IL Track Tested: 2011 Porsche Panamera V6

Quiet, but still sounds somewhat like a Porsche. Nice. Decent numbers too for a six.

Aren't you able to pick up an E63 for this kind of dough and have similar space but far far more performance. Even if it a 2 year old E63...I mean that V6 sounded sooooo lame, if I had been just listening to the clip I would have been thinking toyota camry.

However, I might add that with "only" 300hp and slightly less torque in a 4000lb car it scoots pretty well and was far sportier around the handling and breaking portion of the test then I would have ever given credit if I had not watched it myself.

Mixed emotions....I mean $91k really?

An E63 gives up handling for power
And it looks like every other E-Class
(E-Class isn't the prettiest thing I ever laid eyes on, either)

Panameras look like $100k
All this needs is an aftermarket "S" badge
And no one will be any the wiser

Slap a pipe on it if you don't like the sound!
BD

I thought it would have weighed more.

Decent numbers, I wonder if the vSicks is producing more than the advertised 300hp.
That or the tranny is doing one hell of a job

It sounds good for a V6. Slapping a pipe on it would cheapen the sound as aftermarket V6 exhausts usually do.

I have tried the V8 and V6, it is like what the track review saids, its pretty darn quick still for the V6 and drives great. The car driving feel is excellent and probably the best among any big sedans like this. Unless if you are pushing the limit or on the track, the feel, power, responsiveness..etc of the V6 is actually not far off from the V8. (I have read it is basically the same engine except with 2 less cylinder) I would of like the fact if it was a 5 seater instead of the current 4.. (I mean might as well if you are going to make a sedan!) and the price of the V6 as well, a bit high. But the V6 is by no means a cheap, water down version of the V8, that was something very cool and I am glad Porsche did that. I wish this was the engine put into the Cayenne V6 instead of the current VW source one, it would make a difference in how the base Cayenne drives.

hmmm get a top of the line v8 from mercedes or bmw, or get this v6 in the ugliest porsche on the planet....

Its obviously for CAFE. The numbers are impressive from an engineering standpoint, for the price its laughable.

Its still not fast enough to outrun a mirror.

Those are impressive numbers for a V6 luxo car. I can't think of another large V6 car that runs 14.0 flat.

The V6 Panamera out accelerates the V8 928S of twenty years ago. The fuel mileage is 50% better and the brakes are much more robust.

The blogs love to hate the Panamera; but it has been selling like crazy. This car is a winner.

Wow. I thought it looked pretty wallowy in the slalom, but I can't complain about the performance. Yeah it is $91k, but it is also a V6 in a 4000 lb sedan. I like the Panamera's interior too, it is just such a shame about how it looks!

Those handling numbers...wow. For something that big it's eye popping.

I think part of the fun of a super-luxury sport sedan is raw power, and while a 5.8 0-60 and a 14 second quarter mile aren't bad, if I couldn't budget a Panamera V8 I would go for a BMW M5, Mercedes E63, Jaguar XFR, or (if I was a fan of American automakers) a Cadillac CTS-V instead.

Luxury performance cars are not all about power. 90% of people that buy such vehicles just like the name, looks, and interior (not in that order or preference). Power is only required to be "strong" not mindblowing. Given how these 90% will drive their cars, the V6 is perfect. If you want raw power - they make a v8 tt.

That being said, I really like the Panamera. I just wish they would have shrunk it down by 10%. The lines, to me, are fine but the sheer bulk woul lead me to something else.

"And it's water-cooled!"

Um... are you being sarcastic? Porsche stopped making the air-cooled 911 nearly 15 years ago.

Gee almost as powerful as the Ford 3.7 V6....almost that is.

Lol bodyblue you are splitting hairs. How much more does fords six make? Like five more hp? And its a 3.7, not a 3.6 like in the panamera. And the ford is not pushing almost 300lb of torque especially not at just under 4k rpms. Terrible comparison. This thing weighs how much more than a v6 stang? And only gets 3 mpg less on the highway? With more torque? Suddenly ford's is not that impressive.....

