2013 Porsche Cayenne Turbo Msrp $123,990 1-owner Trade Save $25,000 Off New One! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Malaise Era All-Stars

A few weeks ago, we bid a fond happy 40th anniversary to the automotive dark ages of 1973-84 that have come to be known as "The Malaise Era" - the performance ice-age when 160 horsepower was a lot and a 0-60 time of under 10 seconds was remarkable. Like music in the 1980s, everything in automobiledom didn't suck, however. There were a few bright spots. Here are five of our favorites:
1976-79 Porsche 930, aka 911 Turbo Carrera (above)
Photo Credit: Dorotheum

Porsche Classic launching branded motor oil for air-cooled boxer engines

It's hard not to love the look of a classic Porsche. Whether it's the upside-down bathtub styling of the 356 or the gradual evolution of the 911, there is a little beauty in all of them. However, the older they get, the more that needs repaired to keep them on the road. Porsche Classic is helping out, though, by introducing its own brand of motor oil for the demands of the company's vintage, air-cooled engines.
Developed at the Porsche Development Centre in Weissach, Germany, Porsche Classic Motoroil comes in two weights - 20W-50 for the 356, 914 and 911 models up to the 2.7-liter G-Model and 10W-60 for 3.0-liters-and-up engines through the 993-chassis 911. The company claims that the air-cooled engines have different heat demands than traditional, water-cooled units, and this oil is made to meet those requirements.
According to Porsche, modern, synthetic oils are sometimes too effective when it comes to old engines. They are fantastic at sopping up debris, but those deposits are often holding archaic seals together. Suddenly removing them can cause leaks. The new oil is specifically designed to work with the old-fashioned materials found in its classics. The company also knows that most owners aren't driving their vintage cars everyday. So this formulation is more alkaline that normal to neutralize acids that they build up and corrode components.

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.