[Closed] Porsche Macan

A review of the Macan.

It's no slouch in any form except the most basic:

[url= http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/porsche/macan ]Autocar[/url]

"For a two-tonne 4x4, it’s remarkable how poised, taut, balanced and plain enjoyable to drive the Macan is. It’s very nearly amazing. There is a cutting edge to its dynamic make-up that no other SUV on the market can approach, never mind equal – and you need a really good rear-drive sports saloon or two-seater to beat it."

Whatever car Porsche make it tends to be the best in it's class, or pretty much up there. The Macan is a much better SUV than any other competing one, aesthetics aside, so forget it's a Porsche for a second, it's just a very good car. It's beautiful ugly, which is a look I like in cars, unlike the offerings from Audi and BMW which are just grotesque - like a photo finish in a gurning contest, and the VW, as always, commits the ultimate sin of just being plain old boring. To be fair, the F-Pace looks half decent though, but is more expensive than the Macan and won't be as good. But ultimately there is a special place in hell reserved for SUV's - utterly pointless cars and completely the product of a questionnaire asked of a bunch of wags preserved in fake tan pumped up with botox and silicone in a shopping precinct in some Cheshire semi-rural town. I'd have a Mondeo estate and a 928 for the weekends instead.

So I suppose the Macca's closest competetion is a ten year old Forester with comparable performance and grip, but at a tenth/twentieth of the price. 😉
Love to see a youtube shootout...

It's no slouch in any form except the most basic:

Agreed and any comparisons to a hot hatch don't really stand up if we are talking about about the faster petrol versions but Porsche themselves have said that they expect 60% of the sales to be the basic diesel S model

Nice badge though and I'd certainly pick it over an X3 or a Q5

I can't find direct tests, but the closest I can get is a 2010 golf GTI

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2010-volkswagen-gti-3-door-dsg-instrumented-test

and a macan gts

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2017-porsche-macan-gts-tested-reviews

both have similar levels of grip (0.88g on a 300ft skid pan) - the Macan stops much quicker.

The macan marginally slower to 62 - 6.3 seconds verses 6.0

I would say they're broadly as quick as each other. Certainly no 'clean pair of heels'

Your comparing a 207hp Golf Gti to 360hp Macan GTS

I'm suggesting that a 2010 Leon Cupra with 265bhp might show a clean pair of heels to the 256hp diesel Macan S

other than that you analysis is spot on.

Incidentally the current Cupra 280 lapped Autocar's test track in 46.9s. The Macan turbo (the top end 400bhp version) managed 46.7s.

Again not sure the base spec diesel Macan would see which way either of them went

Don't forget just how good the handling is on a Macan. It maybe a lump but the reviews all agree the handling is exceptional & that's before you take into the account its an SUV.

All the power in the World is useless if your car has the handling prowess of a 3 wheeled shopping trolley..!

Don't forget just how good the handling is on a Macan. It maybe a lump but the reviews all agree the handling is exceptional & that's before you take into the account its an SUV.

Not quite. From your post above, Autocar reckon it's excellent "for a two ton SUV" .
I think that means they're qualifying their praise; in fact it's "very nearly amazing"!

"For a two-tonne 4x4, it’s remarkable how poised, taut, balanced and plain enjoyable to drive the Macan is. It’s very nearly amazing. There is a cutting edge to its dynamic make-up that no other SUV on the market can approach, never mind equal – and you need a really good rear-drive sports saloon or two-seater to beat it."

Lol, I've read five pages of guff about a car I know nothing about and have never seen, finally a pic gets posted and it looks like a Rover 200. I'm wasting my life away...

What tyres for a Macan?

Does anyone own one and if so what are your thoughts or optional extras you'd recommend

Good safety options: blind spot monitor, lane change assist, radar cruise control, the cornering lights system (PDLS I think), rear-view camera/surround view.

The air suspension is really good.

Electric seats are also very handy, if more than one person drives it - the 18-way adjustable sports seats option is the best and they are very comfortable.

For a cold climate, heated seats/steering wheel and auxiliary heating are all very good.

The coolest option you can get on a Macan is the Burmester sound system, which is exceptionally good.

The panoramic glass roof is excellent and doesn't creak, but you cannot have roof rails with it.

The rail system in the boot is also very practical, I highly recommend it, basically you can fix bags in place so that nothing moves.

Can't believe someone else who actually owns one has had the cheek to post a reply!
We'll be getting actual facts soon and where's the fun in that?

Can't believe someone else who actually owns one has had the cheek to post a reply!
We'll be getting actual facts soon and where's the fun in that?

and it's their only ever post on STW what are the odds 🙂

[quote=Klunk ]and it's their only ever post on STW what are the odds

Having just registered...

