cobalt

Looks are purely subjective and I find it to be a decent looking car. The Hyundai Genesis is a direct rip off of the MB. It is like a bad remake of a great song. No matter how bad, it is still a copy of a classic and will always get recognition but it is still nothing more than a bad copy.

There are many cars released in Europe we don't get here so no use in drooling over what you can't have. The AM is a better looking vehicle in this category but totally useless unless you are a contortionist or 4'9" to fit in the back. At least this can fit full sized adults. I know some people that have had a chance to drive one and they are raving about it. I hope to try it soon. Doesn't mean I will buy it. There are many cars I disliked until i drove them and others I liked until I drove them so basing opinion on looks alone doesn't make it a bad car or a good car.

Ray S

Some fine "hatchbacks"

hacker-pschorr

The coupe is a ripoff of the Infinity
You are correct, looks are very subjective and IMO the Panamera is one ugly vehicle.

BMW 7 Series, Mercedes CLS, and the Audi S8 all come to mind if I were considering a 4-door car that would be ahead of the Porsche. All are available in the US.

Based on looks alone I would take the VW CC over the Panamera. I am not the type of person who is stuck on owing a marquee that will impress my neighbors. I love driving my 2000 Beetle around.

I'm one of the rare birds who would take a Boxster over a 911 (same year / options) due to how they drive. I wasn't impressed with the Cayenne over other SUV's I've tested (I would take a Tourag instead).
So maybe you can understand the doubts I have with the Panamera being such an awesome driver to overcome the awful exterior and even worse interior.

They should have hired Chris Bangle to finalize the design. Then at least there would be some kind of style to go with the ugly.

The term hatchback traditionally describes a car with 3 or 5 doors, the odd one meaning the rear which can be used to access the interior. Honda CRX, Porsche 944, every station wagon etc....
The Elise? Not so much.

Ucube

With all the engineering and development effort PAG has put into it, it's a safe bet the Panamera will drive every bit like a Porsche. I don't think there'll be much debate in that. Sure driving pleasure is a key factor for me, but I still have to look at the damn thing day in/out, don't I? Who knows, maybe it'll be more visually appealing in person.

cobalt

I had a 740Il now IMO that was the last of the good looking BMW's. the newest line up is butt ugly in my book. After my last unpleasant experience with BMW i would never own another. Same with the MB The CLS is an uncomfortable car, my mothers E 500 is nothing special and wouldn't give you a dime for it. The S8 is a nice car but it is a limo and has nothing but power. Not at all in the same category IMO. In fact i wouldn't consider any of these to be similar, the CLS is the closest.

The CC is a nice looking car. My neighbor has a silver one. Well appointed and down right lifeless feel behind the wheel. So on looks maybe but there are no thrills to be had with a CC. Could care less about impressing anyone. I work in a foundry and look like I couldn't rub 2 nickles together most of the time. I drive my cars because I enjoy the pleasure they bring while driving them.

I just barfed a little.

Well that says a lot. I would never own a boxster or a 996 non turbo/GT car myself. Nothing against them but IMO Porsche lost touch with their roots with both these cars. The Cayenne IMO is at least a different direction and is not trying to replace the earlier cars with it. It is branching out into areas that these cars can't fill. The Torague is half the car the Cayenne is. The only one worth buying is the diesel it is a powerful truck but lacks the fun side of my CT and doesn't handle at all the same. I would entertain owning a diesel but it is to inconvenient and I don't need one. i have my avalanche for a truck when I need it. The CT is a blast to drive and is more fun IMO than most spots sedans I have driven. My problem with the VW is it looks like Snoopy to me. Not at all attractive and I could never own a car with plastic fenders.

Well obviously we look at things differently and this is not a car for you although I am not sure if any car i choose would be a car for you so we agree to disagree. When I purchased my CT I was not all that fond of the looks either but when I climb inside it takes on an entirely different feel and look. So for me looks are not all that important it is the entire package that makes it work for me.

allegretto

you have expended a great deal of verbiage telling us you think the Panamera is ugly. i trust you have actually seen it.

you are saying above that the reason to own one is to impress your neighbors? or do i misunderstand?

then you say you would rather a VW CC (nice car BTW) than a Panamera based upon "looks"?

so you say you like the Boxster over a 911 because of how it drives, then you say you like a multitude of vehicles over a car you may not have even seen in the flesh (and never driven) due to how it looks? do i understand you correctly?

