Porsche Macan Forum banner

Have a Base car loaner -- Review

34K views 124 replies 53 participants last post by  Parraboi 
#1 ·
The Macan is in the shop getting tires and my wife received a base car loaner . I drove the car for an hour tonight . I'll discuss the car , as well as compare it to my current GTS and former Turbo .

The Base Macan --

The car I have is 60K MSRP . It has the Turbo wheels (expensive) , 14 way seats , and NAV .

a) Since my former cars had 18 way seats , and current car has 8 way seats , these 14 way complete the experience . I can safely say that I feel comfortable in all three .

b) The first thing I noticed was the dummy key . I hate it !! I like to put my key in the hole . Nuff said .

c) Cold start up was quiet . The Turbo was intermediate . The GTS is ferocious .

d) As I drove the car I felt it wasn't as bad as i thought it would be . It's amazing how much it looks like the other trim levels yet drives so differently. If a person sits around in traffic or uses it to just tool around town it does the job. Unlike the higher performance models I began to dwell more on the cars size and comforts . That's when i wished it was a cayenne . I felt that if i wanted a slow vehicle at least it ought to be a more comfortable one . I always felt the trade off was giving up size in the higher trim line to gain performance.

e) This is the first Macan I have driven with the steel suspension . It felt like i was high up and it was a bit harsh compared to the comforts of air suspension and the low slung appeal of dialing it in low .
I was actually glad that I rejected the lot car Turbo based upon it lacking air suspension when i chose the GTS . Air suspension I feel is a must have but not on a base car . On a base car i feel the must have is saving money and opting for little things like heated seats and a decent stereo .


Brief Comparison to the GTS --

The two vehicles are in different leagues . My GTS is a very modest spec at 76K MSRP and this car is 60K . That 16 K really buys a HUGE difference . The base car feels like a CUV and the GTS feels almost like a sports sedan . The power, agility and roar of the engine make the price gap so worthwhile .


Brief Comparison to the Turbo --

At 92K the price gap widens . The main appeal with the Turbo is the combination of luxury and power . Sport plus in the Turbo from a launch is just another world from a base car but that extra 30K is almost enough to buy a second car . On the other hand I could knock 15 grand off that base car and buy a competitor .

Conclusion --
If i were buying my first Macan I would want the Turbo PP . It combines all of the above except cost . So its one painful check writing experience for a few years of total bliss .

However if i were trying to be rational or if i were looking at lot cars then the GTS really is the value play of the group .

The Base car ? Well .. I dont hate it . I never liked it . I have at least began to understand it a bit more but would not buy one .
 
See less See more
#3 ·
Yet another attack on the base car...why the need?

Sorry, but even though I own a Turbo, when I see something like this again I feel compelled to speak up as it's so very misleading.

You describe the base as a slow vehicle even though it's faster than the vast majority of the cars on the road.

To say that the base car is only appropriate for sitting around in traffic or tooling around town is just plain silly as in its base form it's still one of the best handling CUV's out there. If it's crucial to maximize handling you can order PASM and AS on a base, while maintaining the advantage of having less weight out over the front axle. (have not seen anyone do that but it would be an interesting to compare to a V6 Macan). Even without those options it out handles a Q5 or X3, so you are saying that the Q5 and X3 are also only good for sitting around in traffic and tooling around town. There's a lot of Q5 and X3 owners who would not agree with that :)

Sure, there are major differences between a base and GTS, and there better be as a GTS is more than a 40% upcharge over a base!

If i had to do it all over again I would still choose the Turbo (likely the PP). But at the same time I completely get that the base model is the right choice for many of us, and that's why it's selling so well. Perhaps I get it more than most after helping each of three co-workers in selecting and purchasing their base cars.

It troubles me to think that a potential buyer would come to this website looking for information and go away thinking that a base does not drive any better than a Hyundai Santa Fe because of a post like yours.

Larry you know I think a lot your opinions but I'm sorry I think your post above is truly misleading.
 
#5 ·
I don't think Larry was dissing the base car. He was comparing the Base vs the rest of the Macan line up, or even a Cayenne. I certainly wouldn't buy a $60K Base with 21" Turbo wheels. The $60K Macan S would just blow it away anywhere anytime. A potential buyer would really benefit from reading these opinions and POV. Of course, the smart and well informed buyer would go out and extensively test drive the cars to form his own opinion regardless.
 
#4 ·
Great review.

Its good to open the eyes of prospective buyers on the choices within the range.

Very interesting your comments on the steel suspension, did you happen to notice the wheel size, I can echo that experience.

