Porsche Cayenne - opinions

[318Touring 40]

A simple question .....

What do you all think of Cayenne '03-'10 S variety, and the Turbo.

Porsche forum is very informative if you're in the States, and I don't think there is the equivalent of bimmersport forums for P-cars in NZ.

Edited: typo

Edited August 30, 2010 by 318Touring

[Driftit 1953]

I had one for a few months to drive around in. It was an 05 non turbo NZ new one.

Bar it being quite ugly from the front I absolutely loved it. Great power, handling and brakes. Interior was super comfy for me. It drove like a car. Found the NAV and radio had way too many buttons though. Had a built in phone of which you just load a sim card into the stereo system.

I can't comment on the fuel econo as I went everywhere quite quickly. It chewed through the gas though. Far more than my 540i would have being driven in the same manor.

I was infact cleaning her up to sell. It had only done 50k. I think we sold it for $60K about two/three years back. We found that it was not a sort after model as it did not have the active suspension. Active suspension added another 10K to resale and made it much easier to sell. It apparently solves many of the alignment and ride issues they have.

The owner purchased the new shape at the time. Has since sold that one too.

Had some good pics of it. Will see if I can find them.

[M5V8 337]

I've driven both the first and facelift Cayenne S and rode in a Turbo.

It really is the car that does everything and drives like nothing else.

Fast as hell, corners, strong brakes, off road ability, excellent build quality, huge towing and luggage space.

Goes like my M5 but you get the feeling you will bulldoze anything in your path.

Active suspension is a must as it sorts the cornering roll.

Also a big bank balance for the petrol it guzzles & huge tyres it eats.

The best part about owning one IMO is that from the inside you can't see how ugly it is

The facelift is a step in the right direction but still....fugly.

Turbo is ridiculously fast with the thirst to boot. You really don't need that kinda power in NZ expect for the pose factor.

Still as much as I hate the looks I can't but respect it's ability to ignore the laws of physics.

[Apex 693]

Unfortunately to do so they are very hard on tyres and brakes, if you drive a turbo hard you will be easily up for 15k a year on maintenance, if something’s fails triple that.

The non turbo’s still chew through the pads and disks so maybe give a service department a call and get some pricing.

[kingkarl 136]

A family friend has a Cayenne S. As said above, it goes like snot.

Around town he says it usually does about 22L/100km... so pretty bad.

[M5V8 337]

A family friend has a Cayenne S. As said above, it goes like snot.

Around town he says it usually does about 22L/100km... so pretty bad.

best the old man got out of his was 15L/100 on the open road.

he said that was good!

[soarer260@hotmail.com 0]

I find them vulgar. The newer ones look better, but the early ones look terrible.

A Range Rover would be a better buy, or a X5, or a Q7

[M5V8 337]

E53 BMW X5 4.8is ?

[318Touring 40]

LOL seems that its looks still draws comments, don't bother me that much though.

I'd driven a Turbo, a quick blast up to Wainuiomata and back to Petone, 20l/100kms. Impressive though.

Fuel consumption is expected from something that big and heavy same with brake pads and tyres, and what I've heard that its drive shaft and coolant pipes will have to be replaced sometime in its (early) life. These two are costly to do especially with the coolant pipes where you wouldn't get any warning (sometimes) and the only time you know is when your coolant is mixed with engine oil!

RR .... Clinton returned his after a few months.

Q7, isn't this uglier than a Pepper (Cayenne)?

X5 has to be E70 which has to have the specs I want, which not many of them do apart from LCIs.

997/996 can't take a family of three.

CLS ........

Maserati 3200 = money pit

Or keep the E60, there is always that option

Edited: added the Maser

Edited August 30, 2010 by 318Touring

[antil33t 90]

Diesel E53? Clinton's goes real well!

and... gets better economy than my car...

[deeveus 81]

Diesel E53? Clinton's goes real well!

and... gets better economy than my car...

It depends on what kinda money your spending.

If 50-60 then a E53 - Sorry to push it but a chipped diesel has more torque lower down (far more usable) & far more economical.

