I am also concerned by this slipping clutch business. Have Porsche tried this in the US where heavy speed enforcement can result in hours of driving at the speed limit with the cruise control on? I don't like the idea on mechanical sympathy grounds alone.
If you were to ask anyone where I work whether they would accept clutch slipping to that kind of degree, they would answer with a resounding HELL NO. Then again, if the oil temps are controlled, maybe it's not so bad- I have to imagine that Porsche took this through rigorous testing on a dyno and in vehicles to prove the concept works without horrible clutch wear. Even so I'd be surprised if you don't end up spending more for maintenance...
"a Porsche made for the passenger instead of the driver, which is a harder pill to swallow than any of the previous doomsday scenarios. " -------------------------------------------------------------------- If it had displaced one of the other versions I would agree. But it's an additional variant targeted at a specific market and NOBODY is as good as Porsche at making money selling cars. Given the enormous price differential I have no doubt Porsche will make a healthy profit on every one it sells, which will help it improve the cars it makes for drivers.
Why is Magrath shocked that Porsche would build a ridiculously hideous, long-wheelbase Panamera for the #1 automobile market in the world? One could argue that the slightly less hideous, regular wheelbase Panamera was already a harbinger of doomsday.
If this sort of business model equates to selling their corporate soul, well Porsche did that years ago when they entered the SUV business. The also hideous 1st gen Cayenne built off VW Touareg bones (which was actually a handsome SUV) was the end of Porsche's romantic legacy. But the rallying cry from Porsche was that the profit from Cayennes make Caymans.
True or not, Porsche would be Euro-centric fools to ignore the Chinese market or any market niche worldwide. This isn't 1963, the bicycle isn't China's chief form of transportation and the current engineers at BMW couldn't build a spiritual successor to the 2002 if their lives depended on it.
Of course it's about the money. Porsche isn't some boutique company owned by a single really rich guy who really doesn't care if he makes money. It's (based on margin) the most profitable car company in the world. It came thisclose to eating VW, which would have been like a Chihuahua eating a buffalo. Porsche exists to make money, not stroke the overinflated egos of Porsche owners who sneer at the concept of SUV's and sedans.
Comments
If it had displaced one of the other versions I would agree. But it's an additional variant targeted at a specific market and NOBODY is as good as Porsche at making money selling cars. Given the enormous price differential I have no doubt Porsche will make a healthy profit on every one it sells, which will help it improve the cars it makes for drivers.
Why is Magrath shocked that Porsche would build a ridiculously hideous, long-wheelbase Panamera for the #1 automobile market in the world? One could argue that the slightly less hideous, regular wheelbase Panamera was already a harbinger of doomsday.
If this sort of business model equates to selling their corporate soul, well Porsche did that years ago when they entered the SUV business. The also hideous 1st gen Cayenne built off VW Touareg bones (which was actually a handsome SUV) was the end of Porsche's romantic legacy. But the rallying cry from Porsche was that the profit from Cayennes make Caymans.
True or not, Porsche would be Euro-centric fools to ignore the Chinese market or any market niche worldwide. This isn't 1963, the bicycle isn't China's chief form of transportation and the current engineers at BMW couldn't build a spiritual successor to the 2002 if their lives depended on it.
Cling to the past, but let ancient history go.