People have tried to be kind, saying that it’s challenging and that it’s unusual. But the simple fact of the matter is this: it’s as ugly as an inside-out monkey. It’s dreadful. Part Austin Maxi, it looks like someone with no talent at all was trying to describe what they wanted to a blind person, over the phone.
I tried one on a recent trip to Romania and I thought it was a very good car. But that’s like saying Ann Widdecombe has a heart of gold. It’s possibly true but it’s completely irrelevant. You still wouldn’t.
After two pages of digression and British pop culture references, Jeremy Clarkson finally decides to tell us what he really thinks of the Porsche Panamera. By digressing into British pop culture references. Which begs the question: who comes out of this looking worse? Or, to paraphrase Winston Churchill, tomorrow the Panamera will still be a fairly desirable car. Whether Clarkson will be able to offer anything resembling a credible or readable opinion in his next Times review is still very much an open question.
Sorry Ed but I have to agree with Clarkson on this one – its a chopped, lowered Cayenne – the drivetrain is identical, the shape is identical – and its hideous.
I don’t think we would realize how ugly it is if the gorgeous Aston Martin Rapide weren’t coming out at about the same time. Even the Mercedes CLS and Passat CC look much better.
I mean, if Hillary Clinton were the only woman alive, she might look hot after enough Bourbon…
I had an opportunity to see a parking lot full of Panameras a few weeks back. (Being prepped for a dealers’ event at Firebird Raceway.)
Once you get past the lower-brain brand-tattooed specialness of seeing “THE NEW PORSCHE” for the first time, they really are rather clumsy looking. Maybe not inside-out-monkey ugly, but not exactly prepossessing either.
(I took this photo, but with a friend’s camera. The flickr account is his.)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/tfeury/3975669827/
Looks better in person, though they definitely went for function over form. It hauls four people and a ton of cargo, and that’s what will sell a lot of buyers.
As far as Clarkson goes, I’ve never put much stock in his opinion on much of anything. I’m not about to start now.
And your problem?
Clarkson is communicating with his audience. It works! Why does he need to translate? You guys don’t and you don’t need to either. Again. Still.
Stop me if I’m wrong Mr. Niedermeyer, but isn’t the Times a British newspaper, read by British people? Doesn’t it make sense to have references that its core audience would understand?
Clarkson’s awkward metaphors for the car’s looks strike me as the very definition of “trying too hard.”
And am I reading that right? Does he really call the Cayman the “Gayman”?
This car is, quite frankly, and abomination on the nature of all things Porsche. Of course, this is strictly my personal opinion…we’ll see how many people actually pony up the money to buy one of these freaks of automotive stock. I’m so disheartened that the folks at Porsche even dreamed up this nightmare. Sigh…for the days of a simple 911 (make mine an ’82 or ’83 SC please…simple Guards Red and a Targa top)…
I agree with pete. Clarkson is writing for a UK audience, not an international one. TTAC is very America-Centric (something which I’ve always criticised), why? Because it is catering for an American audience rather than a global one.
As for the car, he’s right, again. It’s hideous. In fact it reminds me of this.
This isn’t an issue of Britishness… read the review. Clarkson doesn’t say a damn thing about the car beyond the quote above. If he’s going to be a columnist, that’s one thing. This is supposed to be a car review.
Don’t tell me you bought one…
I feel like the car would work better if the rear end would be modeled after the Carrera GT’s. Maybe they’re trying to set a new Anti-Bangle trend with the fastback look.
I’m sorry, but Clarkson is right – this car is ugly.
I saw my first one in person the other night. It was dark, so I didn’t get a really good look. I was bowled over by two things – the $118K sticker (which was still in the window) and the fact that it was parked outside of the dollar theater (the one that shows movies right before they come out on dvd and charges $1 to get in.)
Clarkson is spot on.
How the Panarama drives is, in may ways, irrelevant. The numbers and the pedigree denote that the Panarama will not suck to drive rapidly, that isn’t even really a question.
