i like those videos they show how pointless fast SUV´s are. Trying to make a 2Ton Brick fast takes so much power and fuel instead of just removing weight. Car manufacturer should be inspired by this. Remove weight instead of gain weight and add power!
The Cayenne is pointless?? Hmmm the large vehicle with air conditioning,all weather capabilities and room for 5 with luggage and stuff within like 2 tenths of the performance of the track car is pointless yet the tiny car pretty much only good for tracking isn't? Dude, I don't think you know what pointless means.
Club Bmw Amg You can't compare cars just by looking at the horsepower. You need to take into account weight, center of gravity (high vs low), wheelbase etc. This wasn't a drag race, but a track battle, and Cayene handling, for it's size, showed excellent.
Kodreanu23 The cayenne would prolly demolish catterham on nurburgring, it depends not on the car but the top speed of the track and the number of straights on the track the catterham is not powerfull enough to reach 200kmh as fast as cayenne and keep going after 200kmh, you obviously DONT know what u r talking about
Club Bmw Amg And you think the track they used for testing here is a high top speed track? I'd say this track isn't that fast, which means Cayenne hasn't been so behind on a slower track and it would be much faster than Caterham on fast track. So, this clip is somehow again showing up as a good commercial for Cayenne and that's what I said in my first comment... What have I said so wrong?
This proves just how incredible of a driving machine that Porsche is. I have the Cayenne base model, and that's already more than enough power for my daily use.
its not about lap times, its about how much fun you get out of driving them. Funtionally the porsche is 100 times better, but in terms of pure driving fun the caterhem cant be beaten
Got your point, but for a car of a totally different platform (Cayenne), the time it did it's pretty good. Remember that you can use it for daily driving, supermarket, kids and whatever .... so i think it's a total winner.
It's actually pretty fair when you consider the Cayenne has massively wide tires, an AWD system that can really help shuffle the power and make it turn like a lower and lighter car (to a point), and massive carbon ceramic brakes. Also, the SuperSport Caterham, despite the name is actually a pretty low end Caterham, the R600 has double the power, giving it a power to weight equal to the Veyron. And the R600 is quicker on the Top Gear Track.
I wish the 160 was available in the states. The higher end models would be out of my reach for probably two to three decades, but I could save enough to pay cash for a 160 in 5 to 10 years.
Both cars have similar power to weight ratio. Cayenne Turbo S 0.248 and Caterham 7 Supersport 0.269. That means they should be as fast in the straight line, but if you add corners Cayenne is at significant disadvantage with its 2215 kg to shift against laws of physics so coming within 2 seconds to super light Caterham is amazing. It looks like it does beat the laws of physics after all Dickie:) And you can go sideways at this speed without crashing, what other 2215 kg car can do that :)
The points of this video are a) Fun, and b) proving that Lightness is Rightness. The Porsche had 400 horsepower more than the 7, but lost by 2 seconds. Mind you, a high centre of gravity can't have helped it either...
I agree...the 7 is gonna top out around 110 mph and the Porsche will undoubtedly go quite a bit higher. The Porsche has a lot more cross-section but much lower drag.
In the Cayenne he drifted the car a lot during the timed lap. I suspect the the times would have been closer with a more clean lap in both cars. Got to love them both though!
I'd say the Cayenne is very impressive. All the extra weight & it was still only two seconds slower around the track than that Caterham gocart. Someone needs to drop a LS motor in one of those Caterhams. That would be a fun ride.
the point is that the porsche was just a couple of seconds slower. The caterham was purpose built for trackdays and yet it's just a few seconds faster than an offroad-going family suv.
"In 2008 the UK automotive manufacturing sector had a turnover of £52.5 billion. It produced 1.45 million passenger vehicles and over 200,000 commercial vehicles" You were saying something about no auto industry in the UK - please, carry on...
You could also define practical as affordable, in which case the 7 is much more practical - you pay a fifth of the price for something that is faster and a lot more fun. I'd also venture a guess that the running costs are a tiny bit cheaper than an SUV with a twin turbo V8, wouldn't you think? In my opinion the 7 is the car for the enthusiast who doesn't have millions in the bank and the Cayenne is for the rich guy who cares more about image than the driving experience.
Bloke: "The road feel through these Nikes is amazing, you can feel every bump. I can go through this chicane flat out. The biggest drawback is the power fade. By the 3th lap, throttle response shows clear signs of fade."
The only disappointment with the cayenne turbo is the deletion of the off road capability that the original car had. Its small, but knowing that your car could blast around a track, drive home - swap the tires, then head anywhere you want because the car could handle just about any surface you showed it... wow. This new cayenne clearly focused to be a rival for the x5/6M which is frustrating because they are so on-road oriented that they will never see dirt, which is a shame for a 150k CDN "SUV"
You're telling me you would rather have a cheaper sedan, not made anywhere near as how well the Cayenne was made? There's a system as well that you can upgrade to that can make the car lower down to the height of a sedan dude. I don't want to call it hydraulics because I'm not sure that's the correct way of putting it. My dad got it on his Cayenne S though. You can change the grill completely. If you heard the car start up in real life it sounds like a pure monster. It's not a bad car at all???
What a pointless exercise! One is a track car, something you wouldn't want to commute in of the things you would do in the Cayenne. There's no point arguing which is 'best', just pointless
What was the point? Given the parameters, I would suggest that Porsche made the bigger accomplishment. Let's see how well the Caterham does off-road now...
