Range Rover Sport vs. Cayenne - Why did u buy Cayenne?
 

Ok, I know FOR SURE, everyone here is biased for Cayenne... and I know for sure it's a better performing SUV. However, for anyone who bought an 08 or 09, and compared it to RR Sport, what made you pick they Cayenne?

For me, both perform better than 90% of boat feeling SUVs, while Cayenne is faster (V8 and Turbo), both have poor gas milage, enough room for what I need, and will do the job. I definitely like the RR looks over Cayenne, with better interior (subjective ofcourse), and RR is better offroad (long-term plan).

Lastly, I know RR has some reliability issues, but Cayenne isn't perfect either, and I plan to get some extended warranty and that's take into account on purchasing either.

Any insight would be great. Thanks

I looked at both in 2010 and ended up withe the Cayenne GTS. This comparison says pretty much everything that I have to say about the differences.

In terms of off road, with 21" and 20" wheels standard for the GTS and RRS respectively, neither is set up particularly well and in any case neither will compete with a full sized RR. With appropriate wheels & tyres the RRS terrain response system will help inexperienced off-roaders a lot but I think that in experienced hands the Cayenne is also pretty competent off-road.

I had an '09 GTS Manual and am currently driving an '08 RRS Supercharged. I traded the GTS for the RRS as a new job resulted in driving in heavy traffic and what would have been a big mileage penalty (leased), I needed more offroad capability too - even though the GTS had ATs.

The RRS has been very very reliable, much more so than the GTS was in the two years I had it. As I said it also is much better offroad in terms of traction climbing grassy hills and muddy roads. The GTS is in another class in terms of handling and fun to drive - no comparison. The suspension is also better in everyway, even offroad (PASM). It also has more front head room, rear leg room, and a better nav-entertainment (hard to believe I know).

The GTS with AT tires has way more grip than the RRS with summer tires.

Here is a link to both with some offroad thrown in - Cayenne: http://www.flickr.com/photos/2058658...7624134675338/

Why did I buy my Cayenne?

It's a 520 horsepower Porsche V8 turbo.

And, I got a hat.

Old RRS is a cramped, heavy, BOF, ill handling gas hog.

New one a different story.

The clips below show some of the Cayennes offroad abilities which I would not consider insubstantial in a primarily road going vehicle.

I never chose the Cayenne, the Cayenne chose me.

After test driving a few Cayennes and RRs, I monitored the Cayenne and LR forums before making my choice. After reading posts on RR/LR forums for a few weeks, buying a CTT was a no-brainer.

In 2008 I looked hard at every SUV that I could find including Range Rover. I have CTT and none of the others came close on drivability (power and handling). Towing limits were the highest and the Cayenne felt the most compact. I much preferred the Cayenne interior especially the look and feel of the dash (I have all leather option). After 100,000 miles I have pretty pleased with reliability of Cayenne. Only mission critical failure was coolant manifold failure and Porsche picked up quite a bit of the cost even though it was out of warrantee. I have put two sets of brakes and the normal maintenance on the car so the extended warrantee really would not have come into play for me.
The dealer in Bellevue is better for Porsche than for Range Rover as well. I plan to drive this one for 4-5 more years and provided they improve the current rear end look would consider buying one again.

Would not like to be known as an RR driver and I am from the UK

^^^This!

I am not biased - I have both. Use these for our daily drivers - mine is an '08 RRS S/C and wife's is a '08 Cayenne S.

What do you want to know? I also bought extended warranties on both. Cayenne has been in shop more than RR.

My RRS is fully built to go offroad [snorkel, winch, rock rails, etc.].

Feel free to ask questions - not sure how to respond. Probably depends on what you like and dislike. Cayenne definitely gets better gas mileage ...

someone commented on the '14 model - I think that is ugly. I LIKE the boxy look. Then again, I like the X53 bodystyle for the X5's (particularly the '03-06's). Also had a X5 4.8i (2009) for 3 years as well if you were considering that one.

p.s. - I am a porschephile as well ... so, for me to pass over a CTT - should say a lot ... although, doesn't hurt to have a p-car turbo already in garage, hehe.

Cayenne comes with a V6. Range Rover Sports are only V8s

Really? How does this matter? You want a V8 Cayenne, buy one. Not like it ONLY comes with a V6.

So it sounds like you bought this for a different purpose and not really a true comparison.

My experience w/ the RR was utter crap i'm afraid. When it came down to it, it was b/w a Cayenne and X5.

