2019 Porsche Cayenne Expert Reviews, Specs And Photos
Porsche has unveiled the new generation of Cayenne as a 2019 model ahead of the 2017 International Motor Show Germany in Frankfurt. This is the third generation of the five-seat SUV, and the big updates this time around are found in the powertrain and in-cabin technology. Porsche states that 鈥渢he new Cayenne retains a strong visual connection to its predecessors,鈥?a cagey way of saying 鈥渘ot much has changed鈥?when it comes to styling. The redesign tweaks the look of the previous Cayenne slightly; there are larger lower air intakes up front, but the biggest changes are to the lighting elements both front and rear, which heavily feature LEDs. Wheel sizes range from 19 to 21 inches. The Cayenne sees big changes on the inside, however, adopting the same multimedia system with a 12.3-inch touchscreen display found in the new Panamera. Cargo room behind the second row has increased nearly 15 percent to 27.2 cubic feet. Furthering the Cayenne performance credentials are weight savings.
There is extensive use of aluminum in the body work and chassis components, helping the new model shed up to 143 pounds. The only transmission option is an eight-speed Tiptronic S automatic and all-wheel drive with four off-road settings (Mud, Gravel, Sand or Rocks). Rear-wheel steering is now available and, for those who want the most dynamically capable Cayenne, an air suspension and Porsche Dynamic Chassis Control that adds stabilizer bars are also optional. Porsche is also introducing a new braking system with the Cayenne, called Porsche Surface Coated Brake. It covers the cast-iron discs with a tungsten-carbide coating that adds friction, which increases stopping power while reducing wear and brake dust. This system is only available for Cayennes equipped with 20- or 21-inch wheels. Fuel-economy ratings have not yet been released. The 2019 Cayenne will make its way to dealerships in mid-2018. Editor鈥檚 note: This story was updated June 7, 2019, with updated horsepower figures for the base models. Cars.com鈥檚 Editorial department is your source for automotive news and reviews. In line with Cars.com鈥檚 long-standing ethics policy, editors and reviewers don鈥檛 accept gifts or free trips from automakers. The Editorial department is independent of Cars.com鈥檚 advertising, sales and sponsored content departments.
Finally, let's keep things in perspective. Any Boxster is an amazing backroads carver in ANY iteration and ANY suspension setting including standard vs. We're splitting hairs here. 1 Really true and easy to lose sight of with all the navel gazing and "how-many-angels-can-dance-on-the-head-of-a pin" type analysis we all sometimes engage in here. 鈥檚 EXACTLY what Porsche Motorsports told their factory drivers after changing the RSR to a mid engine platform a couple years ago. This whole thread cracks me up, but this one item in particular was a bit of a head scratcher for me. I ended up doing some quick research, and it seems like the issue at hand was actually aerodynamics, rather than weight distribution. 5% change in any single attribute on a car. Ok so just put down a deposit on a 2017 718 Boxtster S Miami Blue Cpo 5k miles on it. 67k. Now hopefully I will like the color, little nervous about it. No worries. Opinions differ.
PASM OFF though I neither find PASM ON to be crashy nor do I find PASM worthless. Far from it, I enjoy driving both with PASM on and off (split almost 50/50%) depending on the roads, my mood, or the company. I also like and use the fact that sport on/off can be chosen separately from pasm on/off. I've driven a 987 Spyder and a 981 with x73 on my backroads. There are (rough) sections for which x73 is just too stiff -- just like with my GT3. The PASM Boxster "solves" them with a push of a button. Finally, let's keep things in perspective. Any Boxster is an amazing backroads carver in ANY iteration and ANY suspension setting including standard vs. We're splitting hairs here. I've had PASM for over six years, and my experiences with it are similar to yours. In my case I'd estimate that my on and off split is closer to 60/40. My experience with X73 was a test drive with a 987 Spyder.
I was initially impressed with the drive, until it occurred to me that I was driving on very smooth highways. So I decided to seek out a poorly paved back road, and I quickly determined that it was too stiff and my back told me so as I exited the car. Never had that experience in six yeas with PASM. OTOH if my car were going to get a lot of track time, there's no doubt that I would opt for the X73 suspension. I've had PASM for over six years, and my experiences with it are similar to yours. In my case I'd estimate that my on and off split is closer to 60/40. My experience with X73 was a test drive with a 987 Spyder. I was initially impressed with the drive, until it occurred to me that I was driving on very smooth highways. So I decided to seek out a poorly paved back road, and I quickly determined that it was too stiff and my back told me so as I exited the car. Never had that experience in six yeas with PASM.