[quote=santacoops ]What tyres for a Macan?

effing expensive ones

PDLS - is very cool - more than cornering it blocks out the lights from ongoing vehicles so you have full been on more of the time. Also it changes light patterns depending on speed. Got know how much it costs to repair if it goes wrong!

I must say I'm surprised that you can't get roof rails and panoramic roof. Can't get your MTB on the top... no go for me then 🙂

[img] [/img]

Given a choice between the above bike and a Macan for a day in a ski resort/eastern Spain/Béarn, which would you people take?

Edit, assuming there were pedals on the bike

Saw a Bentayga in the flesh for the first time yesterday. Didn't hate it.

[quote=Edukator ]Given a choice between the above bike and a Macan for a day in a ski resort/eastern Spain/Béarn, which would you people take?

Can you get a Macan on the lifts?

Given a choice between the above bike and a Macan for a day in a ski resort/eastern Spain/Béarn, which would you people take?

depends are porsche warranties not worth the paper they are written on ?

Odd question. For a day in a ski resort I'd take the bike. For the 150 mile trip I did this morning I'd take the car thanks.

Having just registered...

I like the Macan (I have a Turbo). While it's very fast and handles very well I don't consider it a real sports car, but it's a nice compromise of sportiness and practicality. Personally I like the looks and love the interior.

aracer - Member
.......but it doesn't stop marketing led engineering being a bit shit.

Just fancied a catch up on this thread and saw this nugget, which I'm sorry to say is nonsense.
I've worked in engineering since graduating and every product I've worked on has been market led. If you don't have a market, you don't have a product....doesn't matter if it's a whizzy car that some people deem to be a trinket adorned Chelsea tractor or some piece of industrial equipment for a factory.
The product and the engineering will be as a direct result of the market. If you don't have a market, you don't have a need for a product and if you don't have a product you don't have any engineering to do....

That has been the case in all 4 different companies I have worked at; marketing says what the customer want and once it's well defined enough, the engineers (and others) make it so.....

There are many, many products out there where the technology + marketing have created the "need" rather than the other way round. See Blu-Ray, hi-def anything and every stupid MTB 'standard' for the last 10 years

The product and the engineering will be as a direct result of the market. If you don't have a market, you don't have a need for a product and if you don't have a product you don't have any engineering to do....

Of course, but I don't think that contradicts what I wrote. I've also worked in engineering, and in marketing so I understand the principles quite well and how important requirements capture is. Fortunately not for things being sold to the 52% though, so the marketing was all about genuine benefits rather than just image.

Would it help if I wrote "image led engineering is a bit shit"?

It strikes me that new MTB standards are very sensible.

The front hub on that bike has a 15mm screw-in axle that will avoid accidents that broke a Bikemagic contributor's neck. Wheel ejection under braking is no longer possible.

That tapered headset is much stronger than a straight pivot.

The 31.8 bars are stronger too.

The big disc are less likely to fade.

The suspension works very well indeed and much better than old standards which had different geometry and less travel.

Now find me any way in which the Macan is superior to say a five-year old Volvo XC 90 apart from speed (which is dangerous in itself and futile in a congested speed-limited land) and style (which is subjective as this thread proves).

Now find me any way in which the Macan is superior to say a five-year old Volvo XC 90 apart from speed (which is dangerous in itself and futile in a congested speed-limited land) and style (which is subjective as this thread proves).

It's got a Porsche badge on it.

Good lord the Macan is ugly isn't it. Actually, come to think of it, all 'cars' of this ilk are pig ugly. They really are disgusting. I thought the BMW X6 was the ugliest 'car' ever, but the Macan isn't far behind. You can almost feel the pain in the designer's pen as he is told to draw it by his manager who says 'But Gunther... we know it looks crap... but this is what people want!". It wouldn't surprise me if one day they are actually adding sexy decals of the prices of each individual part onto the exterior so owners can meet and have a quick tot up on their calculators to find out who has the most expensive naff looking car. Nothing says nouveau riche quite like these cars do.

Porsche Macack IMHO.

aracer - Member

Would it help if I wrote "image led engineering is a bit shit"?

A bit....
People who buy things like the iPhone might disagree, but I know what you mean....

Now find me any way in which the Macan is superior to say a five-year old Volvo XC 90 apart from speed (which is dangerous in itself and futile in a congested speed-limited land)

1) It's much much better put together
2) It handles way better which 'can' actually make it safer
3) It's more fuel efficient
4) It's more comfortable

I speak as an owner of an XC90 for 12 years and am now a Porsche Cayenne owner with experience of driving a Macan for extended periods - so I think I'm fairly qualified.

Although the XC90 is a good car I can tell you that even after over two years of Porsche ownership it still makes me feel way better than than the Volvo ever could or did (even though the Volvo cost me almost as much as the Porsche did)

Just little things like the way the doors close (thud not clank), the lack of noise, the fact that there isn't a satellite delay between pressing the accelerator and the car actually starting to move (which was incredibly dangerous at junctions.... google xc90 gearbox lag).

