Beautiful 2001 Porshce Boxter Ready For Summer on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

See what the Chevy C7 ZR1 may be benchmarked against

One of the greatest things every Corvette has had going for it, and also one of the most re-used arguments against it, is its price-to-performance equation - long before the Nissan GT-R became the de facto Porsche 911 comparator the Corvette spent decades as Exhibit A. Depending on which side of the argument you stressed, supporters crowed about how much performance you got for how (comparatively) little, detractors carped on how little you got everywhere else in the bargain.
It appears Chevrolet is working as hard as ever to render the argument meaningless. Spy shooters at KGP captured a convocation of European birds of prey leaving the General Motors test center, and aimed at benchmarking the C7 Corvette ZR1. The road train comprised of two C7 Corvette Stingrays, a 2013 Corvette ZR1, McLaren MP4-12C, Ferrari 458 Italia, Audi R8 V10 Spyder and Porsche 911 Carrera S and it was last seen heading down the same kinked-up back roads used to hone the Corvette Stingray.
The C7-series ZR1 and its possible 700 horsepower are still a ways off. If it really is being positioned to compete with the celestial exotica in the testing group, could it be the first Corvette to regularly be the first answer to the question "Cost no object, which would would you rather have?"

Porsche caught testing sub-Panamera-sized sedan

Anyone remember the Porsche Pajun? It was supposed to be Porsche's long-rumored entry level sedan before it mostly dropped off the radar. Now, it might have blipped its way back onto our screens, thanks to a series of spy shots showing what on the surface looks like a Panamera. While our spies point to this being a coupe mule riding on a shortened version of the Panamera's platform, we're leaning towards a smaller sedan. Even with the rear windows obscured, the wheelbase and driver's seating position (which we'll admit is remarkably low and coupe-like) seem wrong for a two-door model, even a disguised one. The cutlines in the rear doors look too deep to be camouflage, and based on the look of those door handles, the rear doors are definitely real. As for what's not real, we wouldn't read too much into those rivet-like things at the front and rear. They're just there to secure the camouflage. We might not be on the same page as our spies about what this car actually is, but they make a strong argument for its eventual styling, which should be a mix of 911 and Panamera. There's a slim strip of taillight hiding beneath the rear camo – you'll need to zoom way in, but the white housings are there – that reminds us of the new 911. It should be more Panamera in the front fascia, aside from the headlights, which might be the only styling element that draws inspiration from the 718. Based on the state of this car, we're thinking it's still quite early in the Pajun's development process. Whether the development timeline lines up with this 2019 prediction remains to be seen. Related Video: Featured Gallery Porsche Pajun: Spy Shots View 10 Photos Image Credit: CarPix Spy Photos Porsche Luxury Performance Sedan porsche pajun