However, the New RR looks very promising. From what I've seen online, I like the interior better than my 11 Cayenne.

Yo Ad, 1 of the best posts ever!

The brand new RRS is a worthy adversary to the cayenne.

Is it though? 3 secs on a 60 second lap is a lot of ground to make up.

http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-video/v...-cayenne-turbo

Care to point out how and where?:thumbup:

Watch/Read like 6 more reviews. I'm a pig loyalist but the news RRS is a worthy competitor.

its the curry

Same driver as the CTT vs C4S you posted. Our MD has one and it really is still a boat compared to the Cayenne.

For the new RR Sport (2014 model), the available engines are Supercharged V6 and Supercharged V8.

https://newrangeroversport.landrover...plore/overview

Tata :bigbye:

So how about you post these reviews?

RR's have always had a nice look -- outside and interior. Have test driven them in the past, and while I wanted to like them, they handled like a 1970 Pontiac Bonneville -- too much leaning, and undersized brakes. That may have all changed, probably has, but I view the purchase of one as a risky proposition:
1) Generally have not done well in reliability rankings, or depreciation.
2) Ownership has been a hot potato proposition in the past with Ford, BMW, and now Tata Motors.
3) Not sure about their long financial viability, and adequate funding of R&D. Porsche spends plenty on R&D -- develops / improves systems -- then rolls them out in multiple models, thereby leveraging every R&D Euro. We get the benefit of that leverage in both reliability, and cost. Very brilliant strategy and organizational structure that makes it all work.

For me, I wanted a luxury / sporty SUV with AWD and a manual transmission.
For the 2014 MY, I believe the Porsche Cayenne is the only choice here in the USA.

Not really. I have my fully built off-road fun car as well. Just wanted a daily driver that I could take off roads with my kids at times if I ever chose to. I'd like to get them involved with MOAB, Rubicon trail, etc. The RRS can definitely handle it.

Personally, not a big fan of the redesign regarding the RRS. I know it is faster, lighter, interior is stepped up to the big brother RR, etc. But, weight savings might not be 800 lbs as claimed. When they weighed the RR [2013 redesign claiming similar weight loss) - it was only around 450-500 lbs. Still, a lot of weight lost.

I avg. 13.3 mpg with my RRS [using my calculator]. I BARELY see a 300 mile range when I fill up - maybe around 300-310 on a good day. I just filled up today and saw a range of 270. I would suspect the newer ones have slightly better gas mileage - might be around 14-15 mpg on avg., lol. I know when I filled up my wife's cayenne S this past weekend - it was substantially larger range (close to 500 if not over). The Cayenne S gets much better gas mileage.

The Cayenne S's problems - at least we've seen is mostly electrical gremlins. Climate control [rear] went out and had to be replaced. Rear window wiper motor had to be replaced ... speakers crackling, etc. Nothing mechanical noteworthy.

The RRS 'FEELS' faster b/c of the torque/supercharger kicking in - but, in reality, cayenne S is much quicker. More than a second quicker 0-60. The Cayenne S has a much better exhaust sound - hand's down. Sounds great stock [starting up, idling, and accelerating]. RRS - pretty much, non-existent sounds. The RRS has std. an auxiliary port ... making it easier to connect an ipod/iphone. Cayenne S - nothing. Navigation/interior on RRS - pretty lame - with the green lighting ... reminding you of an early '80's vehicle [not one that cost close to $80K new]. Cayenne S - much better interior comparatively speaking.

Cayenne S - seats are not as comfortable as RRS, at least to me. Visibility in RRS is much better than Cayenne S. If you want to upgrade the stereo [new head unit, etc] in the RRS - you can pretty much forget it without doing some major work. With RRS - you cannot put the 2010+ LED headlights as a retrofit - way too much work. You CAN put the 2010+ LED rear taillights - plug and play. If you add a $10 resistor to each side - no issues with fast blinking.

The BIGGEST cost that 'could' occur is the air suspension on the RRS. You are talking around $10K+. HOWEVER, most people simply go to a coil/spring system at that point and completely remove air suspension. I bought warranty from dealership to cover the air suspension specifically. Storage - RRS, at least to me, appears to have much more trunk space - but, it simply might be an illusion because of the boxiness. The mini fridge under the center armrest is kind of neat - but, never use it.

