So, are we being tricked by Porsche to believe both Macan S and Macan turbo are faster than they really are?

http://www.macanforum.com/forum/mac...um/macan-general-discussion-forum/22754-macan-s-performance-test-edmunds-6.html

http://www.macanforum.com/forum/mac...rum/macan-general-discussion-forum/22746-evo-drag-battle-macan-vs-m3-video.html

We did not feel the Macan S was 5.2s fast when we test drove. If we knew the Macan S run 6.0s from 0-60 with TC, I don't think we will buy it..

Same here - also very disappointing. If 0-60 of 6.1 was being advertised by Porsche, I'd have probably skipped the Macan S. The gas mileage is also a disappointing, but to be fair, I was assuming it would be higher (wasn't a Porsche mis-advertising issue).

 

Same here - also very disappointing. If 0-60 of 6.1 was being advertised by Porsche, I'd have probably skipped the Macan S.

No car manufacturer advertises 0-60 times for the slowest setting of the slowest configuration of a particular model. If a manual car required dumping the clutch at 4000RPM and power-shifting at redline, that's what e.g. Car&Driver would do to get the best time (in addition to the 1ft rollout). 99+% of owners will not do that to their car once, yet that's the kind of number everyone would quote. If you're disappointed with 5.6s 0-60 that's one thing. But the 6.1 with TC on is really irrelevant.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOM_IDX-FL8

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zOM_IDX-FL8

Turbo numbers have been decent (close to what is advertised). The S ones have been coming in a lot lower.

 

Are you guys serious? This is a deal breaker? I drove an S and felt it was fast enough and handling was fantastic. Real "street acceleration" was very good. Best all-around SUV for the money was my conclusion. Ordered one immediately.

 

Yes I am very serious when I am not getting what is advertised. But I agree with you: handling is still funtastic however the quality issues remind me that it isn't that fantastic...

 

These 0-60 times listed by Porsche are probably the bare bones lightest weight specs for the Macan. If one looks at the spec sheet for the Macan, you will notice that there is a large delta in weight for both the Macan S and the Macan Turbo:

Curb Weight:

Macan S: Min 4112 lbs / Max 4641 lbs

Macan Turbo: Min 4244 / Max 4652 lbs

After adding your suspension options, your heavy pano roof and a whole host of other options I'm pretty sure no one is going to achieve these times.

 

Let me point something out which may ease your troubled mind.

For the Turbo, Porsche claim a 0-100 kph time of 4.6 seconds using launch control. This equates to around 4.4 seconds as a 0-60 mph time.

In the video you have cited to support your concerns, the testers reported a 0-60 mph (0-97 kph) time of 4.5 seconds.

No trickery there for the Turbo. I'll let others worry about the "S" but I predict proper testing will show that you are not being tricked.

 

A rose by any other name would smell as sweet.

Who really cares what the advertised 0-60 time is. If that changes your mind about purchasing a vehicle that you've actually driven, that's ridiculous.

You drove the vehicle, it's as fast as that experience. The end.

0-60 is a relatively useless number anyway. How often are you flooring it from a dead stop? 30-60 is a much more important measure in my book, both for street and track driving.

 

0-60 is a relatively useless number anyway. How often are you flooring it from a dead stop?

What? You don't go WAT at every light? Seriously? :laugh: Don't you need to get ahead of those CRVs and RAV4s?

Ahh, no. 0 - 60 has long since been a standard because nobody is going to run a 1/4 mile cause its too long. Few ppl hit the drags like they used to back in the day and 60 mph is a reasonable number and standard.

 

So, are we being tricked by Porsche to believe both Macan S and Macan turbo are faster than they really are?

Yeah, I'm sure they did that.

I suggest that before you run off an compare times, you compare apples against apples.

Compare times with the same equipment, same conditions, same driver, same way the cars are controlled (e.g., how much gas in tank? How much did the driver weigh? How was the car equipped, etc.)


Good luck

 

I hope most people know that the 0-60 numbers quoted by Porsche, and other mfg's and car magazines are with the 1ft rollout. Here are the times using that methodology


0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 5.3 (w/TC on 5.7)


5.3 is without SC so with it would be 5.1


I think Porsche quoted 5.2 without and 5.0 with. Think that is close.


I think people will be disappointed since Edmunds got 5.0 for the SQ5 vs the Macan S 5.6. So if you assume the 0.3 better with 1ft rollout, then SQ5 0-60 would be 4.7s! That is fast. Will be interesting to see what R&T, C&D and motortrend get when they test.

 

I hope most people know that the 0-60 numbers quoted by Porsche, and other mfg's and car magazines are with the 1ft rollout.

Testing, Testing -- The Motor Trend Way - Features - Motor Trend

"We subtract a one-foot rollout from the launch to simulate dragstrip performance"

Read more: Testing, Testing -- The Motor Trend Way - Features - Motor Trend

 

Lots of focus on 0-60 time. But how important or relevant is it?
@grim posted the link below in another post. Check it out and see if you still have the same answer.

