rsilvers129

But maybe a Macan would be enjoyable enough for me and satisfy my sportiness desire instead of a full blown two seater and all of the downsides that goes with that.

rsilvers129

The Macan S is 0-60 in 5.2.

Only the Turbo is as quick as an S4. And a Turbo Macan with the electronics and leather is $80,000 - which is about $22,000 more than an S4 with some electronics and Napa leather.

All for the pleasure of getting to sit up higher. Like many of you, I don't get us Americans who won't be caught dead in wagons. Yes, the same very people who are embarrassed to be in a wagon are somehow not embarrassed that they don't know how to drive a manual transmission.

I thought the goal was to keep the center of mass as low as possible.

Toecutter

Not if you want to drive down a rough forest road or go skiing without getting stuck in deep snow. The Macan sounds like a perfect combination of my S4 and my Jeep. I live adjacent to 1.8 million acres of National Forest so we have as much dirt road as we do pavement. Maybe more. To get to the trailheads we also have twisty highways, so I picture blasting up the pavement into the mountains, but when the pavement ends the fun doesn't stop.

In stock form the S4 goes 0-60 in what, 4.9? If that's correct then 0.3 seconds slower in the Macan S is close enough for me. I'm not a drag racer.

The total cost of my Audi and my Jeep is around $100K so I guess one could look at it that way. One vehicle that does the job of two for less money.

If I weren't into outdoor sports I wouldn't be looking at suv's though.

rsilvers129

I actually have to go off pavement for a few miles to get to one of my houses also. But I was speaking about normal drivers who never go offroad.

markcincinnati

I started researching the Macan S, right away yesterday, after the "question" was posed regarding the SQ5 and just how close the Macan S would be -- price and performance wise -- to the Audi.

A few observations:

This is Audi World, not Porsche World, but there is certainly nothing that prevents us from a healthy discussion of many brands -- and obviously Porsche certainly merits inclusion.

The Macan S is still not available in the US, so if you want the level of performance of, say, a souped up Audi Avant, the SQ5 is one of your very few options

Upon closer examination, the Macan S when cranked up to the Audi SQ5 Prestige level with several additional options (on the Audi) is quite a bit more than 5% more expensive (which I thought at first), even though I would think someone who would shop a maxed-out SQ5 would be interested in and able to afford a Macan S.

I had thought, yesterday when the subject of "why my wife and I did NOT consider a Macan over an SQ5" that Porsche might be cannibalizing Audi's sales. Although there may be some truth to that, I am now thinking that the Macan customer might not even consider an Audi and that Audi owners, broadly speaking, seem to be somewhat more loyal than most car owners. The Macan S, not "maxed out" will be, for Porsche, another way to attract new buyers to the brand -- and for those who do opt for a Macan S, they will be getting nearly as much power as the SQ5 and, in my view, a better transmission (the SQ5 has a "specially programmed" 8-speed tiptronic and the Macan will be equipped with the 7-speed DSG).

Porsche probably is, in this order, thought of as: a producer of sporty and luxurious vehicles. I assume Audi is probably though of as: a manufacturer of premium luxury, sporting vehicles (although the RS variants and the R8 itself often can run easily in the same circle as Porsche.)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Some folks will think the Audi is the leader in interiors even while admiring what Porsche has done simultaneously (and not just with the Macan, either).

On the other hand, the Porsche exterior is, to most eyes, a "thang of beauty" not that the Audi exterior is not imbued with its own level of pulchritudinous virtue.

I am now at a place where I believe there will be profitable co-existence between the Macan S and the SQ5. The Macan Turbo, of course would seem to be in an altogether different league.

It could get interesting, however, if Audi ups its game in the mid-size CUV world by introducing an RSQ5.

The way it seems, CUV's are the "it" vehicle at this point in time -- that usually elusive Swiss Army Knife of "cars". The Audi dealers here in River City (Cincinnati) can't get enough Q5's (including SQ5's) to satisfy demand; and, if true regarding the Macan's full production run already spoken for, it would seem there is "plenty of room at the top."

Now, then, it makes me wonder if a Q5 based CUV will be ginned up by Volkswagen.

In other news: Audi has registered (trademarked, I imagine) the name "Q9", and RSQ3. We live in interesting times.

I wouldn't kick an SQ5 Prestige or a Macan S out of bed for eating crackers; hell, I'd be happy to bring the crackers.

markcincinnati

At this point, I'll offer a data point: my wife wanted the "normal" ride height of a Q5 in her SQ5 and would have found it unacceptable were it lowered -- she, and many other "data points" want their CUV's to be higher -- not truck or SUV high, but higher off the ground than, say, an S4 or A5.

I don't know if the Macan having a 1" lower ride height (or whatever the number) would be a selling point for someone looking for a vehicle with a slightly higher stance than a sedan.

Those looking for the lowered stance wouldn't shop the higher off the ground Audi, perhaps; and vice versa regarding the Porsche.

Once my wife, to name one, got into a vehicle with a slightly higher ground clearance than the typical "sport sedan", she wouldn't go back. Indeed, the somewhat higher ground clearance of her 2011 Infiniti FX35 was what, at that time, cinched the deal.

Having one -- the Audi -- with higher ground clearance vs one -- the Porsche -- with "normal" ground clearance as choices for the consumer, is I think, a good thing and a way to limit or help prevent these cars from cannibalizing each other's sales.

rsilvers129

I can't consider myself a Macan customer until I buy one, but I like it and am a potential customer. For me, I considered the Audi SQ5 but am not keen on the conventional automatic transmission.

Last night I built a Cheyenne S that I could live with and it was $81,000. All I did was add the $11,000 electronics package. The Cheyenne diesel is also interesting.

I still get 5% more for a Macan over an SQ5. Maybe not exactly equivalent but with the best electronics package on the Porsche.

And don't forget that the SQ5 will never have the Porsche AWD or PDK.

rsilvers129

Macan can get air suspension so I can pick low for street use and high for the bumpy dirt road.

I don't think my wife has ever said she likes a higher ride height and drives the Focus as happily as the Odyssey or Sequoia, but I understand height is what most people want.

The only reason why I want an SUV is to tow our boat or to clear a snow bank or to not rattle the car apart on the bumpy dirt road we often have to cross.

On the street the Odyssey is what we both prefer when we have our family and the sedan when we don't.

I am thinking that since our neighbors always ask to use our boat ramp to launch their boat, I can give up the Sequoia and just ask one of them to do it, then get down to an S4 or Porsche SUV and Odyssey.

Toecutter

I love that the Macan has the air springs. Set it low for general use and raise it for deep snow and high-clearance roads.

The pics of the rear seat look fairly compact. I don't know if three kids would like it for more than short trips around town.

rsilvers129

On the one hand they fit in the Focus. On the other hand we never use the Focus with them all. So I guess it comes down to if we have 2 cars or 3.