Maintenance wise - I would say Cayenne is slightly cheaper to maintain. RRS - full brake kit (rotors, sensors, pads, etc.) - around $900 [no labor - just parts if ordering online]. Cayenne S - around $700 [no labor - just parts]. I think with Cayenne S - you can even get to the $400-500 range.

Driving aggressively - you can definitely feel weight of RRS if you push it around turns [likes to understeer]. However, no real body roll though. Cayenne S - feels more agile and tossable. But, the RRS is very easy to drive in city traffic - you do not feel the weight of it at all [surprisingly]. It is very easy to park, etc. The 2009 RRS has the clear lights on rear tail [non-LED though] vs. the yellow ones on 2008 and earlier.

The RRS makes a lot of squeaks when driving -- air suspension is a big factor in that. You hear it filling up, hissing out, etc. Cayenne makes much less sound. Both cars are almost identical to insure in price. Both cars use the flip-out key switch. The Cayenne S has better range with its homelink system vs. the RRS. Baby seats in rear - seems to be about same size interior-wise. We have 2 recaro prosports in each.

Reason I did not go with the Cayenne Turbo or the GTS - could not really justify having 2 cayenne's with only difference being engine primarily. If you look at used - I would stick with 2008+ Cayenne's or 2007+ RRS's [unless you step up to the redesigned 2010 model]. Both are going to be about the same price used though for a well-taken care of/documented vehicle [middle-high 30's depending on mileage, options, etc.].

you will NEVER take a rangy sport up MOAB period, same as I would not take my TT. I would take a beater and so would you for the same reasons. Best bet for that would be a a spare 04/05 TT with big rubber or a purpose built truck.

umm, because I did not want a Ford.

Thanks for all the input, not surprisingly the comments are biased! :) I just wanted to know when people bought their cars if they considered RR and if so, why they didn't get one?

While researching, I am finding that Cayenne seems to have even a HIGHER depreciation than RR? That's totally shocking to me. Now, my follow-up question is, looking specifically at 2009 Cayenne S models, what are the biggest reliability issues with that model to watchout for?

Thanks

Be careful on your depreciation calculations. Since all options on a Cayenne are "al la carte" they are not priced the same. One Cayenne S could be tens of thousands more than another new.

no, I wanted a V6. it's a bit easier on gas

You're a little behind. Not a Ford.

I wouldn't worry about Tata owning them. Tata is a very large and prosperous conglomerate. Jaguar and Land Rover's scalability across new models with this latest generation is helping them out a lot too.

The weight loss was ~800lbs. only when optioned similarly to its predecessor. Start adding in the pano roof and full executive package and the weight gain diminishes.

You're not taking into account the previous-gen RRS' relatively small fuel tank too.

Who's been doing this on any recent RRS? Most of the time people had leaks in the air bags (as with almost any luxury car with an air suspension from the past decade) and then didn't notice it, leading to compressor failure. Haven't heard of any $10k repairs. Although I'm glad the '14 model has a revised system, finally brought it up the new generation.

It's worth noting a Cayenne with air suspension is not immune to this either.

All this to say, a Cayenne Turbo is still going to be dynamically superior to the new '14 RRS Supercharged. However, the new RRS will have a 3rd row of seats, more cargo room, and a more traditional interior that will attract its fans. I love my CTT but I may move over just for the sake of change in a year or two. :thumbup:

Most accounts from owners here seem to suggest just the opposite.

My own experience with a 5200lb VR6 Eurovan (same basic 24v VR6) and my CTT would suggest the same.

frankly in my eyes I dont compare the new RRS vs the CTT. I compare it to the C GTS.

I interested in driving the new RRS. Looks are definately there for me but will have to see about the driving dynamics.


Separately the New range rover (the big one) is VERY nice and comfy. I cant believe my frd paid like $140k!

Cool video

Ok, sorry, I read that backwards. My bad!

Dont get me wrong, I prefer the cayenne all day long. But the RRS is the closest thing out there to a real competitor.

So I got to test drive a 2009 Cayenne S and then a 2010 RRS HSE (V8). Here's my finding based on short test drive.

- Handling
Cayenne had less body roll and overall felt lighter, but RRS wasn't a slouch either, it still felt almost like a Sedan and significantly better than any other SUV I've driven. So, Cayenne better, but not by much (I think PDCC would tip it further, but this car didn't have it).

- Performance
It was very hard to tell, Cayenne felt faster, and on paper it is, but again RRS was also fairly sporty. So, again Cayenne but not by much.

