"Saracen" (manualdoucheelitist)
10/01/2015 at 17:54 • Filed to: None
3
18|
"Saracen" (manualdoucheelitist)
10/01/2015 at 17:54 • Filed to: None | 3
| 18 |
Ford Explorer Sport or....stripped out Porsche Macan S?
!!! UNKNOWN CONTENT TYPE !!!
Edit: I can’t believe you can spec an Explorer for that much.
TractorPillow
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 17:58 |
|
Macan S. Not even a question about it.
sm70- why not Duesenberg?
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 17:59 |
|
Unless I actually need a practical family hauler above all else, the Porsche. I’ve been in a Macan S (granted, the single most fully loaded Macan S in the country) and it was fantastic.
dogisbadob
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:00 |
|
Damn, 53k for an Explorer?
My citroen won't start
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:00 |
|
100% Macan.
|
Saracen
> sm70- why not Duesenberg?
10/01/2015 at 18:04 |
|
Yep, I have too and I think it’s the best value in the Porsche lineup. Fantastic car.
|
Saracen
> dogisbadob
10/01/2015 at 18:04 |
|
Isn’t it crazy?
Textured Soy Protein
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:07 |
|
The Explorer is so much bigger of a vehicle than the Macan. To me a more interesting question is the Edge Sport with the 2.7 EcoBoost that puts out 315 hp, and likely is just an ECU tune away from plenty more power. $42k fully loaded.
Future next gen S2000 owner
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:13 |
|
The want it strong with the Macan. Need to convince my wife it should be her next car.
|
Saracen
> Textured Soy Protein
10/01/2015 at 18:13 |
|
I’m just using this more to illustrate how ludicrously expensive the Explorer is now.
I don’t bring up tuning, because the Macan can be tuned as well. It’s a moot point, really.
|
Textured Soy Protein
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:29 |
|
I get ya, I guess I’m not so surprised with the fully-optioned prices of “mainstream” cars. I mean, inflation had to happen at some point.
My dad bought a fully-loaded 1990 Acura Legend in February 1990. The sticker price on it, at the time, was $33k. In 2015 dollars, that’s $60k. But at the time, the Legend was an “entry luxury” car. He replaced that Legend in May 1996 with a Mercedes E420, which with some options was $52k. 2015 dollars = $79k.
So yeah, $53k is a lot of money, but in the scheme of car prices over time, not really out of line. New cars ain’t cheap.
duurtlang
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:31 |
|
Macan. Not a single doubt. Having said that, I’d rather not spend $53k on either.
|
Saracen
> Textured Soy Protein
10/01/2015 at 18:47 |
|
Yeah, I understand that. But a 1996 Ford Explorer Sport 4WD started at $23k, which is $35k in 2015. The 2015 sport starts at $44k.
As the explorer grows in size it has moved upmarket to make room for the other SUV’s and crossovers like the Edge and Escape.
|
Saracen
> duurtlang
10/01/2015 at 18:47 |
|
You’re right.
$53k for a Macan S means you don’t get much equipment. I’d probably spend closer to $60k on it.
|
Textured Soy Protein
> Saracen
10/01/2015 at 18:52 |
|
That’s true, and also the Sport trim has moved up within the Explorer range. It used to be the base 3-door model, now it’s the 2nd fanciest trim.
|
Saracen
> Textured Soy Protein
10/01/2015 at 19:02 |
|
Yeah, the type of stuff you get in a sport package wasn’t considered high end. When I bought my A4, it had black out window trim and roof rails, etc. But now, you have to pay $1000 for the titanium package if you want to get rid of all the polished shiny bits.
boxrocket
> Saracen
10/02/2015 at 00:00 |
|
A maxed-out Transit LWB tall-roof with pretty much all the fixin’s is $55K, IIRC. If the goal is hauling people and stuff....
|
Saracen
> boxrocket
10/02/2015 at 11:45 |
|
Completely the opposite point. I’m comparing two sporty small-ish SUV’s..
|
boxrocket
> Saracen
10/02/2015 at 20:43 |
|
Explorer is in a class larger than the Macan, but I get your point. I'll substitute the 2014 Range Rover Sport that CarMax has for $65k instead.