A fast car isn't necessarily dangerous, it's the driver that is. With the Volvo I found myself in situations I'd much rather not have been in because it was too slow in that situation.
Because I now have a faster car I can confidently spend less time in dangerous situations and yet I drive no faster than the vast majority of the driving public.

I would draw a parallel between this thread and the Posh Watches thread where no one seems to mind people having a watch that costs thousands and yet it doesn't perform it's sole purpose (telling the time) ANY better than a watch that costs £20 (in fact arguably the more expensive watch is worse).

A fast car isn't necessarily dangerous, it's the driver that is. With the Volvo I found myself in situations I'd much rather not have been in because it was too slow in that situation.
Because I now have a faster car I can confidently spend less time in dangerous situations and yet I drive no faster than the vast majority of the driving public.

You sounds like a shit driver. A slow car does not put you in dangerous situations.

Good lord the Macan is ugly isn't it.

You sounds like a shit driver.

For example, I'm behind a caravan on an A road with few overtaking opportunities, in my car now I can safely pass the caravan on a shortish section of road and be on my way. In the Volvo I would either try to overtake and risk running out of road, or (much more likely) sit behind the caravan while a queue of cars builds up behind leading to the inevitable hero having a go from the back ..... another dangerous situation.

(But I agree that many people only look as far as the badge.)

In the Volvo I would either try to overtake and risk running out of road

You are not helping yourself here. Step away from the keyboard and pat yourself on the back for being able to afford a nice car.

Seems fair comparing current Porch technology with a 14-year-old Volvo.

Don't ever drive a car with less than 200bhp per ton again, you'd be really dangerous if you can't pull out safely in a Volvo.

But seriously, you just adapt to a vehicles characteristics and don't expect a 40 ton truck to take off like a Caterham R-something.

These things are all total overkill on today's roads it's just the degree of overkill that varies. As for the klunk or thunk of the doors... . Perceived quality isn't it.

And yes, my watch is a Casio which I last wore several years ago, a watch band across my sun tan would be so embarrassing down the pool.

Nice. Why?

Poor judgement. I see it all the time on the road, and that's on a road bike where I'd rarely be going quicker than 25mph, yet alot of people still struggle to overtake in a safe manner; remember Most of the time it is not safe to overtake AT ALL.

Go for a G63......

stop everything; the Porsche's not as bad as you thought

I give you the Lamborghini [s]Hubris[/s] Urus:

[img] [/img]

... is that a dunce's hat ?

Just googled this car .It looks like something a footballer would buy his plastic babe of a wife

where I'd rarely be going quicker than 25mph

yeah, but i mean obviously I'm not trying.

Now find me any way in which the Macan is superior to say a five-year old Volvo XC 90

It's far superior in marking you out to other motorists as a massive bell end 😉

I have no issue with people making fools of themselves in public. [b]I do have a problem with people feeling that it's ok to drive around in a car that produces far more pollution/uses far more finite resources than is necessary. I do have a problem with people driving around in massive heavy vehicles that pose a far greater risk of harm to other road users[/b] (anyone owning a Chelsea Tractor, feel free to let me drive it into you when you're out on your bike, see how well you come off). Etc.

You sounds like a shit driver. A slow car does not put you in dangerous situations.

Yeah. Cos it's all those slow, carefully driven cars that cause mayhem on the roads. Give everyone a minimum of 300 horses. That'll make the roads safer for sure...

That's got to be a troll, shirley? Of course it does, from not being able to pull away from junctions quickly, causing oncoming vehicles to over-estimate how quickly the car is pulling away and catch up much more quickly than anticipated, to attempting to overtake slower moving vehicles, then finding it a struggle to get past in the clear space available.
You do drive a car, I take it?

So what you're saying is, a fast car is more likely to make the driver take risks?

Richmars - yes it is subjective, but trust me, it really is as ugly as sin. And yes it does matter, because one more of these on the roads spoils the look of the country. The car industry coming up with these monstrosities could well be likened to the release of 27.5+?

Now find me any way in which the Macan is superior to say a five-year old Volvo XC 90 apart from speed

Far better design and engineering
Far better quality

The Volvo is a decent car but its not in the same league

Had a beer with a guy who buys second hand cars to order for people. When someone asks him for a Macan he advises them to buy new and if they don't want to wait to expect to pay close to or above new car money

but trust me, it really is as ugly as sin.