- Ride
Hands down, RRS! I guess it's a compromise with Cayenne handling. It just had a different thump around bumps, better isolation of cabin, and overall felt more like a luxurious ride than Cayenne. So, RRS by a big margin.

- Fit and finish
RRS again hands down. It literally looks and feels much more expensive, luxurious, and much nicer all around. Again, this was comparing it to a non full-leather Cayenne which I think only comes in TT. But, both cars are similar price range, so in the sense it's fair and RRS comes with more leather trim without extra options.

- Styling
This is subjective ofcourse, but I think as much as RRS has been known for its styling, Cayenne has been criticized for it. RRS wins this in my eyes.

- Room/cargo
Very hard to say, as I tested on two different weekends, I wish it was on the same lot. But they seem to be equal in terms of room both for passengers and cargo.

- Overall
Well, I think it basically comes down to what you care mostly about? Handling and performance, or ride, comfort, and styling. I am still torn, but leaning more towards RRS, specially since I have a 997 for performance and track driving, and RRS was quite sporty. Sitting down in the driver's seat in RRS just felt more special at the end. If I find a GTS at a good price, might consider one, but CS vs. RRS goes to RRS. Now, gotto find that perfect car, get an extended warranty and go from there! :)

Now go test drive a turbo!

Nice comparison. Did the cayenne have air suspension? Also keep in mind those are both last generation models.

and a Lexus

That's what I was thinking.

Second this, the latest generation for Porsche is night and day IMHO. I have driven both automatic and manual 2010 Cayenne GTS and comparing with the 2011+ generation, is a step back in time :). Do yourself a favor and drive a used 2011 Cayenne S that can be had starting at 55K nicely equipped: Premium Plus, etc. Even the 2013 Diesel is a lot more fun to drive than a 2010 GTS, here, I said it!

perhaps this is worth the wait:

"Autocar sources say the Range Rover Sport and Evoque will get RS designations, the supercharged V8 in the Sport RS getting cranked up to "at least" 542 horsepower..."

Will they get little bobble crowns on the dash is my question

+1

I am driving 2013 CS. I wish the side mirrors were bigger and there was a special place for glassess.

958 is surely a step above... i never could appreciate the prior cayenne models because of cheap interiors and just cheap overall feel when driving..

bought first 958 sight unseen and when it came i was just exuberant.. drove amazing.. the new chassis' they are making are just phenomenal..

i would buy a v6 958 over even a turbo S 957... have many friends with previous model cayenne's and besides the rear window opening up, i have yet to find something about the 957 i like better..

reliability, safety, amazing mileage, large tank, decent accel, amazing comfort, great technology, and lots of storage space... the 958 is just an all around winner.

Not in my budget and the rear end of the new gen looks incredibly fugly to me. It just looks unbalanced with strange curves here or there.

Also Cayenne has such a crazy depreciation that I rather wait. RR looks like a better bet anyways.

PS. U can't even imagine why Cayenne is offered with V6. Diesel, yes, but the V6 is seriously under powered.

V6 is fine for city driving.. the Cayenne's handling makes it still pretty fun and better than most SUVs. It's not like I plan on taking my V6 out to the tracks or anything..

This is rediculous. I have driven both and I agree the 958 chassis is great, but I would never trade it for the v6. I drive a 957 turbo btw

just a personal preference... i value the chassis and interior and technology more than that added HP.. because the chassis/interior/tech always come into play and the hp only comes into place occasionally when "you need it"..

again, a personal preference.. some people love driving 996turbo's but i would take a base 991 over that any day.. i bought a 997turbo... and in all honesty i wish i put that same money into a deposit on the 991GT3.. but too late now... maybe i'm a technology whore... i'm surely an amazing chassis whore... and the 958 chassis is just amazing.

I've had to apply for some govt supported welfare to easy the suffering I've had to undure while driving an "old" Cayenne Turbo. I can't believe that people used to pay real money to experience this type of torture.

Obviously they did not feed the free range cows the same quality of food since the the full leather interior is just torture despite it being "barb wire free scarless leather" The navigation and Bose sound system has been driving me crazy. How the **** did people survive with only 11 speakers?!!!!

I could go on but I don't think its appropriate to make you listen to how I've suffered with 12 forward gears with a.....dare I say it?....."transfer case"!!!!...instead of 8 all perfectly contained inside one transmission!

