Aston Martin Rapide vs Porsche Panamera vs Mercedes-AMG GT63: which one is the best value for money?
In many ways, the Aston Martin Rapide was the first car of its kind in the modern era: a super-luxurious (and very expensive) 5-door fastback with all the styling flair and dynamic excellence of its supercar siblings. But it’s getting on in years now, and it’s not alone in the marketplace anymore, either. Even though value for money likely doesn't feature on these cars' buyer's radar, we decided that it might be fun to see how the Rapide stacks up against its newer opponents anyway.
Flying fastbacks
At the time of its launch back in 2010, the Aston Martin Rapide represented a major step-change for this exclusive sports car manufacturer. Named after a 1960s-vintage “GT saloon car”, the re-imagined Rapide used the same platform and oily bits as its DB9-based siblings, but stretched the formula to incorporate two extra doors and a modicum more rear-seat space.
Pretty soon, other luxury-car makers began developing their own interpretations of this formula, eventually leading to the two opponents we’ve chosen for this comparison. The Porsche Panamera was first out of the blocks, with its first generation also appearing in 2010. Few people saw it as a serious competitor to the sleek Aston Martin, though, because it was… well… aesthetically challenging, to put it mildly. It might have been conceived around the same premise (a supercar for someone who needs more doors), but somewhere along the line, Porsche forgot that bit about making it beautiful as well as fast.
All that changed with the Panamera’s 2017 redesign, however. From a weird-looking blob with vaguely 911-ish styling themes, the second-generation Panamera is a very handsome car indeed. It can even be had with a stunning “shooting brake” body style, but even in the normal sedan format, it’s a real head turner. The Rapide might still be better-looking, but at least the Porsche alternative isn’t a poke in the eye with a broomstick anymore.
Mercedes-Benz has tested the waters as well with their CLS range, the first of which débuted in 2004. This was one of the first modern cars to be officially labelled a “4-door coupé”, but many buyers found its sloping rear end and generally blobby styling to be off-putting. The second generation CLS-Class appeared around the same time as the first Panamera, and looked slightly better, but it still couldn’t really compete in the “practical supercar” arena.
So, for their third try, Mercedes-Benz took a different course: instead of just sticking with the CLS recipe, they threw an extra hat in the ring. Like its predecessors (and the third-generation CLS-Class), the Mercedes-AMG GT 4-door is derived from the latest E-Class, but it’s styled to complement the Mercedes-AMG GT series of sports cars. This approach allows for the line-up to move further upmarket, and gave Mercedes a suitably-named 5-door halo model. It obviously helps that the 4-door AMG GT is a real looker as well, finally banishing the CLS’s banana shape for a much more fetching proper fastback profile.
Related: We reviewed a few 2-door Mercedes-AMG GTs - read more about the 2-door model here.
These are the opponents facing the latest Aston Martin Rapide S today, and they each make a compelling case for themselves. Given these formidable, younger opponents, how well does the ageing Rapide compare on appeal and value for money? We’re going to learn some news about each of these dream machines along the way – but first, some facts and figures.
Facts and figures:
|
Aston Martin Rapide S |
Porsche Panamera Turbo S e-hybrid Executive |
Mercedes-AMG GT63 S 4Matic Plus 4-door |
|
|
Engine size (cyl/size) |
5.9-litre, petrol V12 |
4.0-litre, twin-turbo V8 hybrid |
4.0-litre, twin-turbo V8 |
|
Power/Torque |
412 kW/630 Nm |
500 kW/850 Nm |
470 kW/900 Nm |
|
Kerb Weight |
1 990 kg |
2 410 kg |
2 120 kg |
|
Length (mm) |
5 019 |
5 199 |
5 054 |
|
Airbag count |
6 |
7 |
10 |
|
Load Volume * |
317 litres |
405 litres |
456 litres |
|
Top Speed (km/h) ** |
327 |
310 |
315 |
|
Ave Consumption ** |
12.0 ℓ/100 km |
2.9 ℓ/100 km |
11.3 ℓ/100 km |
|
Warranty |
3 yr/Unlimited km |
2 yr/Unlimited km (vehicle); 6 yr/120 000 battery |
2 yr/Unlimited km |
|
Price |
R 3 499 000 |
R 3 478 000 |
R 2 922 531 |
*With all seats in use
**Manufacturer's official claimed figures.
Analysis
Power, performance, and drivetrains
When the least powerful car in a comparison has 412 kW and 630 Nm, we’re not talking about big power figures: we’re talking about BIG power figures. It’s just a pity that those figures emanate from the largest-displacement engine in this group, and are attached to the most-expensive car here. That would be the Aston Martin, then – as one of the last remaining derivatives of its platform, the Rapide S still uses the previous-generation V12 engine.
