In So. Cal., 10% of the miles you put on the car will be in the snow??

Yep, Mammoth season ticket holders and frequent trips up to our local mountains.

I've had my X5 in lots of mud, snow, sand, and muck. It does really well (even when following a Jeep Rubicon - though I don't have near the articulation or clearance of the Jeep).

I've driven the Cayenne and Touareg, both are very impressive if not just a bit overpriced (the X5 is a bit more reasonable, yet less impressive off-road).

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1108668510.jpg

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1108668544.jpg

The Sequoia is a co. vehicle to carry goods, truck won't work because I do carry venders/clients and still need dry storage area. Suburban is strictly for play. Pulling race car trailer, camping, kayaking,biking, skiing. I don not normally carry 7 passengers, but I do carry 4 or 5 ski/bike buddies quite a bit. I ski about 30 times per year and carrying buddies and gear takes up space. I use the boxster for days I don't need the SUV. When I do drive the Suburban, which is very frequently it's because I need the capabilites. Am I off road 100% of time? No. However, I bet I am offroad or in Snow about 75% of the time with this vehicle. Also, I get about 18/20mpg diesel and not much different with Toyota Sequoia.

Changing tires on the pepper is smart, but most of the people I see in Tahoe don't take the time to do that. I know I wouldn't. For my use, yes, the pepper is still a poser. Would I cruise the highway with it. Yes. would I toss my muddy mountain bike in the back and bound down the off road paths around here, no way.

If my vehicle was going to be used 90/100% on road, personally, I would rather have a sweet perfromance sedan than the pepper. I'm sure it's a great vehicle on the road, but I bet they could have put the same technology in a sedan and come up with an even better handeling car.

I'm no scientist, but seems simple physics would dictate given the same engine, tech, suspension in a chassis with a lower center of gravity would out perfrome any SUV. If they wanted a high performance passenger vehicle, that most people won't take off road, why not just build a sedan ala audi with 4wd technology. I would like to see an M3/S4 competitor. I would give up the boxster for something like this, so I could take the wife and kids for a spirited drive.

Why wouldn't you toss the dirty bike on the Cay? The Cayenne does everthing the Subs do but quicker, safer and better...

Here I don't see many Subs getting dirty... are they all posers too?

I guess for the same reason I wouldn' drive a mercedes S500 through a mud hole. I just wouldn't want my $60,000 to $80,000 vehicle to get thrashed. MY old Sub., don't really care. Scratch the Porsche and I'd be pissed, add another scratch the sub, I'd never know it was there. If my wife used my Suburban to run the kids around town or to soccer practice...yes I'd call that a poser. Would have been better off with a minivan. I think the SUV was desinged for people who couldn't handle the image of owning a minivan/station wagon. Now the wagon is comming back, I think the new dodge magnum makes more sense than the cayenne. Carries same amount of passengers, same or better storage, lower center of gravity.

I disagrre with the pepper doing everything the suburban does and better. Sucks in the snow, unless you take time to change tires.(PITA) Doesn't tow as well, Can get messy but cost to much to fix paint if scratches occur.

As I said earlier, it's a great tall sports sedan, but could have been an even better traditional sports sedan.

The picture of the Jeep with the full body brush gard is right on the money. Now that's an SUV. That's how I use my Suburban, not quit that tricked out, but same idea as far as use is concearned.

I guess it comes down to use. I simply couldn't use the Cayeene. I could use a 4 seater sports sedan.

Here in the suburbs of OC, for the *vast* majority of the owners, yes.

There are several in my neighborhood. Not a one has ever had the trailer hitch uncorked. Never towed a thing, never gone off road, rarely carry more than 3 people. They all just use them basically as single passenger commuter cars.

They buy them like lemmings, though, because they see the ads and think the truck makes them look like rugged individualists.

Any SUV is a compromise vehicle. In that category, it begins and ends with the Toyota Landcruiser. It is the best compromise. Price, reliability, size, power, off road performance, resale, availability of cheap used parts, etc.

