretty rough huh? <img src="http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/newgint.jpg" alt=" - " />
Here is a pic of the so called 30 min ride, looks pretty rough huh? <img src="http://boards.rennlist.com/upload/newgint.jpg" alt=" - " />
02-04-2003, 01:09 PM
#44
Addict
Rennlist Member
Rennlist Member
</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 Rich Sandor: I don't want to read any more biased praise or bashing until the car has proven itself a winner or loser in the field.</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="Verdana,Tahoma,Arial,Helvetica,Geneva">That would kill 80% of what I have read since this forum's inception. Not a bad idea.
However, we could make up for it by starting forums for everyone's preferred marques - Infiniti, Honda, MB, Jeep, et. al.
However, we could make up for it by starting forums for everyone's preferred marques - Infiniti, Honda, MB, Jeep, et. al.
02-04-2003, 01:45 PM
#45
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rich-bury-my-head-in-the-Sandor,
Last time I checked it was a free country where I can freely post as long as it doesn't violate a rule established by the admins of this forum. Biased praise or bashing? Come on, what post here ISN'T biased in some fashion? Look back among the threads and I've asked on more than one occasion for some head to head testing between the Cayenne and other vehicles. So far, Porsche hasn't provided it so hopefully we'll get some magazine to do a decent comparative review. Don't take things so personally.
For example, Brent might not like the look of the FX, and I can respect that. Brent also loves the off-road capabilities of his G-wagen, and I respect that too. What I haven't heard from Brent yet is why either he or I should buy a Cayenne. For me the equation came down to which car has better on-road performance, more luxury features, and more advanced technology in the overall package and I happen to like the looks of the FX over the Cayenne so that sealed it. For Brent, he seems to be looking for good off-road performance. He has that already in his G-wagen, and from the pic I'd say he's got some luxury to go with it, so I'm confused as to why he would even want a Cayenne unless he's just wanting to ditch the G-wagen, get the Cayenne and pocket the $$ difference.
I'm still struggling with who the target market is supposed to be for the Cayenne. It can't be people who want more on-road performance because they could get that from the FX for less. It can't be people who want more luxury and technology options because again, you can get that from the FX for less. I find it hard to believe that the Cayenne would be marketed to serious off-road types, because they'd buy a Jeep Rubicon for less or maybe a G-wagen for more.
So that sorta leaves this middle road niche market of someone who just has to have a Porsche badge on their car, wants adequate on-road performance with "some" ability to go off-road. How many people fit into that category? The only person I know who had a Cayenne on order just cancelled their order for an FX, in their own words they weren't sold on the "looks" of the Cayenne, and when they compared options the FX had the Cayenne beat and for less $$$. In other words they reached the same conclusion we had reached after doing the research.
Granted you might not like the look of the FX and buy something based on looks, lots of people do that, just look at most Ferrari owners.
It's just very disappointing to me that Porsche didn't build the Cayenne to be the "tops" in something as opposed to above average on road to above average to good off-road. If the Cayenne was the top performing on-road SUV then I might give it a second look, or if I was in search of a good off-road vehicle it would need to have the capabilities of a Jeep or G-wagen to make me give it a second look. It just doesn't have either because too many bean counters were involved in making it something for which I doubt there will be much of a market.
I understand the negative reactions by Porsche enthusiasts to the Cayenne initially but I was among the crowd saying "let's wait and see how it compares". Well, the Cayenne has been weighed, measured and found wanting, or whatever that phrase is. If in fact the Cayenne is only sold to people looking for "snob" appeal ala "gee muffy I've got a porch-a suv, pass me the cappacino" then it is going to reflect negatively on the Porsche brand image as a whole.
As a Porsche owner of a different model, I'm not real enthused about something that may negatively impact the company as a whole. Of course, I could be wrong, the Cayenne might just be the second coming of Porsche and sell like hot cakes to every Tom, Dick and Harriet that has lots of cash sitting around from their gains in the market to plunk down on the latest adequately badged Porsche SUV.
Until we know the ultimate outcome I'm afraid all we are left with are "biased" statements.
BTW, did no one find my Patrick Stewart C4S commercial funny??? I thought it was a hoot!
Last time I checked it was a free country where I can freely post as long as it doesn't violate a rule established by the admins of this forum. Biased praise or bashing? Come on, what post here ISN'T biased in some fashion? Look back among the threads and I've asked on more than one occasion for some head to head testing between the Cayenne and other vehicles. So far, Porsche hasn't provided it so hopefully we'll get some magazine to do a decent comparative review. Don't take things so personally.
For example, Brent might not like the look of the FX, and I can respect that. Brent also loves the off-road capabilities of his G-wagen, and I respect that too. What I haven't heard from Brent yet is why either he or I should buy a Cayenne. For me the equation came down to which car has better on-road performance, more luxury features, and more advanced technology in the overall package and I happen to like the looks of the FX over the Cayenne so that sealed it. For Brent, he seems to be looking for good off-road performance. He has that already in his G-wagen, and from the pic I'd say he's got some luxury to go with it, so I'm confused as to why he would even want a Cayenne unless he's just wanting to ditch the G-wagen, get the Cayenne and pocket the $$ difference.
I'm still struggling with who the target market is supposed to be for the Cayenne. It can't be people who want more on-road performance because they could get that from the FX for less. It can't be people who want more luxury and technology options because again, you can get that from the FX for less. I find it hard to believe that the Cayenne would be marketed to serious off-road types, because they'd buy a Jeep Rubicon for less or maybe a G-wagen for more.
So that sorta leaves this middle road niche market of someone who just has to have a Porsche badge on their car, wants adequate on-road performance with "some" ability to go off-road. How many people fit into that category? The only person I know who had a Cayenne on order just cancelled their order for an FX, in their own words they weren't sold on the "looks" of the Cayenne, and when they compared options the FX had the Cayenne beat and for less $$$. In other words they reached the same conclusion we had reached after doing the research.
Granted you might not like the look of the FX and buy something based on looks, lots of people do that, just look at most Ferrari owners.
It's just very disappointing to me that Porsche didn't build the Cayenne to be the "tops" in something as opposed to above average on road to above average to good off-road. If the Cayenne was the top performing on-road SUV then I might give it a second look, or if I was in search of a good off-road vehicle it would need to have the capabilities of a Jeep or G-wagen to make me give it a second look. It just doesn't have either because too many bean counters were involved in making it something for which I doubt there will be much of a market.
I understand the negative reactions by Porsche enthusiasts to the Cayenne initially but I was among the crowd saying "let's wait and see how it compares". Well, the Cayenne has been weighed, measured and found wanting, or whatever that phrase is. If in fact the Cayenne is only sold to people looking for "snob" appeal ala "gee muffy I've got a porch-a suv, pass me the cappacino" then it is going to reflect negatively on the Porsche brand image as a whole.
As a Porsche owner of a different model, I'm not real enthused about something that may negatively impact the company as a whole. Of course, I could be wrong, the Cayenne might just be the second coming of Porsche and sell like hot cakes to every Tom, Dick and Harriet that has lots of cash sitting around from their gains in the market to plunk down on the latest adequately badged Porsche SUV.
Until we know the ultimate outcome I'm afraid all we are left with are "biased" statements.
BTW, did no one find my Patrick Stewart C4S commercial funny??? I thought it was a hoot!