I test drove an S with steel suspension and 21 inch wheels and 8 way seats, and I have to say the ride was terrible, worst than BMW M on run flat tyres and the handling very much compromised compared to a Macan with PASM. Standard 8 way seats were for me plain unbearably uncomfortable.

On the 2.0 base front I did see a Youtube (sadly I cannot find it) where an S and a 2.0 Base were on a circuit together and as you would expect the Base handled very well and the lack of front end weight actually made it slightly more agile through the corners. Coming out of the corners the S very quickly left the Base behind.

It is certainly not the engine for me but to each their own, the Base is a very capable City car an no amount of arguing or comments will ever change my mind.

The only way to decide for yourself is to test drive a Base then get in an S and drive the same route.

Now answer the question.....which puts a bigger smile on my face?
 
#7 ·
@yrralis1Agree 100% with your assessment. I also drove a base with steel suspension. In that configuration it is not playing in the same league as the other trims with regards to power and handling. That's not dissing, that's good information. If the base Macan I had as a loaner was the first Macan I test drove I very likely would have walked away and bought a different CUV altogether. Paying the Porsche tax for it would have made no sense to me. I find this is important to point out - especially on an enthusiast forum.
 
#8 ·
No one is going claim that a GTS is not a higher performing vehicle than a base, but there are plenty of base owners on the forum who are perfectly happy with their cars.

To describe their cars as slow vehicles or say they are only appropriate for sitting around in traffic or tooling around town is throwing mud in their face and insulting.

It would be a real shame if some of them stop participating in the forum because of comments like this.
 
#20 ·
It doesn't take an $80K GTS to kick butt. The $60K S would do that, and I don't mean that as an insult or mud throwing. Most Base owners (with 21" wheels in this case) don't really care if their Macans are slow Porsches (they do know that), but they would "really care" when they find out it costs $1500 every year or 15K miles to replace the tires, or $300 for an oil change, or $180/hr labor rate for any type of work. It costs the same to maintain a $60K Base or a $120K Turbo PP, but it definitely doesn't drive the same, though. First time buyers should know this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pigblackdog
#10 ·
I also had a Base Macan as a loaner. The lack of cold start roar just kills it. Again, that is from someone that owns a S. Well, if you never experienced that roar and is OK with a quiet tiger than the Base will do it. I guess what @yrralis1 is saying is that when you come from a higher model down it is painful. However as I said, if all you tried is the Base than it may fit your needs. Not mine!!! :)
 
#15 ·
This is the first Macan I have driven with the steel suspension . It felt like i was high up and it was a bit harsh compared to the comforts of air suspension and the low slung appeal of dialing it in low .
Good comments. I only have one point about steel. Compared to the other SUVs in its class I've been in, the base car seemed more planted in corners and stiffer. Its still soft but for a SUV, pretty good.
 
#21 ·
It's no different than when I bought the Turbo over the GTS. I remember some of the comments:
"You are foolishly throwing away your money" and "people buy the Turbo just because of the image of having one as it has more power than you could ever possibly use". Just saying the Turbo is not worth it to me would have been just fine :)
 
#24 ·
Now those things you mention are comments directed at the owner/potential owners and, I totally agree, and not needed. Larry doesn't take any shots at owners, he just makes his assessment of the car. Big difference.

I know for a fact that some members here think my Macan build (and maybe me lol) was crazy because it's way over optioned, I will get hosed at trade in time and I should have spent a 10K more and got the Turbo. I don't take offense to their thinking the Turbo is the better car or that I am foolish to not have done it. I can rationally explain my decision and am comfortable with it.

Good review, good discussion. All good!!
 
#22 ·
I recently had a base Macan as a loaner (ironically in the same color and almost same spec as my S) and if you're just looking to get into a CUV that isn't a S and or Q5, X3 or X4, GLE?, GLA?, GLC and GL"whatevertheheckMercedesiscallingitthesedays" RR Evoque, LR Discovery Sport....

(15 minutes later...)

...the base Macan is a good alternative!

All jokes aside, I enjoyed my time in the loaner, outside of the audible difference (kind of like all the reviews for the 718, ok we get it! It does not sound the same as the outgoing 6!) it wasn't bad. It drives well, is certainly built better than some of its competitors, and I think it's a nice entry to a "prestigious" car company. The power plant is smooth and the delivery of power is nice. I recently had a Discovery Sport loaner with the Land Rover 4 cylinder and the 9-speed transmission. The engine sounded like it was going to come out of the hood, it was flat footed in just about everywhere. I wont get started on build quality (the interior of the trunk separated from the actual door while I had it...)

