I have driven the new Cayenne in 3 engine types, but only on test drives.

I have a 11' S loaner. Base wheels w/all seasons, no suspension options and 46k on odometer.

I have always had BMW SUVs. At first the loaner felt very heavy and much truckier than our X6 (which it is)

It wasn't until I flogged it on the highway that I got a better impression. I love natural aspiration. BMW turbos have very little lag, but it's not the same as NA. So engine is great. Ride/handling balance is great as well. It's more comfortable than BMWs which is why it feels heavy - softer springs/shocks, but ... Roll is well controlled.

Bottom line: the Cayenne has steering and handling that I used to cherish in Mercedes and BMWs of the late 80s & 90s. It's a more straightforward drive. BMW bends the laws of physics w/computers etc. and the result while fast and very car-like is a little hollow/lifeless, like a great white chomping a seal.

Only problem, and it's a big one... You pay 15-20% more for P car SUV. Our 09' X5 4.8 was $74k (pano roof, rear dvd, active anti roll, biggest wheels, premium audio, nav etc..) A 2009 Cayenne S similarly equipped was $93k. Dealers in CT don't really order their Cayennes with much equip. it seems (never seen a gen I pepper with a pano roof - outside an autoshow). Drove my friends 13' X5M last night. Incredible- comfortable fast awesome ... And less than 10k more than the base S I'm driving was new....?

Just wanted to share

DRP

 

66k Cayenne S is the base price. X5M is close to 89k. Even if you load up S to a moderate level (nothing as fancy as CF bits and pieces), you should be ~mid-75k to 80k. Personally, I can't stand the styling on X5s so I would opt out for Porsches.

 

there is no substitute.

 

for what? Brand brainwashing?

With all due respect, that line is owned solely by porsche sports cars...

 

93k on a S model?! I've yet to see a dealer ordered 93k S model. Anyways, I'd seriously consider GTS over 93k S model. Are you near Hartford? Just curious.

 

I gotta agree with the point on price premium. Base models are comparable in price but you're getting a stripped down vehicle with the Porsche. Cayenne GTS is in the same price range of the BMW X5M. I'd still rather have the Porsche though.

 

Yep. Hartford area.

 

An apples to apples GTS is about $5k more than an X5M.

The BMW is almost certainly (haven't driven the new GTS yet) more car like (if that's you thing - which it should be if you intend to go fast).

We can all agree that there is no comparison on acceleration performance between the two. The X5M is unworldly fast (ala new. Cayenne Turbo S).

The BMW is much more common looking and perhaps less special since there are a million x5s on the road. It would be a tough decision between the two for me. The M is dynamically superior (safe bet), but the GTS is newer, fresher and has more brand appeal to most. Also BMWs have more tech (or at least it's more in your face) which can be off putting to some - especially older buyers. Candidly BMWs actually have better fit and finish. Thicker clear coats (ask a detailer) better more durable plastics in the interior etc.. Don't forget Porsche was on the financial skids not that long ago.

The Cayenne is a great car. But as a real car guy, it seems obvious that the cayenne is an SUV designed and tuned by Porsche. It's the truck that the 911 engineers would drive if they had to drive a TRUCK. It's not a sports car converted into an SUV. Much like the panamera is their take on a sedan....not a 911 stretched with extra doors (like Aston did with the Rapide). Coincidentally there was a 4 door 996 project car - which of course didn't make it.


A safe and happy new year

 

I don't know about that. Top Gear Australia says the Porsche Turbo (Not S) is quicker than a BMW X5M.

 

But you pay for it. I am pretty sure that the OP was accounting for the price difference as well. I think X5M is a great car for a hair below 100k.

 

2011 BMW X5 M 2011 Porsche Cayenne Turbo
ACCELERATION TO MPH
0-30 1.4 sec 1.3 sec
0-40 2.3 2.1
0-50 3.1 3.2
0-60 4.1 4.3
Read more: http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...#ixzz2GU38hMbc

I'm not a person who thinks numbers are gospel, but there isn't a Cayenne with greater raw acceleration than the X5M at any price.

Most magazines prefer the Cayennes at the track - that's where the engineers deserve credit. I don't think any other car in history has ever had 295 section tires up front? The ZR1 uses 285s..

Dr.

 

I don't have to ask a detailer.. I have 2 BMWs (cars, and another that's 2 wheeled) in the driveway and an '06 Cayenne. And I've owned MANY BMWs though the years.

The finish on the Cayenne is FAR superior to the BMW finish. My '06 is the Titanium edition in a light blue metallic that happens to be a VW paint. At 78,000 miles there is one stone chip in the paint. Our '03 5-series BMW had literally dozens of paint chips well before it got to 50,000 miles. It has so many at 107k that I've given up trying to keep up with them.

