Porsche Cayenne

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-08-12 06:56pm

Was anybody else remined by the Canyonero from Simpsons?

And why'd they name it after a pepper.

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-08-12 07:08pm

Dahak wrote: It's been tested for offroad purposes. It is no Defender, but it won't stick in the mud.
The whole car has a adaptable ground clearing (on freeways it automatically lowers itself above 120km/h), and of course is pumped with electronic systems to ensure it is maneuvreable even in extreme situations.

Most SUV's have and have had suspension that lowers at high speed. They still flip far more easily then any car.

Admiral Valdemar · Post by **Admiral Valdemar** » 2004-08-12 08:44pm

This Porsche has been out for ages over here and yes, like all SUVs, I only ever see women driving them who have a couple of kids and never go off-road.

Which is just as well. The newest pseudo-4x4 to come out of the BMW X3; the 3 Series version of the X5. It was reviewed on Top Gear last week and frankly, it can't handle even the most basic of off-roading courses. Jeremy Clarkson simply asked why people didn't buy - for nearly the same price - a standard 3 Series estate or even the new Jag X-Type estate which can handle off-road better than this 4x4.

Sir Sirius · Post by **Sir Sirius** » 2004-08-13 08:18am

Linky, check out the video titled First of its Kind. It is so pompous and corny that it's truly frightening.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2004-08-13 11:18am

The Porsche Cayenne is actually just a souped-up, restyled version of the VW Touareg, which doesn't look half-bad to me:

IRG CommandoJoe · Post by **IRG CommandoJoe** » 2004-08-13 12:36pm

Does anyone find the first few lines of the commercial stupid? Particularly the parts in bold:

"There is nothing quite like the feel of being first. Number one. Numero uno. The standard that everyone would be measured against. It's not that being second is so bad...it's just that it's not first. And well, it's not as much fun. And it could be said that no one loves being first more than Porsche."

And the way he delivers the lines and the flim clips they chose makes it feel like a great documentary about some noble and awe-inspiring historical event, when it's really just a....fucking....car commercial!

Phantasee · Post by **Phantasee** » 2004-08-13 08:07pm

I think the reason they called it the Cayenne is because it sounds exotic and Italian?

Personally, it's a waste of money. If I wanted a Porsche, I'd get a Carrera 4 or something. On the other hand, if I got a Hummer H2, I'd get it so I could slap some nice 28" wheels with some Pirelli rubber, get a nice Alpine sound and video system in there, and a place to hook up my blender.

People don't buy SUVs for their off-road "capability," they get it to say "I'm better than you, I make more money than you, and I'm gonna run your ugly ass car over" without opening their mouths. That's the purpose behind the Escalade by Cadillac. Everyone wants a big status symbol, and since Cadillac is a big one, let's slap it onto a big vehicle. And then make a truck version....

Dennis Toy · Post by **Dennis Toy** » 2004-08-13 10:51pm

And those who posted pics of the horror known as the Aztec shall die a slow and painful death.

those who wish a horrible death upon me shall have a thousand borg drones infected with the andromeda strain, the t'a'uos herpes and the face of Captain Janeway grafted upon them running towards their houses with plasma flamethrowers.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-08-13 11:22pm

Phantasee wrote:snip People don't buy SUVs for their off-road "capability," they get it to say "I'm better than you, I make more money than you, and I'm gonna run your ugly ass car over" without opening their mouths. That's the purpose behind the Escalade by Cadillac. Everyone wants a big status symbol, and since Cadillac is a big one, let's slap it onto a big vehicle. And then make a truck version....

People like this are interesting..I drive a wee 1.3 litre Toyota Corsa, but also have acess to one of these..SUV? bunch'o'wimps

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-08-14 03:55am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
People like this are interesting..I drive a wee 1.3 litre Toyota Corsa, but also have acess to one of these..SUV? bunch'o'wimps

http://marina.fortunecity.com/cayecalm/417/goddess.jpg

Fuck that pansy little piece of shit, this is a mans vehicle. Though I'd really like to see it with a 1000hp W16 engine, on each axle. Course, I'd also like a WRX STI with a second engine in place of the truck for the rear axle and the axle's linked by some big chains to retain consistant all wheel drive, so I might not be thinking clearly.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-08-14 04:05am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
People like this are interesting..I drive a wee 1.3 litre Toyota Corsa, but also have acess to one of these..SUV? bunch'o'wimps

http://marina.fortunecity.com/cayecalm/417/goddess.jpg
Fuck that pansy little piece of shit, this is a mans vehicle. Though I'd really like to see it with a 1000hp W16 engine, on each axle. Course, I'd also like a WRX STI with a second engine in place of the truck for the rear axle and the axle's linked by some big chains to retain consistant all wheel drive, so I might not be thinking clearly.

