Auto blog

Porsche Macan spied, all lit up and dodging flurries

We've seen the upcoming Porsche Macan testing on surface roads and even on the Nürburgring, but here we have our first spy shots showing a disguised prototype doing some winter testing in snowy conditions. Still obscured by plenty of camouflage attempting to mimic its larger Cayenne sibling, we still can't get a clear look at what the Macan's face and rump are going to look like, although it does appear that some details for the front lighting are starting to emerge.
Below the headlights, those are obviously decals trying to look like turn signal lenses, but it appears that there is still some sort of lighting being hidden judging by the small circles cut into the camo. Lower in the fascia, we can also see there are LED running lights not revealed on past prototypes. The entire rear end of this Macan prototype still appears to be tacked-on camo, but the side view appears to be in production form save for the poorly disguised rear quarter windows.
As we've seen in the past, Porsche engineers are still testing the Macan alongside the Audi Q5 with which it shares its platform. There has been no word as to when we could expect to see the Macan in production or concept form, but we'd have to guess that this compact crossover is getting ready to shed its camo very soon.

Ruf RGT 4.2 offers 518 hp of naturally aspirated power

Ruf has a reputation for building some fast interpretations of the Porsche 911, and the company's latest RGT 4.2 at the Geneva Motor Show provides an interesting point of comparison compared to the new GT3 RS that's debuting there. In terms of pure power, the Ruf wins out. The company crafts a flat six with 4.2-liters of displacement making 518 horsepower and 369 pound-feet of torque with a top speed of 200 miles per hour. In contrast, the latest GT3 RS gets 500 ponies and 338 lb-ft of twist from its direct-injected 4.0-liter mill. Depending on your desires, the RGT 4.2 might have the preferred gearbox too with its six-speed manual versus the Porsche's PDK. Styling is also going to come down to personal tastes between these two. The RGT 4.2 has an almost old-school racing look with its bolted-on fender flares, five-spoke wheels, thick carbon fiber rear wing and lower front air dam. Inside, there's also an integrated roll cage. The RS, on the contrary, appears thoroughly modern with its big fender intakes at the back, slashes just behind the front wheels, CFRP hood and magnesium roof. Check out Ruf's naturally aspirated monster on the Geneva show floor in the gallery, above. The RGT 4.2 maintains a long tradition of Ruf supercars with its outrageous driving performance. Unveiled in 2000, the first RGT was characterised by its powerful, torquey normally-aspirated flat-six engine. With a significantly reduced all-up weight and sports-oriented suspension system, the RGT was an extremely impressive driving machine.Now, in 2015, the RGT remains true its original concept, though its external appearance is clearly more athletic. The wheel arches are more bulbous and the front facade presents huge round air intakes for more effective cooling. The chassis is reinforced by RUF's hallmark Integrated Roll Cage (IRC). Propulsion is provided by its virile 4.2-litre six-cylinder, normally-aspirated engine, developing 525bhp and 500Nm of torque, featuring dry sump lubrication with external oil tank. A proper driving machine for sure POWER 525 PS / 386 kW @ 8.370/min TORQUE 500 Nm @ 5.820/min DISPLACEMENT 4178ccm TRANSMISSION 6-speed manual gearbox TOP SPEED 322 km/h FUEL CONSUMPTION urban 19,8 l/100km non-urban 9,8l/100km combined 13,6 l/100km CO2 emissions 317g/km Effizienzklasse G Related Video:

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.