Last night I was invited to take a gander at a conference of the arrival of the 4-door Porsche. Let me tell you this is the first German, gasoline fueled and from this century car I would not mind having. I would gladly put it next to the Mazerati Quatroporte as real luxuary car I would like to own if I waon the lotto. :-p
The car is pure sport and has no family car feel with its 2+2 seating. Well engineered in the sense the car felt balanced compared to the 2-door rear engine model. Inside is well crafted, unlike what I used to see in Mercedes when I worked there in the past.
Also I was reading from them and Porsche finally has something to brag about when it comes to 'Ring times. When John Heinricy piloted a Cadillac CTS-V around the Nordschleife in 7 minutes and 59 seconds it officially gave General Motors the title of having the fastest four door to conquer the Green Hell. However, sadly the title no longer belongs to America, it is now the German’s time to shine. Porsche’s test driver was able to complete the 12.9 mile circuit behind the wheel of a Panamera Turbo in just 7 minutes and 56 seconds. So it looks like they meant buisness with this car.
What do you think?
Here is info on it it.
http://www.porsche.com/usa/models/panamera/
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
Its only doin it for me in the front
eh dont know about this one yet. The whole 4 door thing is a little getting used to.
its nice and very luxurious
but whats the caddilac cts-v powered by?
germany may have the record now but they had a turbocharged porsche vs GM
14.4 @ 101 Bradenton Motorsports Park 11/22/08
I don't like that it's a hatchback. I can understand that they wanted to keep it somewhat sporty looking, but it really needed a more sedan-like rear.
De Lara (Cortana) wrote:its nice and very luxurious
but whats the caddilac cts-v powered by?
germany may have the record now but they had a turbocharged porsche vs GM
A supercharged 6.2L V8 with 556 hp (ZR1 anyone) vs. Porsche's twin turbo 4.8L V8 cranking 500 hp.
Both seem to be set up well suspension wise.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
- Sold my beloved J in April 2010 -
De Lara (Cortana) wrote:its nice and very luxurious
but whats the caddilac cts-v powered by?
germany may have the record now but they had a turbocharged porsche vs GM
You have a point, and also Porsche doesn't have to travel far to test it at the 'Ring lol
09/10 CTS-V caries
6.2L Supercharged V-8
556 @ 6100 HP
551 @ 3800 TQ
And carries
Tremec TR6060 six-spd man or
Hydra-Matic 6L90 six-spd auto
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
Eh..... too wierd for me to dig... i mean comon... a 4 dr porche car? I like the porche suvs.... very nice.
Reminds me of a bitch who only looks good from waist up.
I'd own one though if I had the cash tho
Chopper Suit wrote:Reminds me of a bitch who only looks good from waist up.
I'd own one though if I had the cash tho
If i had that kind of cash... ide be looking elsewhere... i mean for that money you could get a brand new GTR, or a Skyline R34 or something....
Viper98912 wrote:A supercharged 6.2L V8 with 556 hp (ZR1 anyone) vs. Porsche's twin turbo 4.8L V8 cranking 500 hp.
Both seem to be set up well suspension wise.
damn, i didnt know the cts-v had that much power. i wish i could afford one
Mr.Goodwrench-G.T. wrote:You have a point, and also Porsche doesn't have to travel far to test it at the 'Ring lol
09/10 CTS-V caries
6.2L Supercharged V-8
556 @ 6100 HP
551 @ 3800 TQ
And carries
Tremec TR6060 six-spd man or
Hydra-Matic 6L90 six-spd auto
lol yea they aren't far away from the track lol
and most comparisons are not fair. like when a magazine said the new mustang is better all around than the new camaro and challenger
14.4 @ 101 Bradenton Motorsports Park 11/22/08
GTmatters wrote:Chopper Suit wrote:Reminds me of a bitch who only looks good from waist up.
I'd own one though if I had the cash tho
If i had that kind of cash... ide be looking elsewhere... i mean for that money you could get a brand new GTR, or a Skyline R34 or something....
screw the GTR and its damn maintenance costs
CodeRedZ24 (aka Geeds) wrote:GTmatters wrote:Chopper Suit wrote:Reminds me of a bitch who only looks good from waist up.