:bigbye:

haha, dont take it personal... it's a personal opinion.. FWIW your pics sold me on the cayenne to begin with... i was getting a 10' but local dealer was a dick to deal with... so i waited and ordered the 11'.

everyone has their preferences.. none of us are correct.. they are just preferences and opinions.,..

I'd just prefer to have a Porsche quicker than a Camary. The new and improved V6 only gets to 60 mph in a pathetic 7.4 seconds....which gets seriously SMOKED by a Camary V6:icon501:

Yeah Camry v6 is a 5.7 to 60 car and 14sec 1/4 mile. But it's a faaken Camry appliance. Don't care if it beats me. Would make me laugh. A lot of cars are faster than SUVs. The cayenne is about so much more than raw acceleration. With that said though. A turbo 957 with pdcc can be had for $40k which is a lot of car for the money.

camary? camery? camry?
I call it creamery.

Yep, the Cayenne is about more than acceleration, like towing, and luxury features, and fancy handling features. ALL of which can be had at a much higher level with an old ctt vs a new base V6 and for less money. Enough less that you could go buy something to tow with the savings!

If a Toyota driver can't spell or pronounce the P word then why should we get the Crampery right.

Isn't that 5.7s 0-60 Camry just as fast or faster than the 955 and 957 CS as well? It's just about as fast as the 958 CS, but who the hell would prefer to drive a Camry over any variant of Cayenne?

I love when guys bash the V6 and talk about speed and power. Reminds me of the guy with the big fat gold chain around his neck driving a convertible corvette. Yes, your car may be faster and has more power than most, but quit trying to over compensate for whatever else it is you're lacking.

It's all about personal preference. I chose to spend the money on a brand new 958 V6. At what I paid back in early 2011, I prob could picked up a 957 CTT, definitely a 955 CTT, and saved a good amount of cash. I didn't even consider it. That was my decision, right for me, but maybe doesn't make sense to others. So be it. But please don't try to make it seem like us V6 owners are inferior to you.

There is a huge value proposition with a used 955/957 TT. But there is a lot going for a new 958 base. Improved dynamics and economy, interior and for some having a new car warranty and all that entails just makes sense. I am done with new cars personally and fall into the get a well optioned affordable used model. But I see the merit for both paths.

See, I was sure it was 180* from this. :eek:

I bought my SUV to do SUV things. Like tow a 7700lb trailer over multiple mountain ranges up to 12,000 feet of elevation. Then safely slow down that load coming down.

Things that the V6 just won't do reasonably.

The V6 is for the "gold chain wearing Corvette owners" trying to compensate for something. (as you put it:thumbup:)

For the guy that *must* have the most current model, no matter what the cost, even if it doesn't *really* do what the SUV was designed to do. Just so that people don't think he can only afford a "used car":roflmao:

Seems to me the only reason you buy a V6 in the first place is to be seen in a "Porsche". Not for all the real sporty performance things that make a Porsche what it really is!

I personally bought my 04 CTT for what it can do and the way it drives. The 957 and 958 are not $120K better at this point. Are they better....to some degree.....but..$120K+ better.????...not even close!!!!!!! Is the base V6 958 $40K better???............not even in the ballpark! ......just my personal opinion and preference of course:thumbup::cheers:

...and nobody bashed the V6 owners until they brought it up:cheers:

I think there are leagues of people that are already going to buy a NEW luxury suv/crossover in the 40-60k range. When stacked against the likes of an ML, RX, GX, MDX, FX, X5, Q7/5 etc.. the base model is an attractive choice. Its a capable suv with a nice interior and great handling with class parity power. Is it a "Proper" porsche based on the historical brand position.. thats debatable.

I am looking for value for the money and so I will continue to buy used highly optioned cars in good shape for WAY CHEAPER than retail. I think we come from the same camp here. Still, not everyone buying a base cayenne is trying to be all gold chain wearing, flexin and all that. That just isnt the ONLY reason. For some its just as "rational" a choice as buying any other NEW luxury SUV in that price range. I think you could have stated your opinion without marginalizing everyone who bought or is considering a base 958 and stuff and things.

I agree with all that:cheers: I just wanted to point out the "Devil's Advocate" view on the idea that we V8 owners were only doing it to compensate for something:thumbup:....and that somehow the V6 was the only logical choice.