You reckon wrong. Richard Meaden knows that track like the back of his hand. He's also raced for the Aston Martin factory team in the Nurburgring 24 more than once.
I dont own a porsche so i'm not butt-hurt but i do have to say that he didnt try to run nearly as clean in the porsche, he was throwing it sideways and enjoying some slides even on the timed lap. Good peice I really enjoyed it, just not sure it was fair
He was still good I thought though at presenting. And to answer the people that what's the point, I think it was to prove lightness is the key to have fun in a car or at least that was the outcome.
The cayene is an all in one or if you just don't care too much about money and you simply buy the higher end model. or just want to keep things simple, without having to buy a sports car. Personally I would buy a cheaper version of the cayene, then something like a carrera 4s for city driving, a carrera gt for motorway, an dunkervort d8 gto for sunny weekends and an ariel atom v8 for trackdays, or for a cheaper budget a daily driver and the atom
Richard Meaden (the reviewer) has got a lot of racing experience. I think the fact that the Porsche is a 2200kg off roader has something to do with it.
This guy REALLY irritates me... I find his reviews in EVO tedious and biased. But seeing him moan and complain all the way through driving the Cayenne in this ridiculous, inappropriate test, is far, far worse... Why on earth compare apples with oranges? Just as an excuse to air your bias against the Porsche Cayenne? Grow up, Dickie!
And the range rover is the ultimate success of humanity. If you make a product and people buy it because they want it, you have succeeded in fulfilling people desires.
Maybe it's just me...but before the lap times you already know who's going to win on the track. I'm more impressed that Porsche was about 2 secs slower than the Caterham. I was thinking at least 7 sec.
Yeah, the Caterham has less power than the average 4 cylinder family car, while the Cayenne has a twin turbo V8 belting out 550hp. I'm pretty sure you could get a racing semi truck to beat the Cayenne if you give it 4 times the power too.
This video proves why the E30 M3 will allways be the better M3... everybody says is because of the driving feel, that driving feel comes from lightness that today's cars can't get
This track always favours handling over power. Look at the times in the mag for proof. Since roads are mostly built as straight as they can be and people aren't really likely to drive a cayenne on a track it's set up to suit it's environment. Personally I'll take the luxury, space and straight line power unless I'm on a track which isn't very often these days.
While the Caterham is more affordable, its not too as a daily driver. As for running cost, the Caterham may be cheaper. What I'm tryng to say is that even for something that can do what you need it to, and still put a smile on your face. I look at the Cayenne the option for if you have a family but you still enjoy driving, and the Caterham as the utlmate budget track car. That and plus, if you really wanted the 2sec you could put the car on a diet.
It's their best-selling car. You just can't afford it. You realize it looks great, especially with the right features, you just can't cut it some slack because it's "just a SUV" to you.
No they don't. That engine is far too heavy to fit into a 911. You could remove the rear seats and make a 911 mid-engines with it - but then it wouldn't be a 911, or more importantly, drive like a 911. I have no doubt Porsche will eventually build a flat-8 motor for the 911, as you can only squeeze so much power and revs out of 6 cylinders, before it gets very industrial. They're still some way off maximising what they can wrong fro a 6 though. I'd love a flat-8 911!
The Cayenne is actually pretty capable off-road, I have driven both the Range Rover and the Cayenne off-road and while I think the Range Rover is better off-road it is not by much it beats the Porsche.
I looked at the the Top Gear Leaderboard to make some comparisons...looks like they haven't raced a GT2RS but the GT2 is on there about 1.5w slower than the Caterham. The GT2RS will do 0-60 in about 0.2s quicker than the GT2 - but this is still 0.5s slower than a Caterham. I would wager the Caterham would beat the Porsche.
It's still a pointless comparaison because obviously the Caterham is a sport car build for the track, with a ridid chassis, harder suspensions, a low center of gravity, whereas the Cayenne is not... The weight ratio is not the only point to consider. A good comparaison will be a comparaison between two sport cars : one 2000kg/500hp and the other 550kg/140hp for example. Here it's just a non sense.
I would rather have an Audi S6 with an APR tune than any Cayenne. I have heard them start up in real life. It sounds strong, but I don't find it very impressive. It doesn't compare to hearing, say, a GT3 RS start up. I understand that you like the Cayenne, which is fine. I, on the other hand, don't like vehicles that compromise that much.
im a driver but what im saying is that the suv is fast even compared to a track car, in other words you can not only scare yourself but your whole family and still drive home
Lots of grassy car parks around where we live, Caterham does fine. I suspect that the vast majority of Cayenne's never go more off road than my Cat. Furthermore, most Cat owners also drive 'practical' cars as well.
Youre both missing the point. They displayed how both cars can keep up with eachother but the sheer rush and enjoyment of driving comes from the insane not the practical
well...not entirely. it'll eat mustangs and camaros and many other sports cars in just flat out accelerative pace. the fact that porsche can get a 6000 lb brick to 60 in just 4 seconds is just astonishing
but you forget one thing.... sensations... a two seater truly sports car can give a sensations impossible to achieve with an ultra faster family car...
It just didn't really seem like he actually had fun driving the Porsche (not often you can say that, is it). It seems more like it's really quick but kind of unresponsive (of course, it's an SUV) so it would make more sense to me if you bought a less extreme SUV. If you like the Porsche you could but a Cayenne S, S Diesel or S Hybrid and have over 40 to 50 thousand pounds left for a fun car like the extreme Caterhams. You could buy a Cayenne S and a CSR260 and still have money left.