Introduced as part of the Rapide’s last update (in 2015), a ZF 8-speed automatic sends power to the rear wheels, and helps to keep that high-revving 5.9-litre V12 in the fullest parts of its power band – right at the top of the rev range, because peak torque only arrives at 5 500 r/min, and peak power at 6 750 r/min. It’s a screamer, this one, and a much-appreciated relic from an earlier era. Enthusiastic stabs at the throttle see the rev counter soaring, accompanied by an authentic soundtrack that makes your hair stand on end. The Rapide runs the benchmark 0 – 100 km/h sprint in 4.4 seconds, and has the highest top speed here: 327 km/h of shrieking, screaming V12 power.
But its opponents have even more impressive performance figures, in spite of losing several litres of displacement and “downgrading” to V8 power. Take the second-most powerful contender as an example: the AMG GT63 S is hustled along by a highly-tuned version of the 4.0-litre twin-turbo engine which powers other Mercedes-AMG models to great effect. In this application, it produces an eye-watering 470 kW and 900 Nm, sent to all four wheels through a 9-speed automatic transmission.
Predictably, it’s hellaciously quick: 100 km/h is reached in only 3.2 seconds, and it runs on to a governed top speed of 315 km/h. With performance figures in this realm, a 1.2-second difference in a car’s 0 – 100 km/h sprint time might as well be a week, which means that the GT 63S will disappear into the distance while the Rapide howls in dismay, far behind…
The AMG won’t have it all its own way, mind you, as the Porsche Panamera has a few tricks of its own to show off. Like the GT 63S, the Panamera Turbo S features a 4.0-litre, twin-turbo V8 under the bonnet, but with electric augmentation for an even greater kick into its 8-speed automatic gearbox and AWD system.
Total system outputs are a round 500 kW and a handy 850 Nm, the latter of which is available all the way from 1 400 r/min to 5 500 r/min. The only reason why this mountain of torque can’t hurl the hybrid Panamera to 100 km/h quicker than its claimed figure, is because of its rather portly kerb weight: 2 410 kg makes it by far the heaviest car here (420 kg more than the Rapide and 290 kg more than the AMG). All that battery power comes with a weight penalty, see…
With all these factors considered, the Mercedes-AMG GT 63 S grabs the performance crown in spite of it lacking electric help. It’s only 130 kg heavier than the Aston Martin in spite of its AWD system’s not-inconsiderable weight, but it benefits greatly from its massive torque output and the ability to channel all of its ponies to the tarmac. The Porsche Panamera Turbo S isn’t very far behind, though, and they’re both streets ahead of the Aston Martin. All the better to enjoy that glorious V12 noise without interference from those pesky V8s, then?
Economy
We doubt that anyone who can afford a car in this price class even considers fuel efficiency in their purchasing decisions, but let’s talk about a specific figure anyway. Sharp-eyed readers would have noticed a figure of 2.9 ℓ/100 km listed as the Porsche’s official average consumption claim. Could this be possible in a car as massive as this, and with this much speed on tap?
Not really. That figure can probably be attained over short distances, such as a 20-something km commute at speeds of 120 km/h or less, but over longer distances, the Panamera Turbo S hybrid will likely use as much fuel as a normal car – especially when driven with the verve encouraged by its staunch outputs.
The normal car to which we refer above might as well be the Mercedes-AMG GT 63 S, really. AMG quotes an average consumption of 11.3 ℓ/100 km, but this will likely be impossible to achieve in the real world. Expect average figures closer to the 15 ℓ/100 km mark in normal driving, and a whole lot higher if the driver frequently flattens the accelerator pedal against the carpet.
But, thirsty as the GT 63S is, the Rapide is likely to drink even more. Its officially claimed consumption of 14.3 ℓ/100 km is bound to be just as impossible to achieve, because it has to be driven hard to deliver its best work. Expect closer to 18 ℓ/100 km in normal driving, and even greater thirst when the driver winds that lovely V12 through its rev range.
But let’s not get mired in details: of these three, the Porsche will likely cost the least to fuel, especially if charged overnight. This makes it our economy champ, with the AMG’s downsized V8 and lighter weight helping it to a strong second place. Aston Martin buyers probably won’t care about their favourite’s third-place showing in this department – fuel price issues seldom concern the super-rich, after all.
Practicality
It’s important to remember that, unlike the other two, the Aston Martin Rapide is derived from an actual sports car platform (albeit an older one), and not a volume-market component set. Packaging efficiency was never a consideration for Aston Martin in this era, but, in the context of sports cars, this detail never really mattered all that much.
