2002 Porsche 911 Carrera Convertible 2-door 3.6l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche to introduce new Boxster Spyder, Macan GTS this year

Dig the new Porsche Cayman GT4 but really wish it came in open-top form? Love the Boxster GTS but wish it had more punch? Well we've got good news for you, friend, as that seems to be precisely what Porsche has in store. Among the new models the Volkswagen Group has lined up for this year will be a new Porsche Boxster Spyder. Although no details were announced along with the name, there are a few elements we can look forward to. The new Boxster Spyder is tipped to be essentially an open-top version of the Cayman GT4, but just how many of the latter's components will make the jump from coupe to convertible remain to be seen. The GT4 packs the 3.8-liter flat six from the 911 Carrera S with 385 horsepower, channeled to the rear wheels through an old-school six-speed manual transmission. It also has carbon-ceramic brakes, revised aero, and a stiffened suspension. The Spyder version of the previous Boxster arrived in 2009 with a modest 14-horsepower boost, a retuned suspension and a good 176 pounds trimmed off its curb weight thanks to the elimination of the motorized soft top, air-con and other components. That's not all Porsche has in store for 2015, though. The German automaker has also confirmed a Macan GTS is in the works that promises to explore the little crossover's performance potential. Projecting just what Porsche will do to Macan to give it the GTS treatment, though, is a little tricky. Sure, the German automaker already offers GTS of the rest of its lineup, but just where that model slots in to each line varies. On the Boxster and Cayman, it slots in between the S and GT4/Spyder. For the 911, it serves as a mid-point between the Carrera S and the GT3. And with the Panamera and Cayenne, the GTS bridges the gap between the S and Turbo models. Considering both the Macan S and Macan Turbo pack twin-turbo V6s, the Macan GTS could serve as a mid-point between the S and Turbo with around 350-360 hp, or (more likely) top the range with upwards of 420 hp. One way or another, though, we can expect upgrades to the suspension, brakes, rolling stock and trim to complete the package. Most of the rest of the announcements made in VW's annual report we either already knew about or are of little interest, but the document also confirms new Lamborghinis on the way, including two new versions of the Aventador (likely to be the new SV coupe we just saw and an SV roadster) and three more of the Huracan as well, including two Spyder versions of the latter.

Porsche 959 Prototype started it all

While Porsche was unveiling the new Nürburgring-dominating 918 Spyder downstairs in Hall 3 here at the Frankfurt Messe, there was another Porsche supercar quietly and discretely on display upstairs in the same hall. That, of course, was the 959. But not just any 959: this was the original Gruppe B prototype.
The 959 was first developed as a rally car in the early 80s to compete with the likes of the original Audi Sport Quattro S1, Ford RS200 and Lancia Delta S4. But Zuffenhausen soon saw its potential as a production road-going supercar, emerging as a technological marvel to challenge the decidedly linear approach of the Ferrari F40. It still stands as a groundbreaking supercar in its own right, but also lead to the first all-wheel-drive 911 Turbo and set the stage for the Carrera GT and aforementioned 918 Spyder that followed to cap the top of the evolving Porsche range.
This original Gruppe B prototype, which presaged the production 959, packed a 450-horsepower 2.8-liter twin-turbo flat-six into an even sleeker form than the final version that followed. We caught up with it on display as part of a display of 80s German classics, of which this 959 prototype immediately stood out as the pick of the proverbial litter. Check out the hotness in the high-resolution image gallery above.

What do J.D. Power's quality ratings really measure?

Check these recently released J.D. Power Initial Quality Study (IQS) results. Do they raise any questions in your mind? Premium sports-car maker Porsche sits in first place for the third straight year, so are Porsches really the best-built cars in the U.S. market? Korean brands Kia and Hyundai are second and fourth, so are Korean vehicles suddenly better than their US, European, and Japanese competitors? Are workaday Chevrolets (seventh place) better than premium Buicks (11th), and Buicks better than luxury Cadillacs (21st), even though all are assembled in General Motors plants with the same processes and many shared parts? Are Japanese Acuras (26th) worse than German Volkswagens (24th)? And is "quality" really what it used to be (and what most perceive it to be), a measure of build excellence? Or has it evolved into much more a measure of likeability and ease of use? To properly analyze these widely watched results, we must first understand what IQS actually studies, and what the numerical scores really mean. First, as its name indicates, it's all about "initial" quality, measured by problems reported by new-vehicle owners in their first 90 days of ownership. If something breaks or falls off four months in, it doesn't count here. Second, the scores are problems per 100 vehicles, or PP100. So Power's 2015 IQS industry average of 112 PP100 translates to just 1.12 reported problems per vehicle. Third, no attempt is made to differentiate BIG problems from minor ones. Thus a transmission or engine failure counts the same as a squeaky glove box door, tricky phone pairing, inconsistent voice recognition, or anything else that annoys the owner. Traditionally, a high-quality vehicle is one that is well-bolted together. It doesn't leak, squeak, rattle, shed parts, show gaps between panels, or break down and leave you stranded. By this standard, there are very few poor-quality new vehicles in today's U.S. market. But what "quality" should not mean, is subjective likeability: ease of operation of the radio, climate controls, or seat adjusters, phone pairing, music downloading, sizes of touch pads on an infotainment screen, quickness of system response, or accuracy of voice-recognition. These are ergonomic "human factors" issues, not "quality" problems. Yet these kinds of pleasability issues are now dominating today's JDP "quality" ratings.