The BMW finish instantly etches (no matter what protective coatings I use) when bird poop lands on the finish. If the poop is left too long (like a day) it can require wet sanding and re-polishing to make the finish half decent again. The Cayenne - I wash the poops off with some spray detailer, and you'd never know they are there.

I have the same experience with the '01 M-Coupe. And friends have the same problems with their '10 and '11 335i's.

BMW went to a water based paint quite a few years ago, and the quality immediately suffered.

Interior plastics? Guess you never owned an E36/M3 with self-destructing self-recycling plastic interior? Or an E46/M3 with rubberized interior trim that first turns gray then starts peeling if you happen to touch it? Or any BMW from the past 15 years where the exterior seals around windows start chunking pieces off? Or the very soft glass BMW uses that picks up a sandblasted appearance before 50,000 miles rolls around?

Sorry - I own both marques. Your statement is the exact opposite of what I've observed owning BOTH. The Cayenne has a far superior fit and finish to anything BMW has made in the past 20 years. Last decent finish on a BMW was on my '87 535i - back when they still used decent paint.

BTW - have you checked Porsche's financials in the past 10 years? I believe they currently have a huge (in the mutlibillion euros range) surplus. I don't believe anyone would worry about them being "on the skids.."

 

Didn't mean to strike a nerve there.

In fairness, I have never owned a BMW or Porsche beyond 70,000 miles so I can't speak to the longevity of "fit & finish". My use of the term refers to the tactile feel the daily user might perceive.

I had tremendous paint chipping on my 740i sport, but I chalk that up the consequence of travelling at very high speeds and aerodynamics. The design of some cars lend them to more chipping. I have two chips on the 991 hood and its only 6 months old.

I got my wife's X6 2 months before the 991, and the 991 has way more swirls in the flat black (which I hand wash [2 buckets w/grit filters & a foam wash mitt etc...] twice weekly) vs. the sapphire black of the X6 (which goes through a quality car was 2-3 times a month).

All I was suggesting it that Porsche products have a sturdy old fashioned feel to them. The Gen II Cayenne now feels like the X5 did back in 2004. Which isn't a bad thing. There are good qualities missing from the current X5 which the old car had. Porsche is analog whereas BMW is digital.

I guess a better way of making my point is by expressing what I wish the Cayenne was - I wish that, given the price premium, it was a hands down winner of all performance SUV comparisons. The X5M wouldn't be as threatening without its fabulous car like ride. I haven't driven the GTS, but most cayennes I have driven are softly sprung (and lack a cocoon like feel from the driver's seat) and that's where I take issue. Don't put a sports car badge on a car that doesn't place a priority on sport. Truth is, fewer people would buy Cayennes I think if they were Suvs instead of sUvs.

And like it or not, we all know Porsche's current prosperity (which is only just know affecting the current cars) is due solely to the Cayenne and now lesser extent the Panamera.

I 'left' BMW as my daily driver b/c the company sold out. in 2003 they started making cars they thought their customers wanted - instead of creating a product that people want after its introduced and well received by those in the know. I love Porsche for its old fashioned race team mentality. I love my 911. But when it comes to an SUV to tote around in on the weekends, old fashioned is not an asset to me. Especially for 15-20% more than a tight riding, modern SUV. My 2 cents.

DRP

P.S. to deilenberger - I have been on beemers for years - currently a K12GT. I have always likened the bikes more to a 2 wheeled mercedes than a bimmer. IMHO The bikes don't place as much emphasis on sport as the cars do (with the 1000RR exception).

Happy New Year

 

I looked hard at the x5d against the Cayenne and it was in fact my first choice until they announced the CD. We have an 01 996 and 07 e90 and both are the respective reasons that I considered what I did.

You are correct that a comparable x5 is cheaper than a Cayenne, but I agree with others that the Cayenne has a far superior fit an finish. BMWs go for a very minimal appearance, but they still feel cheap to me which is my main complaint. In my CD, however, I'm impressed with the quality and feel on the plastics that were used (only have partial leather).

More importantly (to me) the Cayenne handles and rides far better (having a BMW though I know that is partly due to the crappy run flats they insist on using). I'd fling a Cayenne into a corner faster than any x5...

 

I just got a set of 305 section tires for the front/rear. It is an absurdly wide tire for the front track and will provide even more uncanny grip. The speed at which you can confidently take an exit (without drama) is laughable.

It might not be an apples-to-apples comparison, but I am not afraid of an X5M