Clear Title on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2020 Porsche 911 Speedster spied with an angry driver

Porsche gave us details and showed us a concept of the 911 Speedster at the Paris Motor Show. Today, we bring you spy shots of what appears to be the production version of that concept with a few changes on board. They're rather minimal modifications, but the Speedster's driver appears especially angry with our spy photographer as he extends his middle finger directly toward the camera. Sorry, not sorry, Mr. Test Driver. Public testing of pre-production cars always comes with photo risks, and Porsches tend to attract more attention than others. You'll notice what appears to be a Cayenne Coupe prototype we've previously spotted running around with the 911. The Speedster Concept we saw in Paris had epic retro mirrors and fuel cap on the front hood, but both those design touches are absent from this pre-production car. It's tougher to see, but we lost the vents in between the two humps, as well. Everything else appears to have made it to production-spec. We can't say we're surprised these concept car features probably won't show up on the production car, but it is a tad deflating. You'll notice the Speedster is based-off the 991.2 generation of 911 and not the new 992. Porsche did a similar thing when the 997 generation was coming to an end with a Speedster model paying tribute to that car's life. The chassis is said to utilize parts from the 911 GT3, and the wonderful naturally aspirated flat-six engine gets carried over from that car, too. Porsche didn't specify if power will be exactly the same as the GT3, but we'll be expecting about 500 horsepower and a 9,000 rpm redline. We were told the six-speed manual would be offered on the Speedster in Paris, too. Let's just say that we strongly approve of that combination. Production will be limited to only 1,948 cars and begin in the first half of this year. We'll expect a reveal with a full spec breakdown soon, possibly for the upcoming Geneva Motor Show. Related video: This content is hosted by a third party. To view it, please update your privacy preferences. Manage Settings.

This junkyard '91 Grand Am is as hooptie as it gets

I spend a lot of time in junkyards. A lot of time. With all this experience, I have learned to recognize a perfect hooptie when I see one, a car whose final owner got every last bit of use out of it when its value was hovering right about at scrap value. This 1991 Pontiac Grand Am that I spotted in a San Francisco Bay Area self-service wrecking yard a few days ago, from the final model year for the third-generation Grand Am, checks all the hooptie boxes just right. First of all, it's a low-option coupe with the wretched and unloved GM Iron Duke engine, a rattly, gnashy, thrashy 2.5-liter four-cylinder kludged together using off-the-shelf parts from the Pontiac 301-cubic-inch V8 during the darkest years of the Malaise Era and used in cars whose buyers just didn't care. Most of the paint has been burned off by 25 years of harsh California sun, but the car spent sufficient time in a damp, shady spot for lichens to build up here and there. There are skeletons-with-sombreros stencils sprayed here and there, plus a big moonshine-guzzling skeleton mural painted on the hood. Goodbye, property values! Still, someone felt some affection for this car, giving it the name "Good Ol' Snakey" and painting that name on the decklid. We can assume that the Iron Duke was a bit loose by this time, probably leaving a serpentine trail of blue smoke behind the car at all times. So, the combination of cheapness, ugliness, menace, and who-gives-a-damn functionality make this Grand Am an excellent example of a pure hooptie. Within a couple of months, it will be crushed, shredded, shipped out of the Port of Oakland, and reborn in China as refrigerators and Geely Emgrands. Somewhere in Northern California, though, a few of Ol' Smokey's friends will remember this car fondly.

Woman Cleared In Fatal Car Wreck After GM Letter

A Texas judge cleared a woman Monday for a car accident that killed her fiance in 2004, after General Motors acknowledged that her car would have been among millions being recalled for a problem that may have contributed to the death. Candice Anderson was driving a 2004 Saturn Ion when it suddenly veered off a road about 60 miles east of Dallas and slammed into a tree. Anderson, then 21, was severely injured when the car's air bags failed to deploy. Her 25-year-old fiance, Gene Erikson, who was a passenger, was killed. She later pleaded guilty to charges stemming from the wreck. But during a hearing Monday, State District Judge Teresa Drum expunged the conviction from her record, according to officials in the Van Zandt County court andAnderson's attorney, Bob Hilliard. In a letter given to the court ahead of the hearing, an attorney for the automaker confirmed that Anderson's Saturn would have been among 2.6 million GM vehicles recalled in February to address ignition switches that can slip out of the "run" position, causing the engines to stall and disabling power steering, brakes and air bags. Anderson's crash "is one in which the recall condition may have caused or contributed to the frontal air bag non-deployment in the accident," attorney Richard C. Godfrey wrote. Hilliard provided a copy of the letter to The Associated Press, and Godfrey confirmed its contents Monday. Anderson was initially charged with criminally negligent homicide because there was no clear explanation at the time why the wreck occurred, according to court documents from the case. She pleaded guilty to a letter charge in 2006, and was sentenced to five years' probation. She also was ordered to perform 260 hours of community service, pay court costs and cover the costs of Erikson's funeral. "GM knew this defect caused this death, yet instead of telling the truth watched silently as Candice was found guilty of involuntary manslaughter," Hilliard said Monday. "It took 10 years for GM to find its voice." In a separate statement issued by the company, GM said it "cooperated fully by providing technical information that was requested to make a decision in this matter." The carmaker also said the issue in Anderson's case was for local law enforcement and courts to consider. "That's why we took a neutral position on Ms. Anderson's case," the company's statement said. "It was appropriate for the court to determine the legal status of Ms.