The headline here is that Porsche actually released a vehicle that looks the way the Panarama does. The vast majority of people do, in fact, think it is as ugly as an inside out monkey. That kills the entire deal because cars of this caliber get purchased because everyone wants one – not on the practicalities. *I* love Porsches and would find a Porsche sedan fantastic… but I wouldn’t touch the Panarama without 5 figures of cash on the hood since it looks the way it does.
Clarkson nailed it by extolling on the fact that is on everyone’s mind: with Mercedes making the CLS (swank looking) and Aston making the Rapide, why did Porsche green light this *thing*?
It’s arguable that it is a car review. It’s his column first and foremost. People read it prepared for a possible (probable?) rant – in he past about London’s transportation policies for example.
Second – if you know about Austin Maxis and Ann Widdecombe – he does say something about the car :-)
The Tesla S seems to get this shape right, but the Panamera? Forget it, I’ll buy a Quattroporte or something that actually looks nice.
I’ve seen these around these parts of Germany. They’re just out of proportion. Looks excessively heavy on the back end of the car.
Checked one out in Stuttgart at the dealer the other day, the interior seems like it might be the best Porsche ever. That I suspect is gonna matter a lot more to buyers than the outside. Its a Porsche to most folks, and that has more credibility than a Maserati or the Aston.
To me, this is way better than the Cayenne mess. I don’t know if it is because I got used to seeing Porsche’s frequently in Silicon Valley or if it was the Cayenne, but I used to lust after a Porsche. 911 Turbo please. Now, I just don’t care. Even a GT3 I don’t care. I loved the Boxster S I’ve driven. I’m sure they drive great. But getting blown by by a huge brick of an SUV driven by someone who doesn’t know a lick about Porsche, the brand, where it came from, etc really just ruined it for me. Get blasted by a 911 and I always loved it. That’s what a Porsche is about.
Anyway, if I was in the market, I’d consider it. Doesn’t mean I think it should have ever been built. Porsche should be ONLY sports cars. Period.
It’s doesn’t matter to me how many people hate this car. I want one bad.
Yeah, all his newspaper “reviews” are like this. You read them if you like reading columns about random things, with a paragraph or two about the actual car near the end. Wider audience, perhaps. But even like that, he manages to put more real information than most newspaper car reviews. I’ve never seen a negative paragraph in one of those.
It truly is the Hunchback of Zuffenhausen…
I don’t have a problem at all with the concept of a 4 door Porsche (like I do with the Cayenne.) However, as has been pointed out ad nauseum, the execution is hideous.
The overwhelming negative reaction of this car reminds me of the reaction most had when BMW released the new Bangle-ized 7 series in 2001/2002. That car was fugly and replaced one of the best looking sedans ever.
BMW took a shalacking for the looks, but the things still sold. In 2006, BMW fixed the worst parts of the exterior design and the car continued to sell well.
Porsche didn’t have to worry about a predecessor, yet it’s still a Bangled design. I give ’em an F and I grade on a curve. To my eyes, it’s an overly bulbous design that has an ugly ass and a weird profile. The new Infiniti M has a more desirable, consistent shape costing 1/3.
I like it. But I own an xB, so that my disqualify my opinion.
Clarkson is not a very elegant writer, but, then again, the Panamera is not a very elegant design for an automobile–or anything else, for that matter. They both are, however, at least less than average in their respective departments.
If he’s going to be a columnist, that’s one thing. This is supposed to be a car review.
Says who? With respect, I think you’re missing the point. Clarkson is an entertainer, with a car theme. He’s said himself that car reviews are generally so boring that hardly anyone reads them. So instead he writes amusing op-eds, which meander along and ultimately (sometimes) make a point about the car in question.
Strangely, despite the ostensible lack of information about the cars, I find his ‘reviews’ to be quite effective. Kind of like a long joke where by trying to guess the answer, you think a lot more about the topic.
German Audio Company Burmester had one at the CEDIA convention in Atlanta September (they make the car fi). I sat in all four seats, and had as much time as I needed to look at everything.
This car has the best interior I’ve ever seen. The seating ergonomics for driver and passenger are spectacular, and it is a gorgeous car inside and out. No one will ever mistake this car for anything other than a Porsche.
