I saw a Macan today. Bit plain looking I thought, just as a SUVed Fiat 500 went passed...jesus my eyes. Had to stop the car to vomit!
The 911 is a rear engine, rear wheel drive (in it's purest form) out and out sports car with 2 useable seats. It's platform is 100% Porsche.
The Macan is a heavy front engined 4x4 that seats 5 and is based on a generic but modified VAG platform.
The two are totally different. Anyone who thinks that they're similar in any way, or that a Macan is somehow a practical 911 has either been duped by some very clever marketing and/or is simply clueless about how to drive.
Regardless of how the 911 & Macan compare, regardless of their perception in the eyes of others, anyone who has driven one will know they handle really really well.
Exceptional product, if SUV's were my thing I'd have one in a heart beat and who gives the slightest **** what anyone else thinks.
Exceptional product, if SUV's were my thing I'd have one in a heart beat and who gives the slightest **** what anyone else thinks.
The 1st sensible thing anyone has said on this thread..
+1.
Funkyduck you should be able to find a 9/10yr old one for £13-16k. Mine is 2007 Tip/auto love it. Mine costs £400 to service every 2 years (24 intervals) at a main dealer. I just got 4 new tyres for £800. Mine is 40k miles but things like cam belt will be expensive, 4 new spark plugs are £750 as the engine has to be dropped but mine are 9 years old never changed. Will do them when cam belt changed maybe next year when car is 10yrs old. Discs and pds are not too bad. All of this can be done by high quality independents.
Quator coming with first hand experience and well reasoned arguments - sorry you'll never fit in 🙂
generic but modified VAG platform.
Quite heavily modified as I understand it - to the point Porsche threw over 75% of the original platform in the bin....or so I've read..
Jamba, are you saying you only get your Porsche serviced every 2 years? So one oil change every two years?
Porsche service is every two years but with an annual oil change. Cayenne full service at a dealer cost is £4-500 which makes it pretty reasonable - plus you get a new car to go a play in for the day.
"Quite heavily modified as I understand it - to the point Porsche threw over 75% of the original platform in the bin....or so I've read.."
So a sort of Saab/Vectra of the Porsche world?
A overpriced Skoda taxi 😆
Rockape - yes every two years, thats what they told me. Oil change every 2 as per main dealer advice. Now I only do 3-5000 miles, if I was doing more I'd probably change the oil. Clearly I drive like a grandad as I changed the tyres after 30,000 mikes as they where cracked and 7 years old not worn out 😳
All this talk about beauty and elegance, or lack there of, this yacht is one if not the largest sailing yacht in the world and my God, it's stupendously ugly.
[img] 
[/img]
@FunkyDunk
I paid £16k for a Cayman S with 67000 miles.
Its fast and refined, and not too bad on the fuel for a 3.4l.
[img] 
[/img]
@thesurfbus, that is a nice car, I didn't realise you could pick up the Caymen for that kind of money, you have planted a seed.
Might be a bit rude to have 2 Porsches on the drive though and I would hate the STW to judge me on it 😆
£6.5k:
[img] 
[/img]
3.4, 27mpg, 125k.
Look, its practical too!
^^ becoming collectable those ^^
Snap one up sharpish..
Macan on practicality grounds. It's a vanity thing full stop.
If you like the brand (engineering, quality, performance etc) its the only medium sized 4-door.
Cayman - great car 🙂
At Chantilly
[img] 
[/img]
^^ becoming collectable those ^^Snap one up sharpish..
Get one that's actually been used day to day. Apparently they don't like sitting around. Bores get scored or something...
Bores get scored
...after 7 pages - I think that pretty well sums this thread up... 😆
Get one that's actually been used day to day. Apparently they don't like sitting around. Bores get scored or something...
No car likes sitting around unused. This is good advice though. One small issue I had with the gearbox (repair was £350) was due to the car being unused for 4 months when I was in Singapore and ex-wife refused to drive the car (as I'd asked as she always did the opposite)
Get one that's actually been used day to day. Apparently they don't like sitting around. Bores get scored or something...
In the change from the 3.4 to the 3.6 engine (around 2000/1) Porsche changed from a ferrous piston coating to a plastic coating.
This plastic coating is "prematurely" failing - leading to scored bores on flat 6 water cooled from the 996.2 to 997.1 inc cayman and boxster of the same generation.
There are almost no cases of premature bore score in the 3.4 with its more resilient ferrous piston coating. The 3.4 also has a dual row IMS bearing more robust than the 3.6 single row.