Autarky

Now come on Anthony. The Boxster and 996 are FAR closer to the original roots of Porsche than the Cayenne will ever be. How can you possibly say otherwise. The Boxster was designed specifically will the RS Spyder in mind. The idea of the open top driving experience has been a fundamental part of Porsche's racing history. The Boxster is also a sports car - the Cayenne is an abomination of the word Porsche. Whilst the Cayenne may be one hell of an SUV, it is not a sports car, and is used for the most part by soccer-mums and around town cruising.

Sure, the Boxster and 996/7 have little racing history in comparison to the air-cooled models but they are sports cars in every definition of the word. With the release of the water-cooled line and the loss of the quirkiness etc that we associate with the 911; the company drifted from its roots to a small extent. Comparing the 911/Cayman/Boxster with the Panamera and Cayenne is like comparing chalk and cheese.

I'm not denying that the Panamera and Cayenne aren't great cars. Because from what I've heard they are amazing machines - I actually like the look of both. However, they are not the cars Dr Porsche had in mind when setting the original philosophy.

The success of these models could see Porsche going down the line that BMW and Mercedes have - truly bastardising the name and traditions of the company once and for all in the endless ambition for profit.

Ray S

Hacker and Anthony....

It may be the basis for the next 928..............

http://www.autoblog.com/2006/10/16/2...d-speculation/

cobalt

Did you read what I said??IMO the Boxster was a major compromise designed to sell to the average Joe who wanted a Porsche with an open roof and some sports car feel without the true sports car experience. It is lacking in the original vision and intent form the prototype which was a fantastic looking car. IMO it should not be mentioned in the same sentence as the RS spyder.

It is a good handling car although I feel it initially had way too much flex and not enough power, lacked the sound and adrenalin raising rush of the older 911's. IMO it served the same purpose that most people here feel the Cayenne or Panamera do. To sell cars to the masses and not to the enthusiasts. Give me a 914-6 GT over a boxster any day of the week.

The boxster and 996 just don't do anything for me. Neither in looks or in driving experience. I always walk away impressed by it's abilities but disappointed from the experience. The latest versions have come a long way but the earlier ones IMO missed the mark by miles. Now the 996/7 GT3/GT2/turbo are different story. Although I would still take the older cars over most of them for driving pleasure. These newer cars are very capable and amazingly quick but still don't offer me what I am looking for out of a Porsche. The car doesn't have to win races for me to enjoy it. It needs to thrill my sole and put a smile on my face and my CT does that for me far more so than any boxster I have driven. Even the cayman I find to be amazingly capable but unless it is pushed 10/10ths it does nothing to excite me.

I agree the Cayenne is one hell of an SUV. It is IMO the only true sport SUV made and is amazingly capable in so many ways that a sports car can never be. I would never take my Ct over any of my other Porsche's past or present because it is not at all the same type of vehicle. Although if i had to choose between a cayenne over a boxster S I would take the Cayenne TurboS/Turbo or GTS over it n a heartbeat.

Do yo know much about Porsche history? Or just the racing end that everyone seems to believe is the only part of Porsche's history that exists. How can you call the Cayenne or the Panamera an abomination? Porsche built tractors at one time not to mention many other types of vehicles including the first electric car. Porsche is in part about racing but IMO it is more about making uniquely different vehicles that do not resemble other manufacturers approach. The racing heritage is just a plus not the be all and end all.

To be honest the quirkiness of the earlier 911's is what gave them character. The computer controls IMO numb the experience and I have no interest in a sports car with them. Cars like the Cayenne and Panamera serve a different purpose for me so I can tolerate the computer controls in them. My turbo is probably one of the quirkiest Porsche's made. not for the faint of heart or the casual driver. It requires 110% of your attention all the time and I wish Porsche still made magnificent machines like it but those days are gone and i am grateful to own one of their finest street machines. The newer GT2's are similar but still are too civilized and far too expensive and costly.