If 60k & above then E70 Motorsport, although the E70s are heavy -

If fuel isn't an issue - Cayenne Turbo, I do like them, preferably the newer shape one. Friend of mine has one and it averages 25liters per 100km (I've just quickly worked that out and thats bloody 45-50 bucks per 100km!!!)

Range Rover - get f**ked - they are the most un-reliable bucket of sh*t. I've had 3 and all have been terribad.

Q7 - yeah if you like parking cars 300meters long the V12 diesels must haul though

Touareg - they're nice but heavy & won't offer decent on-road performance

Landcruisers handle and go like boats (seriously I don't know what the attraction is to them personally)

Edited August 30, 2010 by Clinton

[nath 129]

I wouldnt really choose any of the above, but how about a v10 Touareg (being as you seem happy enough for the costs of a maser/ porsche v8) and have TQ+ power with the handling of a cayenne

[deeveus 81]

I wouldnt really choose any of the above, but how about a v10 Touareg (being as you seem happy enough for the costs of a maser/ porsche v8) and have TQ+ power with the handling of a cayenne

The V10 is pretty thirsty - Real life applications see about 15liters per 100km - which to me seem quite pointless if you buy a diesel for economy.

[nath 129]

Yeah hence me comparing to maser and porsche costs.... V10 toaregs are very thirsty yes

[elmarco 56]

Still as much as I hate the looks I can't but respect it's ability to ignore the laws of physics.

I believe that has to be the quote of the month!

[Gotheschu 1]

Dad went through this same process/decision earlier this year...

Range Rover Really nice inside but if you ask round some Euro machanics they always have a range rover coming in. I think its because they have so many features that there's a lot to go wrong.

Touareg If ya watched Top Gear last night, ya would have heard Hammond say that the Touareg was a hopeless peice of sht. Mostly because of the useless ride and rubbish handling.

Q7 Couldn't afford one but just after looking at em they looked huge and heavy.

Mercedes ML63 If your've got the coin I think these are your best bet. We drove one for the hell of it and they go like sh*t, and since its a Merc you really notice it when ya hope it and the whole build quality like in the BMWs.

E53 X5 4.6is Might be a bit bias here but these have a real good write up. Better than the 4.8is... First this one has a lot of gear of a M5, brakes, cluster, heaps of small crap i can't remember. But watch most don't know is the engine is actually an Alpina motor. Not like the 4.8is which is a normal V8 ( not normal but not as good or as rare as the 4.6is ) Got all this information from Gerry Rodgers ( BMW Car club president ) He had the car before we got it... If ya wanna PM I have an article from when the car was released has heaps of info on it..

Jeep SRT8 This was my favourite. I know its a Jeep but this thing hauls arse. 16L/100kms we got it to 13.3 on the open road. But its also got this cool as computer that you can time yourself to 100 and 1/4 mile times. Build quality is of cause not as good as any BMW but I thought the brakes, handling, and pure speed and coolness this thing had made up for it. got all the new stuff on it and is half the price new of all the EURO alternatives and if you youtube it you'll see it whip the floor with a ML63 in a drag... We got the computer down to 5 seconds to 100 kph, factory says it'll do it in 4.9...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwm6IIBzB_k

Cayenne Never went in one but I don't like the interior and just think its ugly and your paying for it because its a Porsche.

I got heaps of info and articles on all these cars cause Dad did so much research on this, so flick me a message if ya want some of it.

Dunno if that helped....

Edited August 30, 2010 by Gotheschu

[deeveus 81]

sh*t

I forgot the ML63 - never been in one but they are supposed to be EPIC!

[318Touring 40]

Looking at Cayenne because it's a Porsche that can fit a family of 3 not because it's a SUV. The new diesel Cayenne is still selling at $140k!!

25l/100kms, that's rather thirsty really. Food for thought.

Personally I wouldn't want to spend that kind of money on a Japanese car. A couple of k yes, anything more than that I'd buy something with a personality not some bland, designed by committee, reliable, slushy motor.

I spent some time on a Mustang 'vert last month in California, again, I wouldn't blow that kind of money on an American car.

Not an ML63, but a CLS E55... how 'bout this a nice looking one, someone is interested in this...