Lostboyz: what v8 equipped sedans from bmw or mercedes offer the same space and agility as this car? M3 and c63 besides? Remember you don't HAVE to have 20k in options...

LOL I know.....but how much more expensive is the Porsche engine to maintain and will it last longer than the Ford?

Oh and BTW..the Ford 3.7 has 280 lbs/ft at 4250 and 305hp @6500...On REGULAR fuel.

I was not comparing the car at all....just the the engine tech. The Porsche has 220 ci and the Ford 227 ci. Not a huge difference. When you see the "Liter" it sometimes distorts the CI. I always look at the CI number (I am old and still like it better).

High tech engines are not only in 90K cars anymore. My point is that a 24K Ford has an engine that is as sophisticated as a 90K German sedan.

@bodyblue: I believe I recently read that the Mustang 3.7 gets raucous sounding at higher rpms. After driving a Subaru boxer engine for over 8 years now, I say 'Bring on the raucosity!" I love the various sounds from my Subaru's engine, and I can't understand how anyone with an ounce of car loving would want a subdued engine.

To each his own.

This car does seem too fast for it's weight. I agree with a couple other posters about it only being "300" HP and would like to see it on a dyno.

That slalom looked like a 4000 pound car in terms of how much body movement there was....but at the same time, the agility and way it changed directions was totally porsche-like. I'm actually impressed.

I wasn't expecting a 3.6 liter n/a engine in a 4000+ pound car to pull a 14.0 second quarter mile either. Maybe 14.3 - and to me, the shifts didn't look at that fast in the videos. There was a distinct pause and body-rock during each shift (maybe the videos were in manual mode?).

From an acceleration standpoint, you aren't getting 70-90k's worth. But that's like saying you aren't getting 400k worth of acceleration in a Rolls Royce. Acceleration is far down the list when people are looking at these cars.

lostboyz says:

03:26 AM, 12/15/10

"hmmm get a top of the line v8 from mercedes or bmw, or get this v6 in the ugliest porsche on the planet....

Its obviously for CAFE. The numbers are impressive from an engineering standpoint, for the price its laughable."

+100

Report ItReport It dougtheeng says:

05:25 AM, 12/15/10

Its still not fast enough to outrun a mirror.

LOL........!!!!

"From an acceleration standpoint, you aren't getting 70-90k's worth. But that's like saying you aren't getting 400k worth of acceleration in a Rolls Royce. Acceleration is far down the list when people are looking at these cars."

Joefrompa, which cars exactly? The $70-90k cars or the $400k cars?
Can you share your data to back up your statement?

VR6 power!

CR_Driver - People have been saying (paraphrased here), "For 70-90k I better get more acceleration than that!"

My point is that price and acceleration don't correspond - it's not built to be supercar fast at this price point. It's built to a different standard that sheer speed.

For comparison, look at a $350 Rolls Royce Phantom. Here's insideline's write-up of the 2005 model: http://www.insideline.com/rolls-royce/phantom/2005/full-test-2005-rolls-royce-phantom.html

14.3 second quarter mile time, despite a 6.75 liter v12.

Now is that dissapointing? Should people instead spend only "half as much" and get a car that delivers alot more speed for far less money?

Perhaps. Of course, they'd be giving up what makes the Rolls Royce. Like having 2 batteries built in, in case one fails you aren't left stranded. Or leather headliners. Or the road presence.

The point is that whether spending $70k or $400k on a car, it merely needs to offer acceleration adequate to its CLASS of car....it doesn't always need to be mind-blowing. And a 14 second quarter mile time is adequate for a 70k base price (look at the BMW 740i for comparison).

joe: good points.

Bodyblue: debateable.....the 3:6 in the pana could probably get around 33mpg in the stang. Its a huge leap forward for ford, but its not the end all. People didn't stop buying ferraris just because honda broke the 100hp per litre mark in a sporty civic or s2k

Looks like a 911 wearing a loaded diaper.