Go ahead and sniff in dismissal at this beauty. Hopefully, my opinion will stay in the absolute minority, so someday I may have the opportunity to buy a used one. I doubt it.
Awkward but not quite in the same league as the Mohs Ostentatienne Opera Sedan.
“It’s doesn’t matter to me how many people hate this car. I want one bad.”
By the way that thing looks you should have no problem finding one. And I have a feeling the dealer would be happy to give it away.
MarkT, I for one have no doubts at all that your opinion will stay in the absolute minority.
Disagree. Another brilliant review by Clarkson. The point about his car reviews, and something you missed, is the percentage of paragraphs devoted directly to the car is identical to the importance of the car. In this case, its minimal. Perfect!
Clarkson uses British figures of speech to communicate with a British audience, and he is being criticized by a guy who uses metaphores like, “ugly as an inside-out monkey?”
Take off the brand insignia and I would like it. However, ANY car calling itself a Porsche with seating for more than two should be run over by a Hummer being driven by Ann Widdecombe on a bad day. Being navigated by an inside-out monkey. (Sorry, who is Ann W.?)
It may not be attractive (in the rear), but it seems to go pretty fast and comfy. I’d take that over any other similarly priced sedan any day, even if they are drop dead gorgeous.
Ann Widdecombe is a British politician. ‘Nuff said.
Clarkson’s review of course dovetails nicely with his official position that “Only c**ks buy Porsches.”
And his rant is beautifully irate and slightly loony in his typical Top Gear fashion. What’s with TTAC hating on every car writer not on this site?
Pete,
Thanks. ‘Nuff said.
Clarkson has never been much of a Porsche fan, not so out of disrespect for their performance but because of their unimaginative styling. He does not fault the Panamerica for being a technical failure, on the contrary, it is executed brilliantly. He addresses the question that most people ask ‘would you buy one?’ And for him the answer is no.
I tend to agree. The Panamerica is rather like those home-made El Camino’s and Ranchero’s I used to see as a kid. They were made out of an old station wagon; at first glance it should work. But as you look closer you see that no matter how good the bodyshop was, no matter how much money is spent on the engine, wheels it’s still a hatchet job-it wasn’t meant to be.
I own a Mustang, I don’t want a four door Mustang. I’ve driven several Corvettes, and I never lusted after a four door version. I’d love to have an Audi R8 but I’d never want to have one with a pickup bed.
That being said, I’m sure it will sell well, given the PR that Porsche is using: i.e., ‘the Porsche your wife will let you have.’ For me, I think they should have taken the proven drivetrain and designed a completely new saloon car around it. One that shows Porsche excellence in a new way.
Ugly as an inside-out monkey – perfect! But ultimately, it matters not, for as with the Bangled-Bimmer, it’s the badge that matters not the sheetmetal. They will sell every single one they make at a handsome profit.
As I have often said to my BMW Club pals when they point out that the Bangled 7 set new sales records for the model – “Well imagine how many they would have sold if it actually looked nice!”.
These coupe-ish sedans all strike me as garish in some way, but the Panamera just assualts on all fronts.
Even the Rapide’s wheels are way big.
VW CC had odd taillights.
Mercedes CLS has an odd trunk.
The only thing competing for the ugly crown is the new BMW GranTour whatever that is?
Bridge2far :
October 19th, 2009 at 5:02 pm
“It’s doesn’t matter to me how many people hate this car. I want one bad.”
By the way that thing looks you should have no problem finding one. And I have a feeling the dealer would be happy to give it away.
Same thing everyone said about the Cayenne. Turned out a little differently.
All Clarkson reviews are like this: 20 paragraphs of something that seems irrevilant, which he then becomes a parallel to what he thinks about the car in the review, which is only about 2-3 paragraphs.
Why does Porsche think it has to force 911 styling cues on non-compatible vehicle types? The Cayenne suv, the Panamera sedan? I cannot wait to see the Porsche minivan.
Clarkson’s right.
There was one of those exhibition models parked in the mall courtyard yesterday between the chocolate shop and Brookstone.