I am not looking at the panamera or Cayenne as a sports car, although in my opinion the Cayenne especially the turbo and GTS are amazing sport SUV's and I believe the Panamera will become a great Sport GT like the 928 was. I am hoping they build a 2 door version as I feel the demise of the 928 was a big mistake and IMO the 996 was nothing more than a meld of the 911 and 928 filling neither roll well.

I just don't see how you can say or believe this. How do any of us know what would or would not be the intent of Dr. Porsche in this market or modern age. I think he did what came easiest to him and closest to his heart at the time and found a niche to sell to that grew into a legendary car company. The racing heritage we all love (ie 917) was a fluke and although devilishly masterminded a lucky break that opened the door to the beginning of legendary car company and long list of racing victories. If they did not pounce on that single opportunity where would the company be today??

IMO from what I have read about the man i feel he would have eventually branched off into something different just as the company is doing now. he was not about perfecting the known he was about creating the unknown a Pioneer in methods and techniques that others had not yet explored or felt could be done. I see a lot of this in both the Cayenne and the Panamera something i haven't seen in the company for quite some time now.

In all as an addition to the sports car line I think they have made some brilliant advances. I agree these are in addition to and if it were kill the 911 or kill the Cayenne/Panamera programs I too would vote to kill both the Cayenne and Panamera. The sports car market is once again at a stand still just like it was in the mid 90's. The company may go under and that would be a shame. However, the car industry is up against some hard times and if Porsche doesn't keep up with the times and regulations we may not have anything to choose from. So rounding out the product line IMO is a good call and although timing is poor for the release of this vehicle it does not make it any less significant or any less of a part of the Heritage of a great company that might have made poor choices in Executives that tried to bite off more than they can chew by buying a company bigger than themselves.

allegretto

i had the experience of riding shotgun in a TT Cayenne with a Porsche ALMS driver at our track

our local hotshoe in a Cayman could barely, and i mean barely keep up.

don't tell me it doesn't have sports car capabilities in the right hands. it was a great ride! in fact, the flag boss had no idea whom he was, and black flagged him in to tell him to slow down, that the car wasn't safe going that fast. he just chuckled, shrugged and went right back to blistering the track

chance

sheesh. stereotype much? haters come out EVERYTIME porsche introduces a new model. boxster, cayman, cayenne and now panamera. I think the Porsche vision is now and has always been to imagine, design and engineer the best possible scenario on 4 wheels. tractors, sedans, beetles, trucks whatever.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Autarky
- the Cayenne is an abomination of the word Porsche. Whilst the Cayenne may be one hell of an SUV, it is not a sports car, and is used for the most part by soccer-mums and around town cruising.

eloyex

I agree ... i dont have to drive one, or even personally see one to have some degree of apreciation or not on a car ... (or a plane, or a girl !!!)
i think panamera is kind of dated design, not very nice .... i just dont like it ...

I dont care if cost 30.000 or 300.000 .... i just dont like the design or even the decision of Porsche on building 4 door cars, SUV or perhaps forklift trucks ...

Autarky

The age old argument about how the 996/Boxster lineup deviated from the original philosophy.. 'Not something for everyone, but everything to someone'. I agree that Porsche did/have deviated from the original philosophy, but these cars undoubtably defined as 'sports cars'. The Panamera and Cayenne are not 'sports cars'. It's as simple as that. These cars are efforts to generate as much profit as possible! Check the Porsche website yourself in the philosophy section. I'll quote it for you - "We are the world’s most profitable car maker". What links do the Panamera or Cayenne have to the Porsche history and name? Very little. Many race cars Porsche manufactured and competed are mid-engined and several open-roof. These new 'Porsches' are merely providing competition for BMW, Mercedes, Lexus etc. Yes, I agree strongly the Boxster isn't perfect, neither is the Cayman. They are distinctly underpowered to ensure the 911 isn't overtaken as the flagship model. The RS Spyder is definately the more desirable of the two. The link however, is undoubtably there. Porsche is/was a company that makes sports cars. Yes, I know that Porsche design tractors and other small projects but these are not produced as part of the line-up and are not mass produced. Porsche builds sports cars. Not something for everyone but everything to someone. Profit was never the main drive before 996/Boxster//997/Panamera/Cayenne. I can accept the 996, 997, Cayman and Boxster's in their current form - but not these supposed Porsche's - Panamera and Cayenne.

