Jump to content
Create New...
  • Drew Dowdell
    Drew Dowdell

    LA Auto Show: 2015 Porsche Macan

    by Drew Dowdell

    Porsche unveiled its fifth model line, the Macan, today at the LA Auto Show.

    Available in two models, the Macan is Porsche's attempt to create a sports car in the compact crossover segment. Porsche sees a growing market for Hi-Po grocery-getters.

    The Macan S is powered by a 3.0-litre twin-turbo V6 producing 340 horsepower and can accelerate the car to 60 mph in 5 seconds flat. If that doesn't get your groceries home fast enough, you can opt for the Macan Turbo which packs a 3.6-litre twin-turbo V6 pumping out 400 horsepower and enabling a 4.4 second sprint to 60. Both models feed the power to Porsche's 7-speed dual-clutch automatic and then out to all four wheels. Top speed for the Macan Turbo is 164 mph. Remember, no crying if you spill the milk.

    As far as appearance, the exterior Macan looks exactly like what you would expect a compact Porsche crossover to look like. Inside. the Macan doesn't wander from that pattern with a design that looks like a slightly tamer version of the interior used in the Macan's bigger brother, the Cayenne.

    The Macan isn't just a paved-playground bully though, Porsche made sure that Mom can get the kids to Grandma's house even in bad weather. With the air suspension set at "High", the Macan has a ground clearance of 9.06 inches. For reference, the 2013 Subaru Forrester and the 2014 Jeep Cherokee Trailhawk only have 8.9" and 8.7" respectively.

    But if something does go wrong, the Porsche Macan features a new safety technology to keep the kids.. and Mom.. safe. Multi-collision brake technology works on the premise that one quarter of all accidents involve a second collision after the first hit. The brake system of the Macan triggers when the airbag sensors detect the first collision and activates maximum braking to try and prevent a second hit.

    Looking good and going fast is not typically heard of in the compact crossover segment, but in the Macan, Porsche has unleashed an interesting opening shot.

    Check out all of our LA Auto Show Coverage here.

    Porsche's 36 Page Press Release on the Macan can be found here. (PDF Warning)

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    Wow, this thing goes to $100,000 in no time after adding Porsche-esque options. Cayenne GTS lightly loaded becomes a better option.

    But that's exactly the type of choice Porsche can now offer: smaller fully loaded model or larger with less content. More options should bring in more people (in theory at least).

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, this thing goes to $100,000 in no time after adding Porsche-esque options. Cayenne GTS lightly loaded becomes a better option.

    But that's exactly the type of choice Porsche can now offer: smaller fully loaded model or larger with less content. More options should bring in more people (in theory at least).

    More options or cannibalization?

    People doubt GM's strategy for price overlaps through the breadth and depth of its product lineup, but this is okay because it gives theoretically more options?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    This will cannibalize their only faithful sales to the Cayenne. Here I have to say that while the engineering chops are impressive, I think Marketing forgot to keep this small er CUV in it's proper place.

    My gut tells me they will rush a refresh of the Cayenne to market next year after this kills off sales.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, this thing goes to $100,000 in no time after adding Porsche-esque options. Cayenne GTS lightly loaded becomes a better option.

    But that's exactly the type of choice Porsche can now offer: smaller fully loaded model or larger with less content. More options should bring in more people (in theory at least).

    More options or cannibalization?

    People doubt GM's strategy for price overlaps through the breadth and depth of its product lineup, but this is okay because it gives theoretically more options?

    I'm willing to bet they'll make more money on the high priced Macans (Porsche and other German brand option/packages prices are shocking), so even if in terms of the number of units there is some cannibalization, the profit per unit sold will be bigger. It's clever overlap, not the kind of overlap that had various GM brands offering essentially the same content at roughly identical price points.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, this thing goes to $100,000 in no time after adding Porsche-esque options. Cayenne GTS lightly loaded becomes a better option.

    But that's exactly the type of choice Porsche can now offer: smaller fully loaded model or larger with less content. More options should bring in more people (in theory at least).

    More options or cannibalization?

    People doubt GM's strategy for price overlaps through the breadth and depth of its product lineup, but this is okay because it gives theoretically more options?

    I'm willing to bet they'll make more money on the high priced Macans (Porsche and other German brand option/packages prices are shocking), so even if in terms of the number of units there is some cannibalization, the profit per unit sold will be bigger. It's clever overlap, not the kind of overlap that had various GM brands offering essentially the same content at roughly identical price points.

    I am not doubting that it will not make profits on a tarted up Audi Q5 tagged as a Macan. How is that essentially different than the strategy of a Tahoe and Escalade? And vertical overlaps within the same brand is not indifferent than horizontal overlap among different brands of the same manufacturer, so as long they make profits, is it? Again cannibalization will take place in a horizontal overlap also, but it is profit that matters, right?

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Wow, this thing goes to $100,000 in no time after adding Porsche-esque options. Cayenne GTS lightly loaded becomes a better option.

    But that's exactly the type of choice Porsche can now offer: smaller fully loaded model or larger with less content. More options should bring in more people (in theory at least).

    More options or cannibalization?

    People doubt GM's strategy for price overlaps through the breadth and depth of its product lineup, but this is okay because it gives theoretically more options?

    I'm willing to bet they'll make more money on the high priced Macans (Porsche and other German brand option/packages prices are shocking), so even if in terms of the number of units there is some cannibalization, the profit per unit sold will be bigger. It's clever overlap, not the kind of overlap that had various GM brands offering essentially the same content at roughly identical price points.