Wasn't it you that spoke of the Camry smoking a Porsche? You weren't exactly putting the V6 in a positive light, nor are you now. I can't argue with you about the towing piece, but the V6 has the same tow rating as both the V8s. To say the V6 can't do "SUV things" or what SUV are designed to do is just silly. It's not really a comparison thing anyway, as the 4 main engines offered are fairly different from one another. You'll never get an argument from me that V8s are more powerful and can likely do some things better than a V6.

It's pretty obvious from your tone how you feel about the V6 and maybe V6 owners. No sweat. But since you're making assumptions about why I bought my car, I'll enlighten you. I loved the redesign, both the interior and exterior, and contrary what you may think, the V6 is very sporty and offers great performance. It's just not all that fast. You were right about one thing, I did partially buy for the badge, but the same thing can be said about my previous cars. I personally find it hard to believe any luxury car buyer doesn't partially buy for the badge.

I just get tired of reading the small minority that bash the V6, and then go on to talk about speed. I'm just as much as an enthusiast as you, I just chose to spend my money differently. You would never buy a 958 V6, I would never buy any variant of the 955/957. However, I would never fault someone for preferring a 955/957 over a 958, either.

All that said, you seem to enjoy your own sarcasm, so carry on, don't let me interrupt you any longer. :cheers:

if you are thinking about look and off road go to G class,
if you need to enjoy driving go for Cayenne

Yep! Because the V6 is dog slow!;)


Either does Porsche for that matter. Hell, they just stuck a VW motor in it! I have another 5200lb vehicle with the VR6 in it and its a horribly underpowered vehicle, especially at altitude!!

First off I said I bought my SUV to do SUV things like tow a 7700lb trailer. Sure, your v6 chassis is rated to tow that much weight but I dare you to pull 7700lbs from Denver to Grand Junction just once with the V6 and see how it does!:rolleyes: I was pointing out to your comments about the v8 guys "compensating for something" that we are, we are compensating for altitude and weight. Something the v6 simply doesn't do!

Then why are you arguing about it. You seem to be the one offended here that some of us don't like the V6. You were the first one calling us V8 owners "gold chain Corvette owners compensating for something and looking down our noses at the V6 owners"


It's true, I don't think the v6 is a good representation of the model. I've never had a complaint about the owners unless they start calling names and making wild assumptions about why the rest of us chose an appropriate motor for a top tier SUV from a performance brand:rolleyes:


No, I wasn't. It was a rebuttal.;) I honestly don't care why you chose the V6. Especially since it is not the topic of the thread. But it was fun pointing out how one could view it the exact same way you did with your insults towards V8 owners;)


No, it doesn't. ;)


.....kinda part of the whole point of the brand!! ;)


I have never viewed Porsche as a "luxury" car. Most people that do find themselves disappointed with the experience. Everyone that complains about the NAV system on the old Cayennes for example. Or the people disappointed at the basic looking interiors of the 955/957.

In this modern day some features are expected on any expensive car. You can get way more "luxury" items on a Jeep for far less money than on a Porsche.

This is where we are really going to differ. I don't think the V6 gives the same experience as the V8/turbo AT ALL!! It's not about "drag racing" or "speed" but the EXPERIENCE is totally changed when driving it like a "sports car" the v6 just doesn't rip from corner to corner, especially at altitude, like a big V8 turbocharged motor. Nor does it effortlessly pull the high mountain passes filled with people or maybe a trailer like the big motor cars. The engine can make or break a car. Soooooooo much more performance can be had by true enthusiasts for sooooooo much less money by picking up a slightly older version.

For me the V6 just kills the magic these cars have to offer, I'm sorry that offends you.

I think that TRUE enthusiasts will ALWAYS buy the most car they can for the money! People that want they most BRAND for the money will always buy the least expensive newest version.

Now, does this mean someone should never buy a V6? No. It's certainly possible for a true enthusiast that REALLY wants a Cayenne to buy the oldest cheapest V6 they can just to have a Cayenne when that's all they can afford. I applaud that enthusiast. ;)

Depends upon size of ones bank account, vehicle needs (towing, for instance), ones performance expectations, and ones rationalization of allocating financial resources (might have a big bank account, but can't rationalize spending X+ amount on a vehicle). Image, prestige goes into the equation, as well -- some have to own the top end; some don't.

As far as performance is concerned, not everyone wants to take the twisty's at warp speed.

Personally, I don't have any image issues, and am not embarrassed to drive a CV6 or a CD; I like both. My prior Cayenne was a Turbo -- don't feel I'm missing anything.