It's all subjective. I've heard raving reviews and compliments of this model. It all depends on what you're used to.



In the Porsche line-up (not these very small niche markets which you speak of) cars were designed with racing in mind. Sportcars are not by definition SUV's or four door sedans. You can't compare a tiny niche like tractors to SUV's or sedans. The demand was there for Porsche, and they took it - thus eliminating the exclusiveness of the name and car. I remember being excited when I saw a Porsche on the road - they are now everywhere. Especially the Cayenne's. As much performance that the Cayenne and Panamera have they are not sportscars. Since the inception of the company Porsche emphasised their passion as a company who build exceptional and desirable sports cars. Correct me if I'm wrong but I've seen very little marketing or PR for tractors - obviously the pinnacle of the design philosophy!


What purpose do the Panamera and Cayenne fulfil? Why is it acceptable that they have advanced computer controls? Is it because they satisfy this new Porsche principle of generating great profit to satisfy mainstream markets?

r
Porsche = Sports Cars. I don't know how I can put it any simpler than this. It just truly shows how far the company have drifted from its roots.

Dr Porsche's philosophy is well known. 'Timeless', 'Not for Profit', 'Not something for everyone, but everything to someone' etc etc. How do you know exactly how Dr Porsche would act in this current market? Why do you presume he would act in the way the current management have? Why do you presume he wouldn't sacrifice the independence of the company to stay true to Porsche's roots and it's racing heritage?

We can fight black and blue about this but there will be little resolve.

allegretto

while there may be some chimerical "reality" to the concept a couple of you are attempting to fashion, "...not for profit..." ???!!! really?

next you'll be auguring on behalf of what? dry water, colorless crayons, flavored air?

this is paradoxy masking as some sort of "purity of purpose". you may yearn for a simpler Porsche, but an auto producer being "not for profit" is a very poignant oxymoron. some companies have achieved that status, but never on purpose and not for long (though the new GM may indeed be the perpetual motion machine, of sorts).

you are going to great (and questionable) lengths to buttress an already moot point. was your last sentence a Freudian slip, or just one more malaprop?

Autarky

Profit was not the main factor in mind. At least from what I've seen and heard. Porsche were a company who could have cut costs but chose not to - to offer the highest quality driving experience possible, whilst retaining individuality. This is in stark comparison to the bean-counters of today.

The philosophy has completely changed. Can you at least admit this?


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wkuWX1myCw0 - watch this marketing campaign conducted by Porsche in the 80's. To save you the time I'll quote the mention of the original philosophy.

"Why don't we produce large batches(of Porsche's)? That would certainly make the Porsche cheaper, and the shareholders could reckon with higher dividends. That's right, but we couldn't do this for two reasons. In the first place - a mass produced Porsche? Unthinkable! It would lose its typical Porsche individuality! For all the perfection of material and workmanship, every Porsche has its own distinctive attributes whether it's special technical equipment or other special features. Our clients individual wishes can't be automated so we deliver hand crafted quality, which is impossible in mass production. The second reason - our Porsche philosophy - 'We build cars, but not for everybody'."

Yes, Porsche still stays true to an extent of the concept of craftsmenship - Panamera's are built by hand; but not to anything else mentioned there. The company today is a clear contradiction of the original philosophy who now attempt to sell the Porsche name to anybody. It isn't too difficult to get your head around.

This all just falls on deaf ears though. Interpret it as you like. As I've said before I think the Cayenne is a brilliant SUV, and that I like the styling of both - however they are not Porsche's. Simple as that. IMO.