The Unimportance of Speed | The Truth About Cars

 

Lots of focus on 0-60 time. But how important or relevant is it?

@grim posted the link below in another post. Check it out and see if you still have the same answer.

The Unimportance of Speed | The Truth About Cars

Great article. Makes me wonder if I should have just bought a basic Boxster instead.

 

I didn't realize the accelerator could be modulated. I always drive at either Wide-Open-Throttle, or coast in Neutral.

 

What's this Coasting thing you mention? Did you run out of fuel?

 

My S is plenty fast enough for getting around town. I couldn't be happier. If I was planning on taking it on a road course or track then maybe I would be concerned. Then again, who is going to take a CUV and do these things? That's what they have "sports cars" for my friends!

 

Yes it is frustrating but people did choose to buy a mass market Porsche. There are consequences to that.

Don't try to equate past Porsche ideals or values or history to the present. They are now owned by VAG. Accept it. Macan is a frankenstein of VW, Audi, and Porsche parts. Accept it.

However, theres still some "emotion" and brand value left. Chassis tuning is still one of the best. Once people accept that everything will be ok.

 

When someone is testing the Macan S stripped, no AS, no Pano, no nothing, with 19 inch wheels with summer tires and NOT getting the advertised numbers let me know.

I finds this discussion quite silly, my Macan S is in service and they gave me a Panamera (base) as loaner, talk about a slow car. I can't drive it unless it is in Sport mode, my Macan S in Normal mode smokes the Panamera in Sport mode ALL THE TIME according to my very accurate butt dyno .

 

This is why bad data is worse than no data.

 

We buy the vehicle as a package it offers, not just acceleration number. If acceleration numbers is what you are going after, I guess Macan is the wrong car to start with.

 

It's not a deal breaker for me but disappointing at least. Even if other competitor cars are better in terms of performance, I'd still take Macan though.

The only other car that I might consider is SQ5. Not a fan of X3, evoque, etc.

 

After reading all these posts, I'm glad I ordered a turbo

 

@Rollep ME too... Don't want to have to associate with the riff-raff.

 

A lot of people like having bragging rights. I don't want my neighbor taunting me about his Q-5 V-6 doing 0-60 at 5.8,compared to 6.1 for the S.

I have to see more car rags testing the S,I don't believe the 0-60 in 6.1

 

Your neighbor sounds like a DB.

 

One-foot roll-out (which is accurate), no one-foot roll-out, different density altitudes, different octane fuels, LC used or not used, added weight from various options....there are lot of variables that cause different acceleration times. Stop worrying about it and enjoy your vehicles.

 

I do wonder if they had offered a stripped turbo if more wouldn't have reached for it if the gap was smaller.

 

Yeah, but options are where the real money is... A $62k Turbo w/o Bose, PCM, Alcantara roof, painted side blades, 14/18-way seats? I would have been all over that, but Porsche would have made much less money than on my $62k moderately equipped S, I guess.

It would be nice to see a GTS at about the Turbo price/HP, but with "performance" options (20", PASM, Turbo brakes, PTV+, SC) instead of the Turbo's "luxury" options (Bose, PCM, Alcantara, etc). I'd consider trading for that - get one in jet black and maybe my wife won't notice

 

Guys this is a Porsche but an SUV non the less. The only similar car out there is the Audi SQ5 and frankly I much rather have the Macan S. You want speed then get a 911 and get that awesome feeling of all that power just rocketing you forward as you feel the car squat down and push you like only a 911 can. I get my Macan S early October and cannot wait. That said I will still get my speed thrills in my 997.2 S.

 

At 6500 feet the turbo feels weak.

I was following a guy doing 65 mph in a 65 mph zone. Passed full throttle and was doing 100 mph after two shifts.

 

A 0-60 time is important to some and if a choice of vehicle is based off that then fair dues, times in the real world should match up for the satisfaction of those people. I have no issue with the disappointment felt by certain posters. I don't feel the same way but I bought the car for my reasons.

So to the question of trickery and misrep. If Porsche falsely states a fact that a buyer relies on to his detriment then yes, there is a misrep. That is a rudimentary description of misrepresentation in the common law tradition. We'll never know until someone somewhere matches the advertised time. However, how many car mags and websites are going to run a bare bones S just for the 0-60 time test? Most seem to have AS, PASM, PANO, full leather etc and so on. This is to say perhaps the advertised times will never be matched. Still doesn't give me enough to claim a misrep.

 

Lord jeezuz. This is all based on one Edmunds test of an S model.

EDMUNDS???

 

Yes it appears so and then logic disappears and paranoia reigns. Even the poor old turbo whose test times were within a tenth of a second of Porsche's figures is impugned.