[Top Secret 2]

Problem with the CLS is it only has 4 seats.

[kingkarl 136]

Jeep SRT8 This was my favourite. I know its a Jeep but this thing hauls arse. 16L/100kms we got it to 13.3 on the open road. But its also got this cool as computer that you can time yourself to 100 and 1/4 mile times. Build quality is of cause not as good as any BMW but I thought the brakes, handling, and pure speed and coolness this thing had made up for it. got all the new stuff on it and is half the price new of all the EURO alternatives and if you youtube it you'll see it whip the floor with a ML63 in a drag... We got the computer down to 5 seconds to 100 kph, factory says it'll do it in 4.9...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pwm6IIBzB_k

I don't care if it does 0-100 in half a second. I'd NEVER buy hunk of crap American JEEP. I'd rather walk everywhere.

And for the ML63. God they are horrid looking. I much prefer the looks of the Cayenne/any other car ever made. Plus it's a modern merc so it'll fall to bits and end up costing millions of dollars to replace. From what I've heard they are hands down beaten by the X5 with respect to handling/driving dynamics.

[Grant 4]

I don't care if it does 0-100 in half a second. I'd NEVER buy hunk of crap American JEEP. I'd rather walk everywhere.

You sound like a real expert, care to expand with a logical arguement backed up with solid facts?

One of the cars we would be considering replacing the Subaru with a Jeep. I'd love to hear your opinion as to why we shouldn't.

[kingkarl 136]

You sound like a real expert, care to expand with a logical arguement backed up with solid facts?

One of the cars we would be considering replacing the Subaru with a Jeep. I'd love to hear your opinion as to why we shouldn't.

Same friend who had the Cayenne S owned 2 Jeep grand cherokees prior.

1st one blew the gearbox apart within 50,000km and needed a whole bunch of other crap replaced including half of the front suspension and cooling systems.

2nd one needed the WHOLE front suspension replaced.

I don't like American cars. a) they're ugly they're vulgar (names like crossfire, nitro etc). c) build quality was appalling and they used fall to bits. I don't know if that's changed now with the recent shake up of the US car industry, but I wouldn't be prepared to gamble $X0,000 on it.

Sure they're cheap, but so are Civics.

[Gotheschu 1]

Yea fact is the SRT8 isnt a normal Grand cherokee. Sounds stupid. but almost everything is different in the SRT8 and Clarkson said in a review its as different from the standard gran cherokee as ......... Dunno what he used maybe he said ferrari i dunno =D

If you go in one mate you'll see what I mean. I don't like most american cars but this one is just cool and its gotten good reviews everywhere you look. Haven't seen a review that doesn't like the SRT8

Edited August 30, 2010 by Gotheschu

[deeveus 81]

Do the SRT-8's have the same build quality? - I mean we are talking about 200k + Porsche Cayenne Turbo's & ML 63AMG's here at the moment & don't think they can be mentioned in the same sentence. They are super quick and one of the better looking American cars.

Most yanky cars have never done it for me personally, I fear the leaf springs they call decent suspension and chassis made from old shovels a bit of a downfall compared to a German counterpart. Yes they're cheaper, but as they say, you get what you pay for?

Here's a quick list of SUV I've owned thus far with a quick run down:

• P38 Range Rover - air suspension failed - gearbox failed aprox 25l per 100km
• 2001 E53 X5 4.4V8 - Great car owned it a year not one problem & had 170km!
• 2001 E53 4.6is - Great car but farkin thirsty
• 2005 Range Rover - Owned it three months was in the garage a total of 8 weeks - gearbox failed and was away 5 weeks (was a NZ New Diesel)
• 2005 E53 BMW X5 3.0diesel - not the funiest car I've ever owned but very practical and has some serious pickup power & great handling & very economical + reliable!

Edited August 30, 2010 by Clinton

[M5V8 337]

I'd never buy a post 80's american car.

America has a throw away society, they build cars with a 2-5 year lifespan.

You can't seriously compare an SRT8 to a AMG merc or Porsche just because it has a powerful motor and big wheels.

I've been in brand new american cars and found trim coming off.