Forgive me but you can't really compare a Mecan to an XC90, they are both quite different vehicles. If you want a slightly better comparison then an XC60 is more in tune size wise. I've had both an XC90 and have an XC60 at present and it's odd trying to compare each to each other. Ones like a 7 man inflatable white water raft and the other a Canadian Canoe. I had the r-design 90 and despite its sporty look intentions it was by no means a sporty car. Volvo should have stuck to thier original design and left it in SELux spec and broke the 2b pencil, even the much improved 60 is no gunslinger, in SELux spec it's just a nice high estate car. "Making progress" in either is a chore and rather mind numbing.
If comparing cars to cars then the Mecan is closest to the Coupe on Viagra that is the X6/5/4 variants, where space inside isn't a consideration except for the driver and passenger, the rear for 10yr olds at best. But then, that's what the Mecan is designed for, small "upwardly mobile" youthful families with an aspiring nature and a few quid to burn.
IMO.

The ideas slow cars are dangerous is false. As accident statistics show:

[url= http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2367194/Best-worst-manufacturer-brand-owners-revealed.html ]http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/cars/article-2367194/Best-worst-manufacturer-brand-owners-revealed.html[/url]

The main criteria is whether they are driven by road hogs. The Volvo XC 90 gets well up there, Sharkbait. The Macan is the same sort of car, driven by aggressive types who like to be safe themselves while putting all the other road users at risk. The "nobody has died in a Volvo" fallacy gives a sense of invulnerability whilst driving dangerously.

Now find me any way in which the Macan is superior to say a five-year old Volvo XC 90 apart from speed (which is dangerous in itself and futile in a congested speed-limited land)

I do have a problem with people feeling that it's ok to drive around in a car that produces far more pollution/uses far more finite resources than is necessary. I do have a problem with people driving around in massive heavy vehicles that pose a far greater risk of harm to other road users

The whole pollution thing is heavily dependent on how much you drive. You can drive a little car a lot and pollute far more than the guy with the 911 Turbo S who takes it out on weekends.

Then it's really a case of a very subjective "I hate those who have more than me", unless you're driving the least polluting car ever, or actually, you shouldn't be driving at all but cycling around or perhaps using public transport.

On a bike forum? Never!

Sometimes this forum is more like pistonheads crossed with Conde Naste Traveller than a mountain bike forum. Apart from the wood-burning stoves of course.

it's the closest thing to a 911 that can sit 5 people and have enough trunk space for a long trip.

There's a whole multitude of fast estate cars that would do a far better job for this purpose so you really can't justify a Macan on practicality grounds. It's a vanity thing full stop.

The whole pollution thing is heavily dependent on how much you drive. You can drive a little car a lot and pollute far more than the guy with the 911 Turbo S who takes it out on weekends.

Most of the pollution associated with cars happens during the production phase.

It's a vanity thing full stop.

There's a whole multitude of fast estate cars that would do a far better job for this purpose so you really can't justify a Macan on practicality grounds. It's a vanity thing full stop.

Most of the pollution associated with cars happens during the production phase.

I saw a Macan parked up the other day, with a very similar type car parked next to it. And it dawned on me; the Macan isn't a glorified Audi, it's a glorified Nissan Juke! 😆

You misread what I wrote. I didn't buy a Macan because I wanted the most practical car I could buy. Far from it. While the Macan is fairly practical, it's a rather small SUV and definitely not hugely practical. Just about good enough. But I specifically wanted the closest thing to a 911 that is also (much) more practical than a 911. In terms of build quality, driving experience, options and interior, this is it.

Whe whole blingy SUV thing reminds me of [url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/mans-luxury-watch-successfully-impresses-fellow-****s-20161024115895 ]THIS[/url]

oh and [url= http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/short-men-to-spend-day-thinking-about-being-short-20161024115866 ]THIS[/url]

Haha 😆

Be prepared for everyone to hate you.

I bought a ten year old Cayman S six months ago, its a 2nd car so doesn't get used daily, but its staggering the amount of abuse that I have received from other car drivers.

All cars are a vanity thing

Pretty certain mine isnt.

we got the Macan because it's much more practical, especially with a child, and it's the closest thing to a 911 that can sit 5 people and have enough trunk space for a long trip.

Well they have similar interiors but you are deluding yourself a high SUV drives and handles like a 911. The Macan has the same Porsche Badge and a similar interior the similarities end there.

Did you not see this bit...?

We have another Porsche (a "proper" "sports" one)

Seems like quator is in a better position to make his statement than the majority of posters on this thread who seem to be experts even though they have probably never even sat in a Macan (or 911) let alone drive them.

I'm pretty well qualified thanks to known how a 911 and Macan drives. Check some of my previous posts if you want to confirm.

There are people on this forum that think a Transporter drives like a 911, and they've apparently driven both too.....

I bought a ten year old Cayman S six months ago, its a 2nd car so doesn't get used daily, but its staggering the amount of abuse that I have received from other car drivers.

Oh very nice, how much do they cost these days to buy and run? I would love to get one, just need to pursued the Mrs its a good idea !

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..