But it will sell because there are those who want a Porsche and a four door Porsche is easier to live with.

"Bodyblue: debateable.....the 3:6 in the pana could probably get around 33mpg in the stang. "

What is debatable? That the Ford engine make essentially the same horsepower on 87 octane? Or will need less maint? And that maint will cost far less?And what kind of proof do you have to back up your last statement? (besides bias that is).....Do you have any evidence of superior engineering of the Porsche over the Ford engine or is is just dis-belief that it could happen?

@joefrompa, except people don't buy a RR for speed, its an ultralux land yacht. Porsche is a performance company, you expect something a little bit better for spending almost $100k on a 4 door performance car.

@lostboyz
I could say you don't buy a Porsche for outright speed but for the driving experience. For most of Porsche's history they were never the power leaders so I'd be right in this respect.

That being said, people buy modern Porsche sports cars for speed AND the driving experience. But, this is not a sports car. Its a luxury car that drives extremely well. And for $100K, this car is unique, has a great interior, drives extremely well. The only area where it may be "lacking" is in a stop light race. Given its a 4 door luxury sedan, most buyers won't care.

porsche has always been performance with no compromises, this car is the definition of compromise.

VW group has plenty of other brands to release a luxury sedan, porsche doesn't need one. They are known for good materials and the highest quality ratings, but that doesn't mean they know or should make luxury cars.

So this $90k V6 Porsche is no faster than a $30k V6 Hyundai Genesis Coupe.

Nice. Nice.

"Porsche" is synonymous for performance. Hence why this car disappoints so much. It's for rich posers who want to say that they drive a Porsche as their daily driver, but don't want to buy a 911, because all of their friends already own one.

Funny, I just read the article on the new S60, that mentioned how it will get it's doors blown off by the competition - and yet it's 5.9 seconds to 60mph, and 14.2 1/4 mile time (at 1mph faster though) is about equal to this over-twice-the-price-and-no-more-powerful Porsche.

300hp is nothing these days. And for a car wearing a Porsche badge, and costing $90k US, the standard should be set that 1/4 mile times should be better than 14 seconds. Heck, I think the lowly Cobalt SS Turbo did better than that.

^^Those are not poser performance numbers. You know what a Benz S550 with a big V8 runs to 60 mph? 5.7 seconds. And the 1/4 in 13.9.

Plus the Panamera handles like a Porsche. Those are incredible handling numbers for a four-door beast like this.

Poser my arse. Do your homework.

-Rod

I don't know about this one...$90K after $20K in options? What kind of options are worth a small economy car? I saw many comparisons to S-class and 7 Series, which are fair in my opinion...each coming with a full-size trunk and capable of seating 5, compared to this hatch(very small hatch) and room for 4 luxo-sedan. I would agree most people are buying this Panamera for the name alone. Most people are in agreement that this car is not easy on the eyes from practically ANY angle.

Bodyblue: what proof do YOU have that the fords engine is so much more sophisticated? Or that it will need LESS mainenance? (I agree it will be cheaper though). You have just as much proof as I do. Where sticking the 3.7 in the pana would probably make matters worse for it, the mustang would probably improve if we did the opposite. Its hard to compare the efficiency of one engine over another when they reside in two different cars with massive weight differences. And running a car on premiun is no big detriment, its a couple more at the pump, and only increases power by a tad. Running on 87, I'm sure the pana would make essentially the same power.

Lostboyz: I wonder how many v6 panamera owners feel as compromised as you are making this car seem. Probably not many.

@eldaino2, the point is the mustang has the same numbers on regular fuel, you don't even know if you can run this porsche on regular gas but you seem to just make assumption after assumption.

Porsche service has always been more expensive since tacked on to every cost is the importing of parts. My dad owns an 86 porsche 944, just a simple slant 4, yet parts (even when it wasn't this old) were an arm and a leg compared to cars of similar specs. The flat 6s are obviously even more expensive to work on because of placement and complexity. I guarantee you maitenance on the porsche v6 will be more expensive by at least 50%.