Thats nice sonny, but some of need to be able to able to traverse all terrain

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-08-14 04:39am

Stuart Mackey wrote:
Thats nice sonny, but some of need to be able to able to traverse all terrain

What if I was to add 3-D articulation in the middile of the chassis and a jet engine to bleed air into flotation bags?

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-08-14 04:50am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote:
Thats nice sonny, but some of need to be able to able to traverse all terrain
What if I was to add 3-D articulation in the middile of the chassis and a jet engine to bleed air into flotation bags?

jet propelled hovercraft dont qualify, sorry

Post by **Sea Skimmer** » 2004-08-14 05:15am

Stuart Mackey wrote: jet propelled hovercraft dont qualify, sorry

That's like saying a floating car isn't a car.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-08-14 05:23am

Sea Skimmer wrote:
Stuart Mackey wrote: jet propelled hovercraft dont qualify, sorry
That's like saying a floating car isn't a car.

*narrows eyes*Ahh..but we are not talking about ordinary cars

jairyn_1 · Post by **jairyn_1** » 2004-08-14 05:39am

My question is why are SUVs a fashion accessory? They're supposed to be used for offroading.

Peregrin Toker · Post by **Peregrin Toker** » 2004-08-14 05:51am

jairyn_1 wrote:My question is why are SUVs a fashion accessory? They're supposed to be used for offroading.

Because they're expensive as fuck.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-08-14 06:16am

Peregrin Toker wrote:
jairyn_1 wrote:My question is why are SUVs a fashion accessory? They're supposed to be used for offroading.
Because they're expensive as fuck.

its also compensation for some subconcious need, or in the case of some men ..well you know

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-14 08:42am

Robert Treder wrote:It's Porsche's new sportscar SUV:

Here's a pic

The selling point: it's insanely fast, but it looks like an SUV. They've become really popular, at least here in the Bay Area.

Looks like any modern car, ugly.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2004-08-14 05:46pm

His Divine Shadow wrote:
Robert Treder wrote:It's Porsche's new sportscar SUV:

Here's a pic

The selling point: it's insanely fast, but it looks like an SUV. They've become really popular, at least here in the Bay Area.
Looks like any modern car, ugly.

My grievance with the vehicle isn't due to its styling - it's due to the gross excess that is its very existance. The Cayenne is the epitome of conspicuous superfluous consumption.

And, what amazed me about the car was the fact that within a very short while of its introduction to the market, hundreds of them were purchased. This, even though it's an inefficient, nigh-useless $50K+ vehicle. It's one thing if somebody needs to buy a new car, so they buy a dopey luxury SUV to fill their needs. But in this case, there simply cannot have been that many people who needed a car and so bought the Cayenne. It's clear that many of the new Cayenne owners bought the ridiculous thing simply because they could, and they wanted to show that off.

It's not the car that's ugly; it's the owners.

Robert Treder · Post by **Robert Treder** » 2004-08-14 06:03pm

His Divine Shadow wrote:Looks like any modern car, ugly.

And, not every modern car is ugly. For example:

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2004-08-14 06:14pm

jairyn_1 wrote:My question is why are SUVs a fashion accessory? They're supposed to be used for offroading.

No. They're for moms to transport kids to soccer practice. Duh.

Stuart Mackey · Post by **Stuart Mackey** » 2004-08-14 10:09pm

Robert Treder wrote:
His Divine Shadow wrote:Looks like any modern car, ugly.
And, not every modern car is ugly. For example:

http://www.fknr.ie/imglib/BMW/coloursex ... ver_lg.jpg

Thats not ugly..just incredibly bland, cold and far to expensive to fix ouside of warranty.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-15 07:45am

Robert Treder wrote:
His Divine Shadow wrote:Looks like any modern car, ugly.
And, not every modern car is ugly. For example:

*snip BMW*

Well it's not beatifull, it doesn't appeal to me in any way, I infact dislike it's appearence, so I would have to say at best it's a car I won't be able to pick out from the homogenous masses of other cars.

jairyn_1 · Post by **jairyn_1** » 2004-08-15 08:11am

neoolong wrote:
jairyn_1 wrote:My question is why are SUVs a fashion accessory? They're supposed to be used for offroading.
No. They're for moms to transport kids to soccer practice. Duh.

Then why do we still allow for the existence of minivans?