I'd own one though if I had the cash tho
If i had that kind of cash... ide be looking elsewhere... i mean for that money you could get a brand new GTR, or a Skyline R34 or something....
screw the GTR and its damn maintenance costs
I would much rather have the R34... my favorite body style by far... I was just saying though, you could find something just as fast and better looking for less money. =P
The rear of that Porsche reminds me of a damn Chrysler Crossfire lol
~2014 New Z under the knife, same heart different body~
______________________
WHITECAVY no more
2012 numbers - 4SPD AUTOMATIC!!
328 HP
306 TQ
The Cayenne looks rediculous with it's 911 wanna be styling. The sedan doesn't look much better. I hate the scallop on the side.
I recodnise that brand recodnition is important, but the 911 styiling sems to only work for me on a sports coupe. I suppose they have learned some hard lessons on a few quirky models in the past.
I'd like to see the V run with the ZR1 spec. Maybe it would be closer.
Anyway, It's no biggie that it's faster on the ring. It's likely tremendously more expensive.
I've seen one in Munich, it actually looks really good in person.
De Lara (Cortana) wrote:[most comparisons are not fair. like when a magazine said the new mustang is better all around than the new camaro and challenger
I take it you are refering to the latest issue of Automobile Magazine where 2 professional race drivers race the new mustang and Camaro around a track. One a die hard GM guy, one a Die hard Ford guy. After racing each other the Ford handled much better and lighter than the Camaro, but the Camaro had HP on it's side...but couldn't turn for sh*t. The GM guy called it a pig that won't turn. Then they switched cars for a few more laps and the GM guy had to admit the Mustang was a much better handling car.
It was totally fair, read the article. Just because the Camaro is the hot new car di jour out right now, doesn't make it the better car.
"Formerly known as Jammit - JBO member since 1998" JBOM | CSS.net
link to article please, i tried looking for it. no luck
14.4 @ 101 Bradenton Motorsports Park 11/22/08
Jookycola wrote:De Lara (Cortana) wrote:[most comparisons are not fair. like when a magazine said the new mustang is better all around than the new camaro and challenger
I take it you are refering to the latest issue of Automobile Magazine where 2 professional race drivers race the new mustang and Camaro around a track. One a die hard GM guy, one a Die hard Ford guy. After racing each other the Ford handled much better and lighter than the Camaro, but the Camaro had HP on it's side...but couldn't turn for sh*t. The GM guy called it a pig that won't turn. Then they switched cars for a few more laps and the GM guy had to admit the Mustang was a much better handling car.
It was totally fair, read the article. Just because the Camaro is the hot new car di jour out right now, doesn't make it the better car.
And just because the Mustand handled better, doesnt mean it is the better car either. I all depends what you want to use it for. Put the two up against eachother on the quarter mile and the Camaro would be the "better car". Take one person who is a die hard mustang fanboy, and ask HIM which is the better car. It's all about perspective.
Either way... some of the new catches look good, but hatches hardly ever look good 4 door. I mean comon... Subaru even knew not to make their sporty hatch a 4 door.. (WRX STI) And that is a hott ass looking car.
The problem with the Caddy is its weight I believe, tugging around an extra 300 to 500 lbs. The platform is also not nearly as expensive to build.
My Cav
I give up...
i'm buying a VW those people love trees, so they should love eachother too... "Andy"
^^^
Porsche Panamera weight range between 3 models
3969 - 4344 lb (mfr est)
Caddy CTS-v weight with both tranny
manual: 4200 lbs (est)
automatic: 4300 lbs (est)
What I think what (may) be hurting the CTS-V is is the tremendous amount of low-end torque. Yes, torque can get you out of a corner quicker if the track is set up for low speed, but the 'Ring has corners that you can average a high speed. And being that the CTS-V has 551 @ 3800 TQ, having that much causes you to get easily in to oversteer and which makes you more likely to correct the intended part and result a small loss of time.
Either way both are nothing to sneeze at, and I'd gladly have one on my driveway.
>>>For Sale? Clicky!<<<
-----The orginal Mr.Goodwrench on the JBO since 11/99-----
Shadowfire wrote:I don't like that it's a hatchback. I can understand that they wanted to keep it somewhat sporty looking, but it really needed a more sedan-like rear.
Hatchbacks in that market aren't for looks, its made that way to improve the handling. The closer the wheels are to the outside corners of the car, the better handling will be (unless you completely bugger up the suspension and use really heavy wheels). To put it another way, the more of the car that is carried over the contact points of the car (i.e. the tires), the easier it is to keep control of the body weight. This is why a lot of European tuners prefer hatchbacks in the small car segment ("Hot Hatches").
2010 Honda Fit LX