No I'm sure anyone who spent $100k on a car wouldn't like it, you automatically pick up a bias, just ask any car enthusiast, they let the bad things go praise the crap out of the good. If you want a good example look at any VW post on this site, owner come out of the woodwork to refute it.

"what proof do YOU have that the fords engine is so much more sophisticated? Or that it will need LESS mainenance? (I agree it will be cheaper though). You have just as much proof as I do. Where sticking the 3.7 in the pana would probably make matters worse for it, the mustang would probably improve if we did the opposite. Its hard to compare the efficiency of one engine over another when they reside in two different cars with massive weight differences. And running a car on premiun is no big detriment, its a couple more at the pump, and only increases power by a tad. Running on 87, I'm sure the pana would make essentially the same power."

What Lostboyz said above.

The proof is that the Ford does what it does on 87 octane. We are comparing engines...the weight of a car has nothing to do with what how much HP it has. I am sorry but you obviously are in a bit over your head here. All you keep saying is "its a Porsche and it has to be better than a Ford engine". I have given you several examples of how Ford makes engines that are the equal of any in the world, but you wont let yourself believe it because you cant get past your bias (or lack of knowledge). Try to be a bit more objective and a bit less fanboy biased.

91 IS ONLY THE PRICE BECAUSE OF THE CRAZY OPTIONS. The average one will run low to mid 80's which is still a lot. Explain this one to me though. How is a CTS which has more HP and weighs a lot less than this car be at least half a second slower to sixty? Once again German HP vs American HP

lostboyz says: "porsche has always been performance with no compromises, this car is the definition of compromise"

HA!. Every car is a compromise, no matter who makes it. The 911 was made to be a practical, reliable, efficient sports car. That was its original mission statement and it hasn't swayed too far from it. It was never thought of as a performance car without compromises. The only Porsche's that can really fall into that category are the limited edition/homologation cars - i.e. spyder, 904, GT1, Carrera GT.

I'd say the only makers of cars that can be considered performance with no compromises are perhaps Ferrari and maybe Lotus (and only a select few models at that).

As for engine technology. Many lowly cars have a lot of high tech engine design going on. That doesn't mean the car overallis better. As for price, yeah its expensive but then again does a Ferrari 458 really perform 6 times better than the latest mustang GT. No, but that doesn't mean I should buy the Mustang if I have the money and like the Ferrari

This car looks very composed on that slalom, quick transition, very stable. The acceleration is really nice too. Wow i'm actually really impressed here. Excellent job Porsche, love your cars.

The optional (and huge) Michelin PS2 summer tires on this tester are raising its game from merely good to excellent. Specifically the 60-0, slalom, skidpad and (to a lesser dergree) the 0-60 numbers are all strongly affected by wide summer tires vs. the base car's stock rubber. I would be curious to see the full list of options on this car. It appears to have the upgraded PASM suspension, but what about PTV, active roll bars, etc? All those bells and whistles are designed to improve results in these sort of textbook performance tests (their utility on the street in a car like this may be debatable vs their cost however).

Can IL help us all out with a full listing of this car's options? Might go a long way to explaining the (great) test numbers...

TIA.

"Explain this one to me though. How is a CTS which has more HP and weighs a lot less than this car be at least half a second slower to sixty? Once again German HP vs American HP"

Torque curves and gearing, not to mention where the power peak is. Same reason a G37 can't catch a 335i despite having 30 more hp. The 335i has a plateau of torque starting at 1400 RPM whereas the G has to wind up to 5200 RPM to hit its 270 lb-ft peak.

I haven't seen the curves but I'm willing to bet one of the reasons this 3.6's performance is so impressive is a very flat torque band and the ability of the PDK to keep the engine near its hp peak.

Porsche has to be under-rating their engines. The "500hp" Panamera Turbo is way, way, WAY too fast for the weight. Has nothing to do with gearing or torque curves...