The overwhelming impression, even in the flesh, is a Resounding W-T-F?
Probably not the ugliest car Ever, but for the common era, and from a high-end company, esp Porsche, it’s almost an Automotive Goatse.
A Panamera that has been seen, CANNOT BE UNSEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
GAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why does Porsche think it has to force 911 styling cues on non-compatible vehicle types? The Cayenne suv, the Panamera sedan? I cannot wait to see the Porsche minivan.
I think it makes the most sense to have one design theme per vehicle type. One design language for sports cars, one for sedans and another for SUV’s.
That being said I think the back of the Panamera is inspired, the front may need some work.
I’ve been a fan of Jeremy Clarkson for years – not just for his writing but with Top Gear (of course) documentaries, interviews etc – and will defend him to anyone.
But even I would admit his use of British vernacular sometimes leaves me scratching my head and cross referencing them on Wikipedia, but it’s all part of the experience.
His writing reminds me of certain rock critics who meander all over before actually saying what they think, even if it’s sometimes hard to tell if they thought the album was good or bad.
Besides once you get a handle on his prose you realise he is a great writer with a wicked sense of the absurd and best of all does not take himself too seriously.
Oh yeah and his opinion on the Panamera is spot on.
Bashing Clarkson for being irrelevant is to miss the point. The fact that those who contribute articles to this site don’t get the joke obviously doesn’t matter in the slightest, and in fact makes it even better.
Of course you could write to Mr Clarkson and insist that in future he only use American pop culture references. Please do publish the reply.
basho wrote:
… doesn’t matter to me how many people hate this car. I want one bad.
I don’t want one bad … for starters I’ve no use for a car of this size. But the more the haters pile on, the more this car’s looks grow on me. Maybe it really will flop and we’ll be able to pick up low-mile, 2-year old specimens for $50k. But I doubt it.
And, the Cayman STILL doesn’t have a turbo!
If I was a Cayman, I’d one pissed off red-headed-step-child at this point. Cayman needs to murder the Cayenne and Panamerica and steal their turbos.
Clarkson once said that the Cayenne looks like a 911 backing into a shed. So the Panamera, logically, is the same 911 and shed, only crushed by a monster truck.
The Cayenne’s success was a result of the SUV craze coinciding with a lot of unbearably pretentious and tasteless people having money to burn. I doubt there’s going to be a subsequent market trend for 100K+ mutant hatchbacks, and then there’s that whole recession thing. Panamera will flop miserably, making it a car to seek out in a few years as a performance bargain. If you can get past the looks, of course.
Via Nocturna
Used bargain? I think not. The upkeep on the Panamera is going to be hideously expensive. As with many limited edition vehicles, the purchase price will only be the price of admission.
A big Mercedes—say a CL500 with a couple of blowers and some summer rubber, or a CL600, or an S55 AMG—would offer most of the fun for a fraction of the price.
My perspective:
Yeah, it’s FUGLY. It’s very awkward. The very nature of the vehicle and the just ABSURD levels of luxury make it that way. Then Porsche took all this absurd, bulky luxury and tried to make it look like a 911. Lol… of course. Trying to appease the purists or whatever … look it’s ALMOST LIKE A 911!!
However… like quite a few others… if it’s fugly and has awesome performance… it might grow on you. The Cayenne (which is brutally UGLY) was a sales success of incredible magnitude. So if you make something hideously ugly and make it really powerful… there is certainly (for better or for worse) a huge swath of the population that will absolutely head over heels adore it. The Cayenne is proof of that.
The TT and Panamera reviews are back-to-back disappointments. He could have at least commented on the car’s dynamics, compared its handling with that of Keira Knightley.
You can get a Cayman turbo – a well-done low pressure after market kit, but then you need GT3 control arms, coil-overs, large capacity vapor oil separator, etc, etc, etc. Once you start, you won’t stop. And the Gen 1 cars will still have potential lubrication/IMS/RMS problems. OTOH, it is 480 hp and the car still weighs less than 3100lbs… that could be fun. With those kind of numbers, Porsche probably hopes you won’t try this in the Gen 2 cars – new engine design and no IMS.