Most Porsche enthusiasts that don't like the Cayenne, dislike it because it is a compromise. It is neither all the way here, nor all the way there. Being "all the way" in a particular direction is a Porsche mantra.

Mostly I think, those who dislike the Cayenne are just manifesting their distain for SUVs in general. So if you are a Porsche purest, and don't like SUVs, the Cayenne will make you violently ill. But I would bet that of those who own (and like) SUVs, sure wouldn't mind having a Cayenne in their stable.

:confused: You lost me in a big way!!!! You used Fiat and Profitability in the same thought! http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/shake.gif This would suggest that you don't have the slightest clue about the financial situation largest Italian maker. For example their stock valuation...
http://chart.finance.yahoo.com/c/my/f/fia.mi.gif
http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/bawling.gif

And then there is Fiat's historical relationship with their employees. Let's see, how could I describe it...?

http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/ar15.gif http://www.pelicanparts.com/support/smileys/mgwhore.gif

I meant that Ferrari and Lamborghini were not negatively impacted by their acquisition by Fiat and VW.

In fact Ferrari has now become very profitable (u teach me.. maybe the only profitable subsidiary in the FIAT group) focusing on a niche product.

But my friend the days of the 348s were not all roses at Fiorano. Fiat owened 90% of Ferrari since 1988 and 50% since 1969... And back in those days FIAT was not as troubled as it is now.... Instead they could pour cash into a losing Ferrari so that Ferrari could spend it on winningless F1 campaigns and the 308,328,348 series. Ferrari turned the page with the 355 and the 360 turned out to be the definitive sports car. I just think that maybe they could have not done it on their own.
Now they can turn you down if you don't offer enough credentials.



http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1108676360.gif


All I am saying is that independence is good for the Board of Directors... not necessarily for the consumers.

This is what it should look like.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1108678787.jpg

I'll try again.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1108678969.jpg

The Escalade with 26" wheels are definitely poser material. My suburbia living boss' wife is driving a pimped out Escalade with 24" wheels, tvs, etc. The cost? $85K LARGE! THe Landcruiser has an MSRP of $56K! SO a $60K Pepper starts to look good.

Yeah Baby!!! That's what we're talking about. I'll take two.

Wayne

Interesting that this came up this week because I think that Fiat's fortunes might be turning around. :p
Here is a quote from this week's IS Survivor article
The story starts in 2000. The geniuses then running General Motors (many of whom are the geniuses now running General Motors) struck a deal with Fiat ... negotiated, according to one account, over a long weekend ... to swap equity and become global partners. The agreement contained a time bomb, guaranteed to win this year's Business Bizarro Award: A "put option." It means Fiat can compel GM to acquire it whether GM wants to or not -- an inverted hostile takeover. How hostile is it? For $8 billion or so, GM will acquire more than $10 billion in long-term debt. And, even worse, a large pile of Fiats. Read the whole thing at http://www.issurvivor.com/

Wayne

The touareg looks way more sexy than the porsche version

There is so much strangeness with the Toureg/Cayenne thing.

For the SAME PRICE, you can either get the Toureg equipped with a beefy 4.2 V8, or . . . a Cayenne with a VW Golf engine that is literally one of the slowest new vehicles sold in the US.

Doesn't that really make the Cayenne V6 the ultimate poseur-mobile?

I think the Cayenne is a wonderful, well-executed vehicle. But I wish they would have created a new brand name for a non-sports car product. Combine this dilution of the company identity with the overall increasingly Japanese-like feel of their products, the company attitude of profits above all else, the growing focus on yuppie boutique merchandise at the dealerships, the loss of the unique air-cooled characteristic, and the abandonment of top-level racing, and you have the ingredients of heartburn. The ideals of the old company seem to have slipped away on many fronts and the Cayenne is but one piece of that situation.

TechArt
 

Hello!
what do you think of the Cayenne with Magnum body kit ?http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1108702226.jpg
Raynald