It weighs as much as a CTS-V wagon, which ran a 12.6 @ 116 in at Car and Driver Yet despite having 56 fewer HP, the Panamera Turbo manages an 11.7 @ 119. The better ET can partly be attributed to AWD but given the 3 mph trap speed advantage (and 56 fewer hp at the same weight) I smell shenanigans. Of course, they're free to sand bag because people just figure German HP must be superior to American HP.

Also as a side note, the CTS-V wagon managed a little better braking, a little worse road holding and even has better weight balance. Impressively the Panamera Turbo does a whopping 4mpg better on its EPA highway rating.

Impressive handling numbers, especially for a sedan. But for $55,000 less, I'll go for an Infiniti G37S Sedan with all the same features. Not to mention it's quicker on the straight. Even a Nissan GT-R is more affordable and quicker than this car. $91K!!?! For 300HP? DAMN!!!

I don't car what anybody says about this. Nice car, great handling and all, but not worth the money. I'll only get this car if somebody just hands it to me.

"Porsche has to be under-rating their engines. The "500hp" Panamera Turbo is way, way, WAY too fast for the weight."

That's entirely possible and likely too as the Germans are notorious for under-rating.

"Impressive handling numbers, especially for a sedan. But for $55,000 less, I'll go for an Infiniti G37S Sedan with all the same features. Not to mention it's quicker on the straight."

The G37 is a great car but it doesn't compare at all to the Panamera. It has nowhere near the same features, not even close. The Panamera competes well with the S-Class, 7-Series and A8 content-wise; if you don't think the Porsche is worth it then none of those cars are either. These cars are built to an incredibly high standard that's simply in another league than a $40K Infiniti.

Bodyblue: fanboy-ism has zero to do with it though its easy to resort to such accusations on this blog.
I have very little reason to doubt the 3.6 could not run on regular, its been done with plenty of engines that 'require' premium. And as someone mentioned above, you can find high end tech in many a lowly car no problem. The point is if you are going to praise an engine soley on its merits, then we can't sit here haggling over the price of what car you happen to find it in; IF it is indeed the engine tech itself you are wanting to compare. Granted it IS impressive at which price point the fords engine is being offered at, but you can get a lot of relatively high tech engines for cheap. We can go on and on about that all day.....I could plop down 16k on a used sti that gets over 300 hp, has all weather capability, and four doors;...but I never saw sti owners/enthusiasts littering the mustang first drives and tests with posts on how you can get a just as technologically advanced turbo motor for cheaper in the subie....(even if it doesn't get 30mpg)

...that's why bringing up the ford is kinda pointless; its an argument that can be applied to many cars at many price points, and its an argument that in itself has more airs of fanboyism than anything I have posted. There are literally people here saying 'german hp is better than american hp'......nothing I have said even remotely resembles that.

Lostboyz:speaking of assumptions, did you miss the part where I stated bb was correct in saying the mustang would be cheaper to maintain? Or did you ASSume I missed that part?

And yeah I have seen the vw posts, and to be honest, the gti guys can't help that their cars are practically perfect.

Now THAT'S fanboyism ;)

you have to remember, porsche engineers and business people are much smarter than all of us, the fact is that the 911 set the bar so high for porsche that they can pretty much charge whatever they want for their cars, porsche is the best car maker in the world, and it isn't about how well they perform, it's about build quality, and porsche is now the best, it wasn't always the case, you have to pay for quality, and the fact is that porsche is even better than lexus now when it comes to reliability, only honda can probably match them but hondas are boring, porsche sets their prices to a point where they can maximize their own profits. they know more than all of us what their cars are worth, but who cares when people are willing to spend anything for their cars, and the panamera is selling quite well, that's why you guys should just appreciate the car for what it is rather than judging it for the price that it is being sold for, the market will always dictate the price regardless of the mrsp that's why an XLR-V (MSRP over 100,000) can be bought for less than 40K now

^ another example of fanboyism, just making sure lostboyz and bodyblue make note of it.