The Rapide’s problem arises when that platform is stretched into a 4-door format, because it leads to compromised luggage capacity and rear passenger room. It’s just like a real luxury car in the rear pews, with lovely leather trim and individual bucket seats, but built to 3/4-scale. This makes it really cramped in the back, with both leg- and headroom at a premium. Load-carrying capacity is also marginal (considering its overall size) at 317 litres, but, like the other two cars here, the rear seats can be folded down to increase cargo space. These compromises land the Aston in third position among this trio.
Next up is the Panamera Turbo S. Its cargo bay isn’t exactly huge, either, but that could probably be explained by the presence of an AWD system and battery packs, all of which needs to take up some of the available space. Its luggage compartment measures in a 405 litres, which is better than that of the Rapide, but still not really terrific for a car of this size. The Porsche does have fairly generous rear-seat room, however, with decent legroom, and head room which isn’t too badly compromised by that tapering roofline. These attributes puts it in second position here. Need more space? Look at a Panamera Sport Turismo!
But it’s the Mercedes-AMG GT 63 S that really scores a knockout punch here. Thanks to its E-Class underpinnings, there’s a lot of space to go around. Rear-seat room isn’t massive, but there’s still enough space to slot a quartet of full-sized humans inside the cabin. Its trump card lies in the luggage area, however, which boasts a comparatively generous 456 litres underneath its fastback profile. On balance, the GT 63S strikes the best compromise between load-carrying versatility and passenger comfort, which makes it our winner.
Equipment and safety
These are all top-level cars, so it follows that all of them will have generous standard equipment lists. However, there’s a clear distinction between the oldest (Rapide) and newer (Porsche and AMG) cars, because the younger models also have more-modern features.
In reality, the Aston Martin’s cabin is a lovely place to spend time, but its in-car technology is showing its age. As an example, while navigation is standard, it works through a dated-looking interface, instead of the touchscreen infotainment systems you’ll find in the others. Things like adaptive cruise control, blind spot monitoring and lane-keeping assistance are also conspicuous by their absence, even from the option sheet (where these features reside on the other cars). This relatively sparse spec sheet nets the Rapide a third place in the equipment category.
It’s much harder to differentiate between the standard features of the other two. However, the Porsche has just that little bit extra on board to try and justify its price premium, such as keyless entry and a rear-screen roller blind, which is enough to get the Panamera a category win and push the GT 63S into second place.
No NCAP crash test data is available for any of these cars, but their basic safety credentials are all quite solid. Stability control and ABS are obviously all present, as are at least 6 airbags (7 in the Panamera and 8 in the GT 63S). The AMG and Porsche also have adaptive LED headlights, while the Rapide has to make do with Xenon lights. However, the Panamera Turbo S is the only one to offer standard ISOFIX child seat anchors, which is enough to elevate it above the second-placed Mercedes-AMG GT 63 S for a first-place safety finish. The old-stager Aston Martin has to settle for third place again.
Verdict
The main take-away here is that none of these cars really offer exceptional value for money. We can’t even call any of them a bargain for the performance and equipment on offer – at this price level, it’s more about prestige and exclusivity than it is about bland numbers and loaded spec sheets.
With that said, the Aston Martin is the most difficult car here for which a case could be made: it’s clearly the oldest design (albeit still a gorgeous one), the slowest and thirstiest, the least practical, and with the fewest safety add-ons. This is a purely emotional buy, and we suspect that it will find buyers based on three factors: its drop-dead beautiful styling, that amazing V12 soundtrack, and the exclusivity of the Aston Martin badge. And that’s perfectly OK, really – it’s great to know that its owners will choose real character and great looks over clinically effective performance, and are willing to pay for those attributes. Is it good value for money? Not at all… but that doesn’t really matter in this realm.
The Porsche Panamera Turbo S e-Hybrid Executive is the next one to fall. It’s an incredibly high-tech machine, and it applies tomorrow’s technology today to make the most of everything it has, and in so doing goes a long way towards making a rational case for itself. But there’s no denying that its sheer weight robs it of some performance and ultimate agility, so it cannot match the Rapide for sheer driving enjoyment. That full spec sheet and spacious cabin at least makes up for its few other downfalls.
This leaves the Mercedes-AMG GT 63 S as our value winner. It’s more than half-a-million Rand less expensive than either of the others, has the strongest performance and the best practicality of the bunch, and has fairly comprehensive safety- and convenience features thrown into the mix as well. In case any buyer in this category cares about such mundane things, it strikes the best balance between ability, agility, speed, and features. It’s also still exclusive enough to justify itself as an emotional purchase as well – and in this market realm, that alone makes it a value proposition.
* Pricing was accurate at the time of writing, but may change without prior notice.
Recommended next:
Just ignore the value aspect, and find your new or used Aston Martin Rapide in our listing pages.