Other than PASM, I don't see other performance options, @ylarris1. Most of what the OP has listed are for looks, sound and comfort.

 

@ABusLux has got it pretty much right on how I spec'd my order. For aesthetic and comfort while maintaining decent fuel economy for a daily driver.

Here in Canada, the difference between the 2.0 and the S is $6500. By losing RS wheels for 19's, going with aluminum trimming instead of gloss black, dropping the PSE (A wash besides the black finish), and the fuel economy is the difference pretty much. Im curious to hear others thoughts and opinions. Its an endless debate in my mind prior to placing my order, and will be until build lock day.

As stated before, another thing I am considering is the difference the PSE makes on the 2.0, as I am not opposed to saving another 2000$ and just getting black tailpipes instead. So if anyone has heard the PSE, would love to hear your opinion.

 

I didn't see this post so I'll delete my posts.
Enjoy the car . I wont even debate this . I don't wish to waste my time.

 

you'll be in debate even after build lock

I somehow understand the 2.0T with PSE; PASM seems a bit over the top to me if not combined with air suspension.

If I were you and you worry about mpg, I'd stick to the 2.0T but change the 'performance parts' such as PSE and PASM for some other goodies that would make it a real comfortable ride rather than going for looks (20"s) and black PSE.

But that's just me I guess. (I went to see my SA for a 2.0T macan and went home with an order for a Macan S diesel...)

 

In my opinion, even excluding options, $6500 for a "proper" Porsche motor vs a rebadged Audi is worth the extra alone.
For $300 it should be a no brainer!

 

I guess you could say that about the Macan as a whole as it is based on the Audi Q5 Platform. Maybe you need to look elsewhere for a "proper" Porsche platform vs a rebadged Audi?

 

Too bad; deleting posts leaves other posts in the threads hard to understand, and those who replied looking odd.

 

Keep this in mind . The base price of the 2.0 is 47500. The GTS is 67200
The RS wheels are 3300 .
The PP+ is 5950 instead of 3390 (on a GTS)
The exhaust is 2930
The PASM is 1360

So 1360 + 3300+ 2560 (pp+ difference)+2930 +475000 =57650

His options already ate up 10 grand of the 20 grand (base price) difference to jump two entire trim levels !!!

I can keep going ....
14 way seats = 1710 on a 2.0
14 way seats on a GTS =1340
That's another 370 .

The gloss is standard on GTS. It's another 230 on the 2.0
the tinted LED lights are another 550 on a base . He didnt order it but its standard on a GTS.

I dont even want to bother discussing this further . I wished him well on a car that I find ridiculous . That's the best I can do .

 

Of those 2 options I would go with the spend $300 more and get the S. The problem is that the options value goes to zero as soon as you buy the car, so to buy the 2.0t for the fuel economy doesn't make sense if it's highly optioned as you'll lose that savings immediately.

 

If gas mileage is your prime concern, keep in mind that each LCK (litres per 100 kilometres) saving is only about 150 litres difference per year, or about $190 per year at our current gas cost where I live (based on driving 15,000 km/yr). Not very much if you price it like an option versus the fun factor.

(I'm not sure the mileage difference between the 2.0 and the S, but I'm sure someone here has that handy).

 

I am using it as a daily driver and the occasional trip up to the mountains in BC during the winter for a ski/snowboard getaway.

You will notice a huge difference between the base and S while driving in the mountains.

Get the S.

 

I would go for the S as well especially with the options u specified. Keep the standard s seats and exhaust and live with the 19 inch wheels. I think you will appreciate a much more fun and exhilarating Macan. Especially driving up to whistler!!!!

 

340 hp vs. 252 hp for $300?

That's a bargain I'd be all over.

BUT, if you're rarely going to go over 3000rpm, you'd be disappointed even with the GTS engine. You really need to be above this engine speed to truly appreciate the S and GTS engine. If looks and mpg, are more important than power, then go with the base.

 

Not to mention you are probably looking at a year before an S allocation.

 

If I had to make this choice, I would go with S and keep my options low.

 

If you want fuel economy for a great driving and good looking CUV get the 2.0 and drop the PSE . Don't let us spend your money. Get what feels right to you and fits your budget.

Enjoy


Sent from AutoGuide.com Free App

 

Don't let us spend your money. Get what feels right to you and fits your budget.