Yeah, she’s ugly…no doubt about that. Clarkson’s spot on with his analysis.
What this illustrates is the problem with trying to incorporate 40-year-old styling cues into a 21st century car. Jaguar did that for years, and it got them nowhere. But the new XF manages to be beautiful and convey a Jaguar feel without trotting out every old XKE and XJ styling cue they could find. Maserati also managed to incorporate a strong brand feel into the Quattroporte without referencing their glory-days ’70s designs.
But Porsche trying to morph 911 styling onto SUVs and sedans simply ain’t gonna work. If they want to start building sedans, they’re going to have to given them unique designs.
That is one awkward rear
Jeremy Clarkson is more of an entertainer than a journalist.
yomama has an ugly son and yes yes you the one,
YOU UGLY
U-G-L-Y
you ain’t got no alibi
YOU UGLY
Wow. Jacksonbart nails it — awkward.
Almost reminds of a late 90’s/early 00’s Hyundai 4 door hatchback……
I think it’s really cool looking, actually. It’s a breath of fresh air in a lookalike world. If Porsche is going to make a 4-door sedan (and whether they should is a different debate) then I think this is exactly what it should look like. It’s certainly the sportiest looking sedan I’ve seen in a long time.
I love Clarkson…
But he’s an entertainer as much as anything else. Rush Limbaugh with opinions that I agree with (some of the time at least).
But I don’t get the complaint here. De gustibus non est disputandum and all that, but this thing is hideous.
*disclaimer, haven’t seen one in person yet*
I’d definitely take the monkey inside out and backwards, lookswise. And , by the way, I think the 928 is Porsche’s styling high water mark.
Having said all that, if it fit the budget and the need (which it doesn’t in either case), I’d take one of these in a heartbeat. And the interior, as others have said, looks extraordinary. And that’s where I’d want to be…
I stopped considering Clarkson as automotive journalist a long time ago. He’s still funny, but that is it.
I’ve driven the new Panamera S for few days. In real life the car has presence. It is big and wide, and has that special Porsche feel. It is not ugly by any means, its different, but different in a good Porsche way. And I am not a Porsche fan, not even little bit.
But real virtues of this car become apparent when You sit in the car and drive it. I have driven lot of different new expensive cars, but Panamera has the best interior I have seen in past few years. All the materials and buttons are extra high quality, all the switches click with percision, the disain of the interior is very driver orientated (dials, screens etc), the seats look and feel very cool and Porsche like – they are more sportscar 911-type seats, than large sedan seats. When you sit in this car, you feel really special. I even don’t remember when was the last time I’ve felt that way in a new car. And it drives like a Porsche. Good roadfeel from the steering (although the steering feels a bit lighter than I expected), very good percise suspension – this car really communicates with the driver (very suprising for such a heavy sedan), nice suspension settings which really make the difference how you feel the car (from comfort to sport plus). Joy to drive. And when you drive it you can feel how well the car is put together, it feels really tight – a sensation you rarely get from new cars in past few years.
Only complaint is the gearbox. 7-speed PDK is very economical on highways (100kmh cruise control on – 31mpg, not bad for a 4.8L V8 with 400hp in a heavy sedan), but on slow city speeds and stoplight starts it feels bit jerky and when you make a full throttle start from the stoplight then it becomes even more confused and jerkier and even creates little bit of wheelhop – the rear starts bouncing and vibrating (for those who like to make quick starts from the standstill I would recommend to opt for the awd 4S model, or Turbo :)).With speeds higher than 30+kmh the gearbox is perfect. The NA V8 is adequate for such heavy car, but it doesn’t feel very powerful. Then again that’s why Porsche also makes the Turbo model :)
“This isn’t an issue of Britishness… read the review. Clarkson doesn’t say a damn thing about the car beyond the quote above. If he’s going to be a columnist, that’s one thing. This is supposed to be a car review.”
Have you read a lot of Clarkson reviews in the Times? Typically he spends the first page talking about his day, and the car doesn’t get even a mention until the end. That’s just how he writes.