In the change from the 3.4 to the 3.6 engine (around 2000/1) Porsche changed from a ferrous piston coating to a plastic coating.This plastic coating is "prematurely" failing - leading to scored bores on flat 6 water cooled from the 996.2 to 997.1 inc cayman and boxster of the same generation.
There are almost no cases of premature bore score in the 3.4 with its more resilient ferrous piston coating. The 3.4 also has a dual row IMS bearing more robust than the 3.6 single row.
Can you translate that into English? 😆
Which are the years to avoid?
Basically any 3.6 or 3.8l air cooled 911 until the 997.2 (2008 or 2009). The engine of these 911 has issues with bore scoring and IMS bearings. Some specialists won't even trade 3.6/3.8 996 or 997.1 because of this. You are looking at a potential engine rebuild of £8-12l from someone like Hartech. The Porsche magazines are full of stories of this engine.
You may of course get a 996/997.1 without these issues but it's a gamble.
Saw a Bentayga in the flesh for the first time yesterday. Didn't hate it.
Seen a few around, and, while they can't hold a candle to the Continental GT for purity of line, they're vastly better than pretty much any BMW from the last twenty years, in particular every single SUV. Had a blue one pass me on the M5 on my way home this evening, and it didn't exactly dwarf the Peugeot 3008 I was driving, looked pretty good to me.
I still find it amusing how STW seems to find it acceptable to swan around in a bloody great van as personal/family transportation, yet has a fit of the vapours when anyone mentions SUV's which are around two-thirds the size.
Personally, I find most SUV's just a bit too big, I get on OK with something about the size of a Qashqai, but the Merc MLs are just a tad too big for my taste, which would probably be the same for Discos, etc; I've yet to drive one to find out for sure.
I wonder if those who are so critical of the likes of the Macan et al are equally critical of cars like this:
[IMG] 
[/IMG]
I have to say, it was a joy to drive, I just wish I'd had it for another couple of hours. Oh, that engine noise!
I still find it amusing how STW seems to find it acceptable to swan around in a bloody great van as personal/family transportation, yet has a fit of the vapours when anyone mentions SUV's which are around two-thirds the size.
Personally, I find most SUV's just a bit too big, I get on OK with something about the size of a Qashqai, but the Merc MLs are just a tad too big for my taste, which would probably be the same for Discos, etc; I've yet to drive one to find out for sure.
partly it's the sheer impracticality of them, for such a huge vehicle it has a pitiful load and passenger space really. Every part of them is driven by fashion and heap of very bad taste. At least with a van it's got a geniune practical purpose, with the mega AWD SUV types the practical reason is generally that there is just no way I'd get a 2wd car up my gravel drive...
Throw in the propensity of the owners to want to insulate their precious offspring in a safety bubble that is fairly bad for the other users of the road and the fact that for their actual needs a decent estate is much more practical they are worm as a status symbol. Honestly if you lower a T5 and bling it up I'll have the same contempt...
Macan is between a SWB and LWB Landrover sizewise. Boot similar ? We all love the idea of a Landrover but they are out of production as not enough people wanted to buy one.
Also what's a 4x4 and what's an SUV ?
[quote=jambalaya ]Macan is between a SWB and LWB Landrover sizewise.
#jambafact
It's longer and wider than a LWB Defender. Though I'm not really sure why you're comparing it with one of those, I don't think anybody else has mentioned one - it's also larger in all dimensions than an Octavia which has a larger boot.
Also what's a 4x4 and what's an SUV ?
4x4 compentent off road vehicle designed for going off road.
SUV? Elevated estage car with lots of toy buttons often supplied without 4wd, sensible tyres etc. a marketing mans wet dream sold to people who's idea of the countryside or offroad is an unsurfaced car park. As ironic as the name Sports Untility Vehicle, as the review started with "handles well for a 2t lump"
We all love the idea of a Landrover but they are out of production as not enough people wanted to buy one.
becasue so many people did it better, it's quite possible to make a comfortable off road capeable vehicle that works well and doesn't shatter your spine for sensible money. When your market is the rose tinted spec enthusiast brigade the profitability is gone.
[quote=mikewsmith ]becasue so many people did it better
Depends what the aim is and the definition of better - though I think the Disco is a better off road vehicle in most circumstances? All sorts of other reasons for the demise, but given the market for them was limited, I don't suppose the way they tend to keep going helps the market for new ones.
better?
