2012 Audi Q5 2.0t Quattro Premium Plus on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ram and Alfa Romeo top J.D. Power study of best automaker websites

Imagining a new car can be terrific fun, especially if the new car is an Alfa Romeo. So say the fantasy engineers at the J.D. Power agency, who’ve found that Alfa and Ram, sister brands under the Stellantis umbrella, offer potential buyers the most attractive consumer websites, which are often their first viable encounter with those vehicles. Power found that those marques lead the mass market and premium categories in its twice annual Manufacturer Website Evaluation Study. In the premium segment, Alfa Romeo led with 755 points, up six points over BMW, 10 points ahead of Infiniti, 14 points past of Jaguar, and 18 points up on Porsche. By contrast, Volvo and Audi trail the pack with 689 points, and are behind Genesis (699 points), Tesla (720), and Cadillac (721), all of which perform worse than the premium segment average of 724 points. The summerÂ’s study showed that in the mass market segment, Ram leads with an impressive 735 points, which puts it six points ahead of GMC, seven points atop its stablemate Jeep, eight points beyond Subaru, and 22 points ahead of the industry average. Volkswagen finished dead last among mass market names, but only one point behind Ford, 684 to 683 out of a possible 1,000. Segment average, as noted, was 713 points. “Website satisfaction can be volatile, and automotive websites are not immune to changing preferences,” said Jon Sundberg, director of digital solutions at J.D. Power. “However, manufacturers have shown to be very agile when it comes to website design and ensuring their sites meet modern standards, more so than many other industries, as exemplified through the study data.” Marketing/Advertising Alfa Romeo Audi BMW Ford Volkswagen

J.D. Power study identifies top seats for your tush

File under News your fanny can use: The seating systems in the Ford Escape and Edge, the Audi A3, Chevrolet Cruze, Kia Cadenza, Porsche Cayenne and Toyota Tundra received top marks in a new J.D. Power study on seating and seat belt quality and satisfaction. The J.D. Power 2017 Seat Quality and Satisfaction Study asked more than 77,000 new owners and lessees of 2017 model-year cars and light trucks to rate their vehicle's seats and seat belts within the first 90 days of taking ownership. The survey is broken up into seven vehicle segments and scored on total seat problems per 100 within each segment, with awards presented to the seating system supplier. Canadian auto supplier Magna won three of seven first-place awards for its seating systems in the A3, Escape and Edge. Ireland-based Adient got top marks for its seats in the Cadenza and Cayenne. Lear Corp. won for the Cruze, and Avanzar Interior Technologies scored highest for seats in the Tundra. J.D. Power says its study is intended for automakers and suppliers with quality and satisfaction information to be used in developing and marketing seating systems. "But the results are just as interesting to a consumer audience," the company says. "After all, some drivers spend a considerable amount of time behind the wheel, and it's helpful to know which vehicles offer the most comfortable seats for those long commutes." Ain't that the truth. Ford was the only automaker whose seat systems, both manufactured by Magna, received top honors in two segments: the Escape for mass-market compact SUV and the Edge for mass-market midsize/large SUV. J.D. Power says it used 22 attributes to measure seat quality, three measures of seat belt quality and 12 to measure satisfaction. Awards were presented to the seating suppliers. Related Video: Image Credit: Audi Auto News Design/Style Audi Chevrolet Ford Kia Porsche Toyota Safety JD Power seats

2021 BMW M3 and M4 vs all the high-powered sport sedans and coupes

Should you have a found a way to get past that schnoz, you've probably digested some of the basic specs for the all-new 2021 BMW M3 sedan and M4 coupe specs. They're plenty impressive. There's also, basically, two sets of them thanks to the regular and Competition versions that differ in engine output and transmission type.  But how do they compare to other ultra sport sedans and coupes? Well, we were wondering that too, so we fired up the Autoblog Comparison Spreadsheet Generator 5000 (aka me chained to my computer in a dark basement).  Sadly, there are surprisingly few competitors for the 2021 BMW M3. Rival sedans include the Mercedes-AMG C 63 and the Alfa Romeo Giulia Quadrifoglio, along with the Audi RS 5 Sportback sedan/coupe/hatchback thing. There's no more Lexus IS F, the Cadillac CT4 Blackwing has yet to arrive and Jaguar doesn't offer a spicy XE R.  Happily, there are more coupe rivals for the 2021 BMW M4, including the two-door versions of the AMG and Audi as well as the Lexus RC F. I also included the Ford Shelby GT350 and Chevrolet Camaro SS 1LE. On paper, they align incredibly well. On the street and on a track, I can personally attest that these Americans are fully capable of keeping up and/or bettering the fancy-pants luxury brands (and let's not forget there are even more powerful, hardcore versions available). If they don't align in terms of price or prestige, whatever. OK, let's get to the spreadsheet. Let's start with the coupes and note that I didn't bother listing the dimensions for the M4 Competition and C 63 S as they are identical to their "lesser" siblings.  I won't bother burning words explaining what you can see on the chart. Instead, I'll point out a few things that stood out to me. First, BMW M comes awfully close to matching the output of AMG's twin-turbo V8 despite having two fewer cylinders. Similarly, Audi manages to better the 0-60 time of the M4 Competition and tie the C 63 S despite being WAY down on power. It's not like it weighs less. Magic? Second, and speaking of 0-60 times, remember the importance that transmission and drivetrain make with them. It's not just horsepower and torque. An automatic will be quicker and easier to launch than a manual, while all-wheel drive provides more instantaneous and beneficial grip.