    I am not doubting that it will not make profits on a tarted up Audi Q5 tagged as a Macan. How is that essentially different than the strategy of a Tahoe and Escalade? And vertical overlaps within the same brand is not indifferent than horizontal overlap among different brands of the same manufacturer, so as long they make profits, is it? Again cannibalization will take place in a horizontal overlap also, but it is profit that matters, right?

    Because the price overlap here is between a higher end smaller car and a lower end (relatively sepeaking since this a Porsche) bigger one. It's not selling the same car 5 times over in the same price points (which GM did for years - Tahoe and Escalade are not Old GM in that regard). This allows for an actual choice: smaller with more goodies or something bigger but with less goodies; with the added 'bonus' of having a higher profit per unit on the smaller one given the obscene option pricing by Porsche. IMHO this is the Alfred Sloan way done the right, this is how stair step pricing should be done.

    Link to comment
    Share on other sites

    Okay let us skin the cat a little differently. Porsche Cayenne S with 400hp engine starts at 66,800, while the Porsche Macan Turbo starts at 72,300 with the same hp engine (granted a different layout and has standard the PASM). This is still illogical. Imagine the conversation between a desperate housewife and salesman trying to keep straight face in telling why a smaller car with not too much more in standard equipment actually costs more than a larger car.

    Porsche's intent with this vehicle is volume to keep it from losing money. And if it wants volume with this vehicle, then going at a lower price and yet keeping a health price delta between the two SUVs will work more economically. It may work in short term, but the strategy is going to hurt Porsche in long term.

    If smaller with more goodies or something bigger with less goodies with added bonus of having higher profit per unit on the smaller one is the elixir of automotive industry, then the BMW should be charging 74,000 for a decently loaded 335i on par with the 740i and then by keeping slew of greedily charged options bring it to the levels of 750i.

    • Agree 1
    Link to comment
    Share on other sites



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • google-news-icon.png



  • Community Hive Community Hive

    Community Hive allows you to follow your favorite communities all in one place.

    Follow on Community Hive
  • google-news-icon.png

  • Subscribe to Cheers & Gears

    Cheers and Gears Logo

    Since 2001 we've brought you real content and honest opinions, not AI-generated stuff with no feeling or opinions influenced by the manufacturers.

    Please consider subscribing. Subscriptions can be as little as $1.75 a month, and a paid subscription drops most ads.*
     

    You can view subscription options here.

    *a very limited number of ads contain special coupon deals for our members and will show

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Those use cases will necessitate the purchase of something with a long range, like 300+. But even still, two hours at 11.5kW would put 50 - 70 miles of range back in the car. You might need to make one 10-minute DCFC stop if you had a really busy day, but otherwise, you could make it.
    • I can understand this, but then this is part of my daily life. With two kids with their own families and grandkids it is not uncommon for us to be out and about for the day, come home for a bit before heading out to help with the grandkids and their afterschool activities. Plus, with family that is living from both sides north and south of us, it would not be uncommon to drive 75 miles down south to deal with my wife's side of the family, see the nieces/nephews and then up north to my side to see folks and with both our parents in senior years with health issues, also moving back in forth. Course this is why Sun puts on about 15,000 miles a year on the SS. We all have different use cases.
    • That's all I'm worried about. I'm not going to spend a sht ton more money having a 19.2kW charger installed for the 1 day every 3 years I empty the battery, get home for 2 hours, and have to again drive enough that I couldn't make it back home...  
    • I could see settling on three charger rates, but definitely not one. A Bolt or Kia EV4 type vehicle simply does not need 19kW home charging.  It would be an excessive cost to retrofit a house and the number of buyers who actually use that rate would be pretty close to zero.  That would be like insisting that the Corolla has to have a 6.2 liter. It's excessive and doesn't fit the use case. Now, if we settled into 7.5kW, 11.5kW, and 19.4kW as a standard, that would probably achieve what you are proposing while still giving cost flexibility.  It would allow for entry-level EVs to get the lower cost / lower speed charger while allowing the larger vehicles or premium vehicles to have faster home charging.  For example, the EV6 could have a lower cost 7.5kW charger while the Genesis GV60 on the same platform could get the 11.5kW charger because it is a premium brand and higher cost vehicle.  Then any large EV with or near a 200kW battery could have the 19.4kW charger, but even then, unless it is a newly built house or a commercial fleet, it will still probably charge only at 11.5kW, as that's about the max that the vast majority of homes are wired to do.  Unless you're driving an EV with a 200kW battery to 10% every day, an 11.5kW charger can "fill" an EV to 80% overnight with room to spare, so most people (including me), won't want the extra expense of spending extra money just to say my EV charged faster while I slept.  Either way, it will be ready for me when I need to leave at 7 am.
    • @ccap41 @Drew Dowdell Thank you both, this is the kind of dialogue I feel the Auto buyers need to be made aware of and the various use cases in understanding as I feel most DO NOT really understand this and give into the FEAR Mongering of News Stories. While I still feel that everyone should have the same charging rate capabilities, I also understand both your points. I do feel that this will change electrical across the WORLD over time due to the need of charging.
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    • There are no registered users currently online
  • My Clubs

×
×
  • Create New...

Hey there, we noticed you're using an ad-blocker. We're a small site that is supported by ads or subscriptions. We rely on these to pay for server costs and vehicle reviews.  Please consider whitelisting us in your ad-blocker, or if you really like what you see, you can pick up one of our subscriptions for just $1.75 a month or $15 a year. It may not seem like a lot, but it goes a long way to help support real, honest content, that isn't generated by an AI bot.

See you out there.

Drew
Editor-in-Chief

Write what you are looking for and press enter or click the search icon to begin your search

Change privacy settings