Reliable
Comfortable
Practical
Cheaper
I'll give you that nobody quite made a vehicle as unrefined, basic, uncomforatable, expensive etc. as land rover but there comes a point where it's not really what was needed.
but given the market for them was limited
A conversation with my dad who's a farmer so their target market in many ways on their demise. He reckoned it was a shame, then I asked if he would buy one - Hell No!
Also what's a 4x4 and what's an SUV
I guess you could describe it as a 4x4 is a vehicle that's good off road (e.g. Landrover etc), normally used by people who need it - i.e. people who actually need to drive off road.
An SUV is a higher, heavier, more expensive, worse handling, less fuel efficient, less practical car, sometimes with 4x4 and with the fashion lead looks of an offroader, normally used by people who like to give the impression that they're outdoor, moneyed or superior type's etc. Normally this couldn't be further from the truth.
The owners of these vehicles try to justify this by saying yes but gives better visibility, safer for the kids etc. Well 2 tonnes of badly driven SUV is not safer for anyone else on the road or their kids is it (or your kids if you'd consider walking them to school for a change), and the high roofline often blocks visibility for other road users.
As someone previously said "I can't give a damn what others think" - well that kind of sums up the kind of person who buys SUV's for me, oh and maybe you should consider giving a damn actually.
Most farmers I know have been using Japanese pickups for years in preference to Land Rovers. Ever since every "self employed" person put a new pickup through their books as a "business" vehicle and then the used market was flooded with L200.
The Discovery is better than a Defender at everything, apart from being pickup.
The only reason they never made a Discovery pickup to take that market head on is that they don't want to "cheapen" the brand.
As Land Rover has gone more up market I suspect they may never enter that market again.
The "new" markets where Land Rover make all their money don't give a toss about Defenders. Its dead.
About time we realised they are not designing cars for British people anymore, they are designing for China / middle east etc.
normally used by people who like to give the impression that they're outdoor, moneyed or superior type's etc. Normally this couldn't be further from the truth.The owners of these vehicles try to justify this by saying yes but gives better visibility, safer for the kids etc. Well 2 tonnes of badly driven SUV is not safer for anyone else on the road or their kids is it (or your kids if you'd consider walking them to school for a change), and the high roofline often blocks visibility for other road users.
As someone previously said "I can't give a damn what others think" - well that kind of sums up the kind of person who buys SUV's for me, oh and maybe you should consider giving a damn actually.
So patronising - got your hair shirt on this AM?
Can you translate that into English?
Which are the years to avoid?
The early '98-'00 3.4 C2 is the one to have. No bore score or IMS bearing problems, mechanical cable throttle and no interfering electronic aids. However they are pretty old now, and any one of a million things can go wrong with a car engine at that age.
A 3.6 is a fantastic car, more low down power than the 3.4 so drives differently, just look carefully for smoke when running (a puff at startup is normal) / one blacked tail pipe or for peace of mind get the bores inspected with a borescope. If it hasn't already scored a bit it will do, but how long before it starts consuming oil is a gamble.
A 3.6 with relined cylinders fixes the issue (as they use a cylinder material thats more compatible with the plastic coated pistons), the builder with the best reputation is Hartech and they use non ferrous liners.
Just to add that no engine lasts forever, effectively most production engines are on borrowed time above 10 years / 100k miles. So Porsche are not particularly bad, its just that the cars are so well put together they last well and hold their value - and people expect their £15k 911 to be as problem free as a 3 year old car, even though its 15 year old.
[quote=wzzzz ]As Land Rover has gone more up market I suspect they may never enter that market again.
Which is also a big part of the reason for the demise.
About time we realised they are not designing cars for British people anymore, they are designing for China / middle east etc.
Hmm, on a thread where we're discussing people in the UK buying lifestyle SUVs and 4x4s?
This seems to be the logic from some here;
SUV = hate
4x4 = cool and practical vehicle
Range Rover lead the way as I posted before. Created a superbly capable off-road vehicle which was a great place to be on-road too.
I'll take a Macan in the ice and snow all day long over an estate including the A6 Quattro I had.
If people want to buy a 2wd version of a "mass market" SUV good luck to them, that's customer choice.
@aracer Landrover went out of business as the only thing a Landy was good for was off-road and their competitors where more than good enough for that for the vast majority of the market
This seems to be the logic from some here;SUV = hate
4x4 = cool and practical vehicle
Nope I think people who drive 4x4's who actually need them for work and/or for going off road are fine.