I think all the people who are screaming "why oh why did Porsche do a base Macan!?!" are probably the same people who say "Oh why oh why is there a Boxster/Cayman!" It's a plain and simple explanation, if you want your fire breathing 911 or 918, Porsche HAS to have a not so fire breathing everything else. Heck if they made a 2.0 4 cylinder that could move a Panamera, dropped the price by a few dollars, I'm sure that'd sell (Porsche marketing if you're reading...you can have that for free.) Audi's base A6 is a 2.0, and the curb weight's of the Panamera and the A6 are not that far off! I feel like I may be stoned the death for that comment...

To each their own everybody! If it wasn't for that pesky diesel business in the US, I would take a diesel Macan. Torque to restart a dead planets core? Yummy
 
#23 ·
To each their own everybody! If it wasn't for that pesky diesel business in the US, I would take a diesel Macan. Torque to restart a dead planets core? Yummy


^This. I joined this forum several years back precisely for the diesel Macan. Also, my Touareg TDI is getting bought back. The diesel is an ideal powertrain for the Macan. Oh well.
 
#25 ·
OK, as a Base Macan owner, I actually didn't have any problems with @yrralis1's review. Calling it a "slow" vehicle compared to a Turbo or even an S is fair - I knew when buying the Base that it wasn't going to be a speedster. But I'm still very pleased with how well it does perform compared to some of the other CUV's I test drove. And I guess I'm not a true Porsche enthusiast (shhh!) because this fascination with the cold start roar is lost on me :).

Anyway, thanks @yrralis1 for sharing your thoughts on the Base. Yes it's not for you but your review was factual as well as sharing your opinions without being insulting. But for me, as I've said elsewhere, the Base was the right combination of performance, features and price for me. If I was willing to hand Porsche another $7-10K for an S, I might have but I had a clear set budget and the Base fit in that budget.

Oh and I'm not sure why it should matter to me that maintenance for my Base is the same as maintenance for a Turbo. I did my research and understood when I bought a Porsche that I would be paying Porsche maintenance rates.
 
#32 ·
Oh and I'm not sure why it should matter to me that maintenance for my Base is the same as maintenance for a Turbo. I did my research and understood when I bought a Porsche that I would be paying Porsche maintenance rates.

This is a good question . It is my opinion that most chose the base to retain savings . Some mention taxes in some countries . Others mention the cost of the car or gas .

Two thousand dollars on a 60K car for tires which cost the same as those tires on a 93K car which has identical wheels is a tremendous proportional expense . Those who go out and buy other less expensive competitors can still get a comfortable ride . They can even get better technology . And when they go to service they get a lower bill .

Getting less car ought to mean lower cost to maintain for many people .. especially if the reason they chose it includes the cost to own.
 
#33 ·
It will be interesting to see if actual maintenance cost for a stripped down Base is much less than for a fully loaded Turbo. You'd think that many of the add-on features are another potential thing to break down in the future. And I wonder if the parts to fix things in the Audi 2.0L engine would be cheaper than parts in your *REAL* Porsche engine. Labour costs will be the same for everything I guess but if I have to fix my Base less often than you have to fix your Turbo....... Anyways, we'll see I guess.
 
#27 ·
It's really unfair to ask the base Macan owners to pay the same maintenance cost. They are subsidizing the S/GTS/Turbo owners. ;)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Trued and Peccavis
#38 ·
Haha that works too. :p:p
 
#41 ·
What is with Porsche service? Seems like they take twice as long to do everything. Feels more South American than German.
 
#44 ·
@jimithingI can only speak for my dealership and they have been as quick to address issues as one could have reasonably expected. No feeling of slowness with a Cayman - I promise. Be warned I ordered one after they gave me a loaner a couple of weeks ago. If they ever offer me a 911 I'll ask for a Base Macan again instead...
 
#51 ·
Had a base Macan while my S was in getting the driver's seat base replaced under warranty.

Porsche Langley came to my home 40 minutes away and traded vehicles, saving me at least a couple hours' time. Impressive.

Also, their loaner has 18-way seats (I have 14-way), and they still opted for the Sport Chrono package, even though it is a loaner.

First impressions:
It's been stated here before - it is much quieter than my S at startup!

It was interesting for me to see a Macan without the full leather package. Nice to see that the plastics they use in the interior are far nicer that the Jag F-Pace I saw at the auto show, and also the Audi SQ5 interior.

Driving impression:
Wow! I took it through the mountain twisters behind where I live for a spirited drive. Should have known that Porsche was not going to make a vehicle that isn't a thrill to drive on a curvy road. Lacks a tiny bit of guttural punch in the uphill curves, but other than that I am duly impressed. Did notice lack of PASM, which I have in my S, but not so much that I would say there is "body roll".