Wise words

 

@PorscheFanatic, I agree with others that the more-lightly specced S looks like a much better choice for you, particularly for mountain driving. You mentioned BC so I assume you're in Canada. What is your target budget for the car? Apart from the changes you've already listed, if you want to trim the cost a bit further I'd consider omitting the crests on the head rests. Also, the exhaust tips are very easy to remove and replace so you could paint them black (or any other color for that matter) yourself for the price of a can of Krylon. Others swear that the PSE is a must-have for them and I can't argue with that. For me though, the standard exhaust on my S sounds just right - quiet and refined for normal driving in standard mode, quiet but with nice little barks when driven harder in Sport mode.

By the way, some forum members have reported being caught out by their order locking earlier than expected, so just to be safe you might not went to bank on having that full month available to you to make up your mind. Getting caught with or without crested head rests wouldn't be a big deal, but getting stuck with a 2.0 when you wanted an S (or vice versa) would be quite irritating.

 

If I were OP, I'd be looking at two options - the S plus $300, or the Base minus those options OP were looking at on the S. And I absolutely don't understand why people keep pushing the GTS agenda when it's $30K more than the Base OP is looking at

 

It's the OP opinion but I just don't understand why get a Porsche and not try and get the performance if possible? Otherwise, I think one should consider the Audi to get more car. I agree with another poster that the gas savings isn't much overall. Maybe the SQ5 is may be a better choice?

I was in a similar state with the S and the GTS but opted for the GTS and don't have any regrets. This car is amazing and the power helps bring out the engineering marvel that is the macan.

 

E888 is not a bad motor at all. Makes great power and torque.

Add in a reflash (perhaps APR will tune these) and you can have more power and torque than a base 3.0.

 

Good point. I'm too lazy to check right now, but does anyone know what transmission the 2.0 uses? I know that was one of the considerations when people were comparing a RaceChipped (or similar) S to a standard GTS or Turbo. With both the GTS and the Turbo having bigger clutch plates in the PDK than the S the lesser transmission in the S was perceived as being a potential weak link if the power / torque was boosted.

 

I've read PDK

 

Thanks for all the info and feedback everyone.
So I have touched base with my SA. The base macan (dropping the PSE) would arrive late december as already ordered. The "s" would arrive in April of next year.

Also, I was under the impression PASM is a must have option?

 

Congrats on deciding to get a Macan S. I personally think that no matter what trim level you get, it's going to be a great car.

As for the PSE, I would almost say that it's a must have if you are already going to spend the $1k for the sport tailpipes. I personally didn't get the PSE because I felt that $3k was a bit much for sound alone (since I didn't care if I had the sport tailpipes or not), but if PSE had been $2k I would've gotten it for sure. And while sound doesn't make the car any faster, it does make it more fun and, given that it sounds like you'll be going for the 2.0, should add some much needed auditory pleasure for your driving enjoyment.

As for PASM, I don't think it's a must have, but it is definitely nice to have. Standard stock suspension is fine, but if you're going to be going through any twisties with any sort of speed, it helps a lot.

 

Just my personal taste, but I wouldn't buy a 2.0. Buying a Porsche with a 2.0 seems silly to me. I don't mean to be offensive, just my opinion.

 

My vote is for the S with the twin turbo 3.0- 6. I love my start up deep throated exhaust melody in the mornings. I don't think the 2.0 t will be that much better fuel economy than the 6. I'm getting over 22 mpg's overall in over 17 k of spirited driving.
A bare bones 4 banger Macan makes sense to me to get the sweet ride and balanced chassis of the Macan.

 

If you want performance, get the S.....if you want fuel economy, get the S and drive conservatively.........

 

I see the 2.0 as a door step of Porsche in other parts of the world and it has been very successful, especially for some emerging markets like east Asia. But here in the U.S., I personally don't get it since the price difference between S and a similarly equipped 2.0 is so small.

Just think the "S" as an option, check this box and adjust others. You won't regret!

 

First full disclosure, GTS bias. That said the other day I saw a 2.0t build that I actually thought made sense. It was in Volcano Gray and it had the Spyders. The Volcano blends so well with the Side blades and rear fascia so those don't need the upgrade. The matte black window trim comes standard and that blends nicely as well. The Spyders complement the Volcano perfectly and minimize the wheel gap esthetic concerns. They deleted the model designation and overall the presentation was impressive. Little else in terms of options the build was 54 and change and I couldn't help but think, I would take this over my sister's Q5 all day long. That engine be easier to service at an indy. For someone that isn't that much into the performance but simply appreciates the aesthetics, I think the case can be made. It's a known workhorse of an engine, the gas mileage is impressive, if someone wanted to keep the cost down and turn it over every 4 years, why not? Everything else out there in it's class, sucks by comparison, IMO.