Can you not understand though how those who live in a town and who drive an unnecessarily large and thirsty 4x4's or SUV (when in reality an estate car - or sports car if you want a fast vehicle) would far more suit their needs (i.e. choosing vanity/status/image above everything else including the safety of others) might be perceived as a shallow and selfish decision by others? Narcissism really has gone crazy!
I'll take a Macan in the ice and snow all day long over an estate including the A6 Quattro I had.
You might want to change that opinion when you see the big alloys and wide sports tyres that every Macan seems to be fitted with.
Most of the farmers where I used to live used to keep a small lightweight FWD french hatchback with narrow tyres in reserve for the winter months. In the snow this will still get them to the shops even where proper 4x4's struggle.
This seems to be the logic from some here;SUV = hate
4x4 = cool and practical vehicle
+1.
I think I'd rather have a Macan, with good brakes, grippy tyres and a nimble chassis up my chuff than one of these monsters:
[img] 
?crc=296995116[/img]
But they're OK; they're a working man's vehicle, rough and agricultural. Never mind a transit van is more practical in most scenaria. (Is that a word?)
Agent well I'd agree with Frenchie FWD with narrow tyres being great in snow and ice. The 2CV is well known for it.
I bought a Shogun as I wanted a 7 seater which was not a Sharan/Galaxy and the 4wd as we lived on a steep unswept road and drove it to the Alps every winter. Once we didn't need a 7 seater we got a Rav4 and then the Quattro estate. You can call style choice vanity if you want but people like different things. If style wan't imoortant we'd all drive Postman Pat type square cars
Oil change every 2 as per main dealer advice.
Sorry for the delay in coming back on this. I'm amazed that they would advise to keep the same oil in such a premium engine for 2yrs. Its the one thing Honest John raves on about if you want to keep the car for a long time, change the oil every year or 10,000 miles whichever is sooner. Still, if it ain't broke don't fix it.
+1.
I think I'd rather have a Macan, with good brakes, grippy tyres and a nimble chassis up my chuff than one of these monsters:
I'd rather see the L200 doing it's job as a work horse than it bimbling up the motorway as a family car...
Neither are that really.
Can you not understand though how those who live in a town and who drive an unnecessarily large and thirsty 4x4's or SUV (when in reality an estate car - or sports car if you want a fast vehicle) would far more suit their needs (i.e. choosing vanity/status/image above everything else including the safety of others) might be perceived as a shallow and selfish decision by others? Narcissism really has gone crazy!
this +100
I want to look like I need it all...
I'll take a Macan in the ice and snow all day long over an estate including the A6 Quattro I had.
As a youngster we took an exchange trip to Norway, the father of the family drove us to somewhere, road was covered in packed snow and ice in a 5 series auto, 1 handed as he rolled a fag. Learning to drive and proper tyres will sort most things, also had a Danish friend with a Z4, went fine in the snow with proper tyres on. I'd not want a porsche with low profiles etc. and a footballers wife behind me then
But they're OK; they're a working man's vehicle, rough and agricultural. Never mind a transit van is more practical in most scenaria. (Is that a word?)
Not as good as a family car though, which is the reason they are bought. Just happen to be classed as a working vehicle so it can go through the business books....
[quote="jambalaya"]@aracer Landrover went out of business as the only thing a Landy was good for was off-road and their competitors where more than good enough for that for the vast majority of the marketIs this one of those jamba facts i keep hearing about?
Land Rover didn't go out of business, where the **** do you get this shit from?
They are making about three hundred thousand cars a year. If anything, they are more successful now than they've ever been.
And the Defender died as it physically couldn't be made compliant with new emissions and crash rules. As massively reported and discussed all over the trade for many, many years before it actually happened, putting the transit engine in it was a last gasp to keep it emissions compliant.
And as far as i can find out, sales were pretty stable for probably the last dozen years before it's demise, about 18-20 thousand a year.
But they're OK; they're a working man's vehicle, rough and agricultural. Never mind a transit van is more practical in most scenaria. (Is that a word?)
Not as good as a family car though, which is the reason they are bought. Just happen to be classed as a working vehicle so it can go through the business books....
Exactly. You'll get the kids' bikes in the back but an 8x4 sheet? Forget it. Once you've fitted the very necessary toolsafe box you can't even load a pallet of dust.
"Premium engine" is my favourite phrase since "peer-reviewed dataset" appeared on this forum a few days ago.