In his review of the Lexus GS awhile back, he spent most of it talking about their Japanese exchange student that vomited after trying to eat a plate of mashed potatoes, and wondering, in a vaguely racist way, how it is that the Japanese even understand how to make a “European style car” such as the GS because they don’t have autobahns in Japan.
@Greg Locock – I, too, would second a letter from Ed regarding Clarkson’s profligate use of British-isms, if only to see his reply. :-)
And to continue beating the dead horse, I think if you asked ole’ JC if he considered himself a auto journalist first, he would respond no. He is an entertainer who talks about cars. It’s like criticizing Lewis Black, because he doesn’t present all the nuances of the latest bonehead move from Congress.
It is often the indirect blow that inflicts the most injury. I love British authors, but you do need to read them a bit differently than you would an American on virtually any subject. For one thing, they usually illustrate, then explicate. That is, they tell a story or describe something, often seemingly unrelated, with a heavy dose of irony and absurdity. Then they make the leap to their real point. It is only at that point that you see how their story made their case, and even then you may have to make the connection yourself. Read C.S. Lewis (non-fiction) or G.K. Chesterton. Winston Churchill often got strait to the point, but he was the exception, not the rule.
Clarkson, isn’t he the guy who panned Insight? I remember he received a lot of props for it from the usual commentariat. And look at that, Insight’s sales weren’t all that great. Perhaps it’s just his mode of operation: trolling in traditional media.
Clarkson is an enterntainer i hear some poepl say… well he is, but his view on cars is backed up by experience, and in the end he has his own strong opinion that he likes to speak about without actually caring what anyone feels.
i like that…actually Clarky even puts words in my mouth when he describes cars, because in those cases I’m lost for words. and i was still looking for a way to describe the Panamera and i found it, inside out monkey… but most of the time i don’t agree with his taste…
but in any case, in person the Panamera looks much better just because of it’s sheer width. The interior is very inviting to say the least. i haven’t driven it yet, but will soon, and i have no doubt that it’s a mighty machine. BUT, i have a few quips….
and on another note, Clarckson used to call the Cayman the Coxter, which made perfect sense…
Well…..I LIKE it. And that’s what matters.
I agree with Clarkson that the Panamera is awkward. I drove one recently, however, and was very impressed with the driving experience and particularly with the quality of the interior. The nav system in particular resists the German urge to make something complicated even more so. A large car which holds four people in comfort is a nearly impossible packaging job, even if Mercedes and VW have done well with their similar four-door coupe designs.
As for me, I’ve sufficiently compromised with a 3-series which will hold four adults for short periods and remains small enough to be maneuverable and reasonably spritely in day-to-day driving. It is not a Cayman, and is further compromised by the bangle set-back of BMW “design”, but was good enough that I put down my cash to drive one.
I suspect that there is a market for those who want a four-seat non-truck mate to their 911, Boxster or Cayman, so the Panamera should fill this small niche. And if Porsche can make money on it in small enough batches, god love ’em for offering an alternative to the dreadful S-class and boring 7-series. Personally, if I wanted a car in this segment, I’d buy the LS460, which has no sporting pretensions whatsoever and can be had for 2/3 of the price. I don’t need a car nearly the size of a Lincoln Town Car which pretends it’s a sports sedan…
I really like Clarksons reviews, pretty worthless as a car review but a very entertaining read most of the time and occasionally they make me laugh. So judging them as somewhat car related columns instead of reviews i think they are great.
I like it, but that’s the third martini talking, come to think of it, Hillary is kinda hot.
BD
I agree that Clarkson is an entertainer. I read the Times article and I enjoyed the wacky humour (though I’d prefer no involvement of alcohol). I’ve seen a fairly large number of Top Gear shows – again, their wacky humour is great. I actually like the looks of this car. It’s also quite different, unique. I also agree that when a company starts trying to please everyone (such as Porsche with SUVs and sedans), it may betray its purpose and alienate its fans. Is this car practical? Absolutely not. From a common-sense perspective its existence is nuts. That also goes for many other vehicles from other manufacturers. In a way the owners of Panamera will broadcast to the world they have more money than intelligence.