1976 Porsche 914 Base Coupe 2-door 2.0l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hamann Porsche Macan S Diesel promises more performance, questionable looks

Ignore the Gulf Oil livery for a minute (we know, it's hard). What we have under the blue-and-orange paint scheme is a diesel-powered Porsche Macan S, which is fascinating enough in and of itself. But this particular example has been upgraded by the folks at Hamann, for that added bit of oomph. Power output from the 3.0-liter V6 diesel is up from 258 horsepower to 300 hp. We buy diesels for torque, though, so it's the 494 pound-feet, up from 427 lb-ft, that really gets us excited about this modded Porsche. Taken together, the Hamann Macan S Diesel can hit 60 miles per hour in a decidedly un-diesel-like 5.7 seconds, down from 6.1 seconds. German tuners like Hamann are not known for their subtlety, of course, so beyond the power ugprades, the company has made its own aesthetic tweaks. The new body kit is, um, aggressive? Okay, it's really not very nice to look at. The Macan is a handsome vehicle on its own, but Hamann's efforts haven't done it any favors. It's extremely busy, particularly around the front and rear ends, where the tuning company's efforts seem focused. We're guessing some attention has been paid to the cabin, although it's impossible to tell on the Geneva show car, which has had all of its windows heavily tinted. Here's hoping any changes to Macan's cleanly styled cabin are kept to a minimum. Take a look at our full crop of live photos of the modded Macan, direct from the floors of the Geneva Motor Show. High-performance power, long-distance comfort, extravagance: the benchmark figures of the formidable Porsche Macan S Diesel are impressive. For all fans of the dynamic vehicle Hamann's tuning experts now sets the bar even higher. As is generally known, the model's name "Macan" was derived from the Indonesian word for tiger – and exactly this tiger Hamann frees from the ties of a series actor. The face of the Macan, which Hamann presents in the S Diesel version in Geneva, has self-confident traits. The tiger seems ready to jump – an effect achieved by the low line of the front apron and the lowering of the car. Hamann's aerodynamics attachment emphasises the sharp "teeth" of the Macan Turbo's standard front and sets distinctive accents. The car refiner's interpretation of the Macan S Diesel appears well-toned and is coherently continued in powerfully shaped wing extensions making the predator's body grow by twelve centimetres in width.

Porsche 918 Spyder officially priced from $845K, Weissach package $84K more

Porsche has released official pricing for its entire lineup of 2013 models, which just happens to include the upcoming 918 Spyder hybrid supercar. The 795-horsepower advanced-technology-lab-on-wheels is now officially confirmed to have a starting price of $845,000 in the US, which is the exact amount we were told earlier when we had the opportunity to ride shotgun in some 918 Spyder pre-production test vehicles.
What we didn't know at the time was the cost of the Weissach trim package, which is a high-performance upgrade to the standard vehicle that includes the deletion of some interior amenities and addition of lighter-weight carbon fiber appointments, magnesium wheels, flame-resistant upholstery, racing belts and aerodynamic aids - it's meant for track-going folk who intend to use their 918 Spyders as God, country and manufacturer intended.
All told, the Weissach package should drop the 918 Spyder's curb weight by some 80 pounds, while also lightening your wallet of an additional $84,000 - the car's MSRP with the Weissach package is $929,000. These prices don't, however, include destination charges, which, for something like the very limited edition 918 Spyder (only 918 will be made), could very well cost considerably more than your average Porsche.

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.