From a business perspective, Porsche finds it profitable to offer a wide range of Cayenne's -- spreads development / manufacturing investments over more vehicles. If nothing else, the "lowly" CV6 could be a "gateway" vehicle to higher end offerings in the future.

As stated, if one has a budget for an SUV of $40K to $60K, the CV6 fits the bill, and will perform better than other possibilities in that price range.

And if one wants even thicker / heavier "gold chains", I just saw a very nice Bugatti Veyron for $2.5M with 1,200 hp on CNBC.

I can see this thread degenerating rapidly into a mines bigger than your scenario when in fact they all work.

Phil, need new picture of monster ! stat !

get some thicker skin dude.

funny, a buddy of mine has a G glass thats never seen anything other than smooth paved roads, nevermind off roading. He has a Jeep and a pick up for those dirty jobs.

One way or the other, I have to buy some gold chains. That's going to be a reach for me because I don't even wear a watch.

I think we are all in for additional chains now.

Never meant to come off as classifying all V8 owners one way or another, that was def not my intention. Your initial comment came off as an elitist, and your subsequent argument pretty much confirmed it.

And its not about having thicker skin.

All good tho, you win. :surr:

I can't be an enthusiast since I own a V6, nor do I know what it's like to experience a real Porsche. :bowdown:

:cheers:

Although we ended up with a GTS, the first test drive was in a V6 958 and my impression of it was very favorable. It was not rocket-ship fast, but far from slow IMO. These are SUVs after all.

With the big weight reduction for the 958 series, the V6 now has a power-to-weight ratio very close to the original V8 Cayennes.

I would not feel in any way inferior having the V6. I have said it before, and I still feel it is true: The Cayenne is a very well developed series and each engine option has its virtues and there is no single winner for all.

As for the RR question: Although I think RR is doing much better under Tata ownership, the RR Sport is not as sports-oriented IMO. The weight, at 5,700 lbs for the Supercharged is close to 1000 lbs more than the GTS (which is the price-competitive choice). The Supercharged is quite a bit more powerful, so the straightline performance is there, but the driving dynamics will be different. However, the RR might be the better choice depending on what you really want.

Basically I am a Porsche guy, so I am very biased. However, I have been very impressed with the GTS so far (even though I am not that keen on SUVs in general).

Just went through some calculations using Edmonds data comparing 2004CV6 / CV8S to 2012 models:

CV6: HP went from 247 to 300
Weight went from 4785 to 4398
Pounds / HP went from 19.4 to 14.7

CV8S: HP went from 340 to 400
Weight went from 4950 to 4553
Pounds / HP went from 14.6 to 11.4

As stated by 500_19B, power to weight ratio of the 958 CV6 is very close to the original CV8S.

Performance in the 958 was additionally enhanced with the 8 speed transmission.

Interesting number for sure but HP doesn't tell the whole story. How much torque and where in the power range is it?

I've got a motorcyle that is 2:1 but it wouldn't tow for ****!


Fwiw, I'm below 10:1 on my Turbo:p

The power loss at 10,000 feet above sea level is substantial. According to the calculator below, the V6 Cayenne will be down from 300 HP to 210 HP. Turbo engines do not lose nearly as much power because they can partially compensate for the power loss at altitude. So, if you live at high altitude and tow heavy stuff, get the turbo. If you live close to sea level, get the V6. If you are in between, get some gold chains.


http://www.wallaceracing.com/braking-hp.php

http://www.rs6.com/showthread.php/10...charged-engine

Back on topic:
 

Has anyone driven the new, full size RR, and if so, how does it drive?

I'm not biased. I think the RR is ugly and has had far too many problems over the years, and they haven't fixed that. The answer is that they are two completely different vehicles and would usually not be considered in the same purchase unless someone was just fishing for a SUV and didn't have a preference.

I've debated this before getting Cayenne. I trusted German engineering over British. Seems like British cars typically suffered from electrical issues over time, which I wasn't ready to deal with.

I have a Cayenne but I do like that RR that ran them motorcycles over

My daughters 2013 RRS has been nothing but problems...all electrical. They will return it based on the lemon law.

Exactly,,,, British cars tend to have the permanent electrical problems...

:roflmao:
The GTS probably can't do that with the sport design package!

If could w the air suspension

I consider the RR as the Barbie doll and the Cayenne is the G.I. Joe.

^+1

v6 vs v8 p...sing match
 

Lots of testosterone flying here.....glad its history