JasonNY

Tacet-Conundrum

Love the conclusion they come to in that article. But are those performance numbers for real? JESUS-CHRIST!!! Zero to Sixty in three point six that is just plane frigen silly.

Ucube

All I got from that was man, the Quattroporte S is gorgeous!

Rojda

The Panamera Turbo lapped the Nordschleife ring in 7 minutes, 56 seconds, 3 seconds faster than the Cadillac CTS-V for a track record.

However, somehow it can't keep up with a Masserati Quatroporte with a 0-100 that is a whole 3 second slower or a 0-100-0 that is 2.7 seconds slower? Give me a break!

Put Panamera turbo in sport plus mode and it would leave the QP in the dust!

pcar964

Why are people so caught up in paper statistics? The clear message here is that the panamera is big, fat, ugly, offers an uninvolving and sterile driving experience, and has no business being called a Porsche. Again I offer the example of dropping a 500 cubic inch V8 in a Ford Taurus - it DOES NOT MAKE IT A SPORTSCAR just because it's fast. And it certainly doesn't make it a Porsche in the same spirit as the great cars that built the Porsche heritage over the past 50 years. It's a pathetic departure from Porsche's roots, fueled almost solely by Dr. W's insane ego and quest for short-term profits at the expense of the purity of the brand. Porsche will soon realize that as it enters the world of hum-drum automakers, it will start to lose buyers in droves due to brand dilution.

Rojda

"It's quite simply the finest high-performance sedan money can buy. "

See the Edmunds review:
http://www.insideline.com/porsche/pa...and-video.html

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I personally find the panamera more interesting than the tired design of the 911.

It is not all about the numbers and my point was that the Panamera turbo would not have any trouble keeping up with a QP. Further, the car does not have an uninvolving and sterile driving experience. Have you driven it yet? It is not trying to be a 911 but rather an excellent handling sports sedan. The 911 purists should get off the back of the Panamera.

The car is remarkable in its own class and in real life will easily out drive its competitors.

W8MM

OK, so some people don't like the Panamera's looks, particularly in photos. Fine. I happen to like it in person very much. If one can regard a 1965 911 as beautiful, then the 2010 Panamera will become even more beautiful after one gets used to its looks. In my youth, Porsches were often derided as being ugly and resembling up-side-down bath tubs. But they did get lots of mechanical respect and, eventually, admiration of their distinctive looks.

But, I'm really curious about some other stuff like, "offers an uninvolving and sterile driving experience." This seems like a statement from someone who hasn't actually driven a Panamera. I drove a Turbo from my dealer on local roads and an "S" from PCNA up and down a twisty mountain road in Carmel, CA. The words "uninvolving and sterile" are the exact opposite of what I experienced.

Maybe the Panamera is too easy to drive really fast. From what characteristic does driving excitement come? Just because it doesn't try to go tail-first off the exit of most curves doesn't mean it isn't a true Porsche. Back when I owned some 928's, they throttle-steered so well and accumulated speed so effortlessly that driving one at high speeds became a really intellectual process so as not to overcook the situation. One needed some real respect to be safe.

If one's standard of a rewarding driving experience is wrestling with a car to learn how to dominate its unusual driving characteristics, maybe a competent car is too boring. My Carrera GT is so competent that it exposes times when I am not. It has so much more speed potential as a car than I sometimes do as a driver that I can spend the rest of my life learning to be a better pilot. That sort of competence in a car, from which I can learn, is rewarding to me. Merely learning how to keep the front wheels ahead of the back ones while driving a 911 does not define nirvana for me.

I find the Panamera to be a car somewhere between a BMW M5 and a recent Porsche 911 in driving dynamics. That's my own evaluation and it is so convincing to me that my own Panamera should be in my driveway before Spring returns to Ohio.

YMMV

BTW, I actually like not having to be so intimately involved that I worry about the next change in road crown making me dart off the road while hustling down the tarmac.

Wachuko

Quattroporte S is a thing of beauty. Leave it to the Italians to get that leather interior right...

Tacet-Conundrum

Yup one thing is for sure Porsche designed this car to be easy to drive near the limits; that is for sure. I was never truly scared twkng the turbo up to speeds where on other cars I would be freaking out. And no you are not plugged into the car , a la (if you will) the Matrix movies, like you are with the 911. Don't think Porsche intended the Panamera to be another 911; they already wrote that book.

Might have to buy the Panamera Turbo after I get my 997.2 TT for my common law better half. She's zipping around town in a mini right now and I'm about to pull the trigger on a 67 mini just for giggles.

Meister Fahrer

Well, we can tell you're just a delusional hater from your avatar....

kcturbo

I am in the market for something to replace my RS6. I have recently driven a Panamera 4S, a Panamera Turbo, an M6, a Masserati Gran Turismo, and yesterday the new Mercedes E63 AMG. I was impressed with the E63, but then drove the Panamera Turbo again immediately after the E63 and was blown away by the Panamera. The Panamera is not the prettiest car (it frustrates me that Porsche could not make the rear look better), but you should not knock this car if you have not driven it.

ricster

The turbo panamera in launch control is mind boggling. It will make you dizzy on acceleration!!

Slimwear

I understand the message that pcar964 is trying to get across with his post.

Porsche has built an incredible reputation making cars with certain characteristics and I don’t see the Panamera following any of them. This doesn’t mean that it’s not a great car, it appears to be spectacular. I think the other cars in this comparison are great too but that doesn’t mean I would want them associated with Porsche either. Does anyone associate Jaguar with sports cars anymore? They used to be and I wonder if Porsche is going down the same path.

The real killer for me is that last quote: “The Panamera doesn’t engage, inform or involve in the way that the Jaguar and Maserati do”. Does this sound like a Porsche? They now build cars that don’t provide the driver experience of a 2010 Jaguar and weighs more? Really?

I can’t wait to see one in person (Tuesday night) and I’ll give it a drive and root it on against the competition but it does worry me for the brand.


Emery

W8MM

There's an awful lot of hyperventilating flying around on message boards from people who haven't had any personal experience with a real, live Panamera. The authors of EVO are welcome to their opinion, but my seat time in the Panamera wasn't disappointing in any way. It makes me wonder what sort of driving they did that I didn't do to come by their observations. Or, whether they and I are just different in some fundamental way?

Why, I wonder, do the vast majority of posters on this board who have actually taken the opportunity to drive a Panamera tell such glowing stories, while those who have not driven one are so prone to despondent pessimism?

Something's not quite right with the data here. Maybe the negative predisposition comes from those who would never be part of the market for a Panamera, no matter what its virtues?

The Panamera is plenty engaging and involving for me. I plan to enjoy the heck out of it when mine arrives at the dealer in a few months.

Bill P.

I wonder what EVO's advertising income from the three manufactures is?