Seems like every review of Panamera Turbo claims this car is the fastest thing ever and there seems to be a great deal of hype about how quick the car is. 0-60 times with launch control are very good, yes. However, it does seem to run out of steam on top. looking at this month's R&T 1/4 miles times, it doesn't seem very impressive, especially given the $153,000 price-as-tested. That car managed to run 11.7 @ 118.0mph. To me that doesn't warrant all the praise considering that something like E55 AMG runs 12 flat stock (there are even a few high 11's stock passes on dragtimes) and about 115-116mph trap speed. And that car has been out since 2003, you can pick it up for $30,000 or less. Same thing with the M5, it can trap 116-117mph bone stock also. I believe Panamera Turbo should be will into the 120's trap speed and have at least 560hp, given the outrageous price. Not impressed with the acceleration personally.

 

Seems awful fast to me, and I have one. I've had the M5 and and Merc. They are not built as good. Granted, it is an opinion.

 

can't comment on top speeds but in acceleration around town the thing is stunning. i hit it at 30 mph and my son and his friend were pinned in the seat and couldn't move.

it blew away my 2008 Cayenne turbo and those are fast.

the car's acceleration is not overrated imo

 

I guess we'll have to wait and see how they compare with E55/M5 in terms of rolling acceleration (where are the vids lol), but all I'm saying is that from just looking at 1/4 mile times, Panamera is not looking significantly faster.

And these cars were out ages ago too, which means that their replacements will likely blow the Panamera away. 2011 M5 is supposed to have at least 550hp and the new E AMG will probably have even more power than that.

 

My dads stock E55 went 12.2 at 115. So yes, the Panamera Turbo will put a few lengths on it from 60-130

 

Seems pretty fast to me. Post some of your rolling times in your M5, etc so we can compare. I don't know how to post vids in the first place. Someone more technologically advanced will post up.





When a 500-hp Porsche shows up—especially one with four doors—some sort of irrational response seems appropriate. Usually someone says, “We should race this thing,” except our racing budget is exactly equal to the number of folding bills you’ll find in the editors’ trousers at, say, 10 p.m. on the second Wednesday after payday. Still, we could have raced the Panamera Turbo because it has more moves than a congressman at a pastry buffet. Consider: Against one of its competitors—let’s say a Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG—the Panamera’s 0-to-60 and quarter-mile times are both 0.6-second quicker, and the Porsche arrives at 150 mph 2.4 seconds sooner.

 

>>>>>>>
it doesn't seem very impressive, especially given the $153,000 price-as-tested. That car managed to run 11.7 @ 118.0mph. To me that doesn't warrant all the praise
>>>>>>>

First it's $132k.

Second that 1/4 mi time is the same as the new Ferrari 458 Italia.



C'mon....If you don't like the car because you don't like the styling just come out and say it.

And if you're going to compare it to old cars then compare the Panamera and the 458 to your brother in law's souped up Camaro IROC-Z that did the 1/4 in the low 10s.

 

Its so funny how people want to hate this car so much but cant find a reason other than its rear end lol

 

It does take some getting used to. Tracking down the road it looks great. Sitting in my garage it looks great. There are a couple angles on the car based on where you stand that give it an odd look. The same can be said about the 911 at times. That car is iconic. I was on the "station wagon" side a while, but I have changed my ways. I'm glad I own the car. And I've driven one 600 miles off and on, have a GT2 with 650 HP, and I believe I am qualified to say this car is veeeeery fast and an M5 or E55 are not even in the same league. And I have owned both of them too. Granted, there is a price diff, but you get what you pay for. And the price you sell for is reflected as well.

 

Dont believe everything you hear in magazines... No stock Panamera will be aaaannnnywhere near a stock 458. A 118 trap is below average for a base 430

 

Agreed. The 458 is a stud. I've had a 430, and the Pana would eat it up for the first 100 mph. After that, I don't know. The 458 on the other hand will be different. I'm glad Ferrari stepped up their performance in a BIG way.

I don't think that someone can call a 4 door car that has been clocked to 60 mph in 3.3 seconds "overrated"...........

 

it's all about the rear end. you know what i mean?

 

Lets look at some other things like 100-0 times and handling.. The e55 is a FAT PIG that handles like a cruise ship.. Nobody is buying the panamera for straightline accel only and if they are they are dumb.. The car is gorgeous from every angle.. When the E55 came out they were raping for 100-110k.. Id say 20k-30k more is a STEAL in 2010 vs what they were robbing people for when the e55 came out.. Merc has nothing close to the attention to detail that the panamera has..

Mike

 

Panamera Turbo seems amazingly fast to me but you need to look at any car as a whole. The Pana has a wonderful interior, handles well and has all the tech gadgets you’d expect in this class of car and can actually carry stuff and move you around in the snow (not talking Buffalo, New York level snow).

You could buy a brand new fully optioned Chevy Camaro and have any tuner bump it to 750hp, or do the same with a Z06 or even boost a ZR1 or Viper ACR. All of these would be well below a Pana and better options if your main interest is speed.

How fast do you need a large four door sedan to be?

 

What about the guys who like headlights? I'm just sayin....