Mercedes 500sec Amg Widebody on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The 10 car brands most expensive to maintain over 10 years

Car maintenance has got to be one of the least fun things you can do with your free time, right behind going to the dentist and filing your taxes. However, depending on the brand you buy, your time spent at the shop could be much more than you bargained for. Consumer Reports’ new study on the most- and least-expensive-to-maintain car brands found that European car companies are most likely to break your wallet with costs nearly five times that of the automakers at the other end of the spectrum. Land Rover had the highest ten-year maintenance costs, at an average of $19,250. Porsche was second worst with $14,090 in costs. 10 car brands most expensive to maintain over 10 years: Land Rover: $19,250 Porsche: $14,090 Mercedes-Benz: $10,525 Audi: $9,890 BMW: $9,500 Volvo: $9,285 Infiniti: $8,500 Acura: $7,800 Mini: $7,625 Subaru: $7,200 The Euro brands at the “top” of this list arenÂ’t all that surprising. Land Rover has consistently landed as one of the most expensive vehicle brands to maintain for years now, though Porsche is generally viewed as being one of the more solid performance brands. That could suggest that some models donÂ’t always require more repairs, but the fixes they do need are significantly more expensive. Tesla, Buick, and Toyota were the three cheapest to maintain car brands, with 10-year maintenance costs of $4,035, $4,900, and $4,900, respectively. Consumer Reports noted that these numbers could be slightly skewed due to the fact that some automakers offer free maintenance for the first few years of ownership, and all companies cover their new vehicles for at least a few years after the purchase. Routine maintenance is a great way to avoid costly repairs over time, as itÂ’s much cheaper to catch a problem before it starts causing other issues. Check your oil, rotate your tires, and avoid driving like a wild person, and youÂ’ll likely fare much better than others, even if you own one of the scarier-to-maintain brands.

Is Audi getting complacent and suffering from brain drain?

The argument is made in a Reuters article: Audi is falling behind other luxury brands, such as Mercedes-Benz and BMW, due to a lack of research-and-development spending and "brain drain," or the migration of top executives and R&D chiefs to other parts of the Volkswagen Group. Reuters notes that Audi's current R&D chief is the third in 16 months.
Audi, which contributed to 40 percent of VW Group's $11.6 billion in profit the first nine months of the year, is delivering cars at a record pace: 1.31 million were delivered from January to October 2013 versus BMW's 1.35 million. Yet Audi, Reuters reports, doesn't have a halo car akin to BMW's new electrified i3 and i8 or an answer to Mercedes' plug-in-hybrid S-Class, and the R&D spending at Audi is less than BMW and Mercedes by a fair margin. It's noted in the article, however, that Audi benefits from other R&D spending within VW Group.
Reuters mentions that BMW "trumpets its new 'i' series" and the new Mercedes CLA and GLA ranges are winning "rave reviews" as part of its argument that Audi's recent lack of technological innovation could hurt future sales. Those cars do pack tons of new technology, some of which are firsts for mainstream production cars. But last time we checked, the i3 could be causing BMW's stock to slide, the CLA isn't receiving the rave reviews that Reuters would have you believe and the GLA hasn't been reviewed yet.

Ecclestone wonders if F1's upcoming turbo V6s should get augmented sound [w/videos]

While every team on the Formula One grid is worried about making a good showing in this year's championship at the same time as they develop a brand-new car for next year's championship, Bernie Ecclestone and F1 circuit promoters have a different concern: how next year's cars will sound. The current cars use 2.4-liter, naturally-aspirated V8s that can reach 18,000 revolutions per minute and employ dual exhaust, next year's engine formula calls for 1.4-liter turbocharged V6s that are capped at 15,000 rpm and are constrained to a single exhaust outlet. Ecclestone and promoters like Ron Walker believe the new engines sound like lawnmowers and that the less thrilling audio will keep people from coming to races. If Walker's Australian Grand Prix really is shelling out almost $57 million to hold the race, every ticket counts. As a fix, according to a report in Autoweek, Ecclestone "suggests that the only way to guarantee [a good sound] may be to artificially adjust the tone of the V6s."
However, neither the manufacturers nor the governing body of F1, the FIA, think there will be a problem. Ecclestone fears that if the manufacturers "don't get it right" they'll simply leave the sport, but the only three carmakers and engine builders left next year, Renault (its 2014 "power unit" is pictured), Mercedes-Benz and Ferrari are so embedded that it would stretch belief to think they'd leave the table over an audio hiccup - if said hiccup even occurs. And frankly, these issues always precede changes to engine formulas, as they did when the formula switched from V10 to V8; fans, though, are probably less focused on the engines and more on the mandated standardization of the sport and the spec-series overtones that have come with it.
No one knows yet what next year's engines will sound like, but we've assembled a few videos below to help us all start guessing. The first is an engine check on an Eighties-era John Player Special Renault with a 1.5-liter V6 turbo, after that is Ayrton Senna qualifying in 1986 in the Lotus 98T that also had a 1.5-liter V6 turbo, then you'll find a short with a manufactured range of potential V6 engine notes, and then the sound of turbocharged V6 Indycars testing last year at the Indianapolis Motor Speedway. Any, or none of them, could be Formula One's future.