The dealer put 18-ways in, which makes me regret my decision to go with 14-ways. The upper side bolsters really hug the torso, they feel fantastic. We were worried about the side bolsters being too high in the seat portion for entering/exiting but after a couple of days we were both completely used to them. Shoulda coulda woulda. It's on the list for my MY20 GTS. ;)

Overall:
If someone had a hard ceiling to their budget but could sneak a base Macan in, I think the value is there in spades. It drives beautifully, 4-cylinder sounds a bit high pitched at times, but is an extremely capable engine coupled with the PDK and turbos. Comparing it to other small CUVs I see in the 40s-$50s CDN, I would take a basic Macan over Nissans or Toyotas or Acuras that have all the bells and whistles even. Add in a couple of options to personalize it and you have a very special vehicle. I realize you are still going to be another $5K-10K over the Japanese Luxury CUVs out there, but to get into a Porsche for just that much more must be very enticing to many people.
 
#53 ·
Wow that mpg is amazing. I'm getting an average of 17 on my turbo. it's the one thing that really irks me about it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MacFix
#65 ·
A little late, but still relevant, I hope. (I just know that a couple years from now, someone will ask: So what did @Hokie think of the base Macan?);) Took my wife's S in for 2 year service ($559.43), and windshield replacement by independent glass shop. Gave me a highly optioned black base loaner, my first experience w/ this model. I found the around-town acceleration to be surprisingly good; at higher speeds, not so much. I was surprised that the four was much quieter than I remember the BMW fours that I drove as loaners from 2013 - 2016. This is the first time I've driven any Macan w/ 21" summer tires (Conti's). Again, surprisingly, did not find them noticeably noisier or harsher than my 20" all-seasons, BUT, driven on the same marginal Tucson streets that I drive every day, found them to track/tramline considerably more, to the point I thought it was the Lane-keep feature trying to center me. (My wife has been trying to do that for 40+ years; she does have the keep feature). :x Steel suspension felt very firm and controlled, I liked it except for the ride height. All in all, while I was not in favor of Porsche introducing a 4-cyl Macan, I found it to be a perfectly capable, great handling CUV, and one that I can see would appeal to a significant slice of the premium CUV-buying segment.
 
#66 ·
I would get a lightly optioned base Macan rather than a Lexus NX, X-3 ,MB or other lux 4 bangers. The Macan has more hp and torque and we all know how nice the chasis is especially with PASM or air suspension.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hokie
#67 ·
I would not be so quick to rule out the GLC 300. Have you actually driven one?

I have, and like I always say, no matter what you favor, competition benefits us all. It handles very well (of course not as well as the Macan), and I thought it was just as fast as the Macan base loaner I had (sure enough, I checked, and the quoted 0-60 times are 1/10 of a second apart.)

While I like the Macan's interior, I can see why the GLC's interior is getting such positive remarks from the automotive press, and I favor it over the Macan. The GLC also has a noticeably better ride than the Macan and it's quieter.

While if those were the only two choices I had, I would go with the Macan as it's sportier, there's no question MB did a really nice job with the GLC. I think it's going to appeal to a lot of mainstream buyers, and I would expect it to significantly outsell the Macan.
 
#68 ·
I checked out the GLC 300 and preferred the Macan. Biggest turnoff for me was the interior! Cannot stand the screen on top of the dash...looks like an add-on from Best Buy. It's a nice overall package and priced right. I would take the new Q5 over the GLC 300.
 
#69 ·
Biggest turnoff for me was the interior! Cannot stand the screen on top of the dash...looks like an add-on from Best Buy.
I was also originally put off by the various manufacturers that are putting screens on top of the dash. But after owning a BMW 2 series for a year and a half, I have to say I "get it" now. The info on the screen is right up more in your line of vision where you want it. Certainly not as good as a HUD, but to me it's the next best thing.
 
#71 ·
Haven't looked up the sales figures for the GLC, but, anecdotally, I see a lot of them on the Tucson streets. They are selling very well here. I will study them more seriously in a year or two when it's time to trade my wife's S; probably would only consider the AMG tho.
 
#75 ·
GLC are quite popular around Buffalo too, and I see them every where. I assumed with lower price and attractive lease rate, any regular Joe/gal can afford one. I test drove a GLC43 extensively and even I though I wasn't impression with it overall, I contemplated ordering the GLC63 coupe next year. Then quickly I realized my presumed $90-100K GLC63 will just blend in like the rest of "regular" GLC I see daily. With Macan, I rarely see one when I drive around Buffalo, let alone a Turbo. In fact I am in Buffalo 3-4 times a week and I seldom see any Porsche! I am just too accustomed to characteristics and feel of Porsche(plus PDK) I ordered the Macan Turbo PP instead.

John
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top