This is probably one of the most well focused reviews I've ever watched. Completely packed with relevant information, short to the point and beautifully presented. Well done and THUMBS UP!
Young Matt Watson! I'm not British, so I just came across Matt on his own channel a few years ago. Carwow. Didn't know he used to work for Auto Express
I like Matt he is normally very objective but I wish he and other reviewers would stop with the 'ugly' comments - its only a matter of opinion; I actually prefer the look of the early models - all other car companies have a front end 'signature' and Porsche is no exception.
I think the Cayenne I saw at my local dealership was assembled during the Oktoberfest because although the materials used in the interior were of an excellent quality they squeaked a lot more than in other porsche models
just receive a brochure and the options list! is this car coming with absolutely nothing on it standard! you pay extra for everything. i love it though, and still consider trading my 2010 RRS TDV8 for this Hybrid. waiting to see it live and take a test-drive before. then i will decide! it is a very tempting though against an X5 M or X6M. this one has something i like a lot, the rear seats can actually accommodate people for a long trip with those inclinable back rests.very attractive feature!
I know that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so I'll leave you to make your own opinions about the new Cayenne's appearance. Apart from that, I think that Porsche is is heading down a good path. They have evolved from a sportscar company to a luxury company with a focus on performance. Ironically, they made the most significant breakthroughs in hybrid technology (918 Spyder), not Toyota. Now, they focus on being both fast and economical. I thought this was a fantastic review.
Great and thorough video, much better than some of the other lame excuses for car tests, this one tested 3 important aspects and showed of the range of this vastly improved car...now just to wait for the lottery win!!!
I've driven the new Porsche Cayenne Turbo and the handling is amazing compared to any other suv i have driven, but its not really necessary because no one takes there suv to the track. The new Range Rover super charged is much more practical and its insanely fast if you are concerned about performance and i think its much better looking. The new Cayenne body style is very nice but I really liked the 2009 body style its much more aggressive.
@mustsilm city is called LEIPZIG, east germany. another clip on youtube shows the racetrack on the porsche leipzig plant. for sure, only the turbo bodywork looks like a real cayenne...
@hereistand2008 It`s not about being able to afford one. I was talking about wether you have experienced the sheer joy of driving a Porsche. The moment you turn the key you start smiling and the second you get out you`ll be sad, `cause you`d like to keep on going. You don`t buy a Porsche because it`s fast, or good looking, you buy it because every single meter you drive is like a happy and fun dream you`d never want to end. To know what I`m talking about you need to experience this yourself.
There are sooo many alternatives to what this car does. It's built for people with more money than sense and think driving a big, heavy 4X4 around a busy city is a good idea.
Have you ever seen the reliability scale of the Land Rover.. and a lot of people in Canada buy this Cayenne for it's performance on dry, and it's off road performance (snow). This is the ultimate SUV to buy, and if you ever get to drive one, you would understand why.
I gave this a test drive in the summer and was thoroughly disappointed with the German quality of Porsche. The price tag was outrageous as well. We chose a loaded-up E-Class.
I think reliability ratings have gotten significantly better for lots of car-makes that had bad reps, Land Rover included. The gap between most reliable and, say, #25 most reliable, is not that much any more. But I'll believe you about the Cayenne's fun-to-drive level, but it fails in utility for me.
...i wonder what they do with the car they tesy an give to ppl to review....im sure there sold at a lower price an have like alot of miles.....or does porsche keep them???
I find the new design to be very nice. i like it far more than the old one. Range Rover is still the best in off-road driving capabilities, but i still think that Porsche manages a better on road handling with decent off road capabilities, its just perfect. now I don't know how reliable it actually is.
I'm sure the Cayenne is a great car to drive, but that's not the main reason to buy an SUV, is it? My XC90 is fun to drive too, and it has a lot more hauling capability (for people & stuff). And the last I heard, Land Rover's reliability has gotten a lot better.
He forgot the DIESEL! That's the best compromise between the hybrid and the S version ,huge torque for offroading ,high mpgs for city traveling! Best option for a normal person.
@TheEasyontheeyes yea thats partly true ;) but i think you have to seperate the porsche cars. i mean a porsche carrera turbo, gt2, gt3 can still play with ferraris and lamborghinis... but yes i can understand you :)
Hi friends i am contemplating buying car ,can any one suggest which out of Audi Q 3 S, BMW 180 and Volvo V40 is more suitable for indian conditions is more suitable for indian conditions
@chigasaki06 that car doesnt look like a porsche. i think the back of the car looks like it was designed for the asian market. the old cayenne looks more powefullll.
@Tony27nine yes indeed ..had a Cayenne 2006 sold it and bought a Landrover caz of fuel consumption...but still Landrover drinks much fuel but not like Porsche :)
@germanysbest89 Precise! Take the elegant front from the new Cayenne, and combine it whit the bombastic back from the old, and Porsche would have a smash hit!
And touching on Toyota, CR just removed the Camry and Rav4 from it's recommended list because of repeated failures on the IIHS's new 'small overlap' crash test. And what's up with all the Toyota recalls these days? It certainly seems that Toyota is not the company it once was.
Because of the different units (I mean miles per hour and kilometers per hour) the results are falsified...for example - in US a car accelerates in 3.8s but in Europe (except for GB) the same car needs 4.0s...and the next thing which is weird is that sometimes you say (not you Matt, I mean in general) 0-60 time and sometimes you say 0-62 time...I just don't get it...?!
