RX: Great car, Soft ride and suspension, quality and reliability are great. Transmission is terrible from a performance point of view. It is turned for fuel efficiency and gradual acceleration.
GLC: idk much about it. Seems like everyone drives that car. Inflated market like a c-class.
Volvo: it’s a nice car. I like it
Q5: your wife has one
Macan: I would take it due to the exclusive factor and not everyone else is driving it. Also, pretty great performance even on the base car as far as gearing, suspension and rigidity of the car
Nah the macan i drove was fine, unspectacular. The PDK in a cayman S i test drove wobbled in first to second gear. They were giving those things away 2 summers ago and i wanted to try one out. wound up with an i8 for less money.
There’s a lot to address in your post that I respectfully disagree with. However, I’ll only address this. The new generation 2.0T EA888 gets torque well below 2,200 RPM. I’ve personally owned two cars with the 2.0T (GEN I/II) and my brother has owned 2 as well (GEN II). They changed out the turbos for the newest generation and adjusted the fuel mapping. Torque does come on way sooner now compared to what I was used to.
There’s a lot more to the car than just he engine. The engine itself has been tuned and adjusted for a “Porsche” application in the Macan. It’s not really faster than the Q5, but it performs better in other ways.
I would agree the ZF 8 is an overall more convenient transmission, but to get the ZF 8 he would need to step up into an M40i or SQ5 which OP has already stated he cannot find at a price he finds acceptable.
A base x3 has the ZF. You don’t need an m40 for it. It also has a turbo that kicks in at 1400 rpm, which makes it a lot more practical for suv day to day applications. Would say that a base macan is not a comp to an x3 m40, though. It’s not much more than a base x3 or GLC in terms of performance.
i get why the macan / cayenne exist. the VW group is trying to maximize profit by making a mass-market car, so they can take profits and put them into R&D for actual “porsches”. In this, they’re no different from MB & BMW, who do the same for the AMG & M divisions by flooding the market with SUVs, which is all fine and good. But to say a certain mass market SUV is “exclusive” or whatever, is laughable. You know what’s exclusive? A G-Wagen. A Urus (VW platform, but a lambo engine), a Bentayga (VW platform but a bentley engine) or a Cullinan.
Still confused. I really like the Mercedes GLC as well, but cannot find anyone that is able to offer me a quote. Nobody seems to have any idea of what numbers will look like for my lease term and location.
I believe there is a 2-3% difference on the residual percentage on Fsport models. Do you know what the residual value is on this lease? Also do you know the Money Factor?
As far as discounts, you got about the same. He got a bigger discount off the MSRP by few hundred dollars and you got few hundred more in rebates. The dealer may have just moved that extra few hundred into the rebate a s none of us can justify where that rebate came from.
If you were to go with an Fsport AND you can find a car at $55k MSRP, you will get a lower payment due to the higher residual percentage. (highly unlikely because in the tri-state area, you are likely to find Fsport models at about 59-60K MSRP cars)
