2001 Porsche 911 996 Turbo on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The 2014 Porsche Cayenne Turbo S brings 50 extra ponies to Detroit

Porsche has announced a new version of its popular SUV today at the Detroit Auto Show: the 550-horsepower 2014 Cayenne Turbo S.
This newly minted "flagship" of the Cayenne lineup is powered by a twin-turbocharged 4.8-liter V8 engine, and offers 50 hp more than the Cayenne Turbo. Performance figures are impressive for the sleek utility vehicle: 0-60 miles per hour can be dashed off in 4.3 seconds, while maximum speed is rated at 175 mph. The Turbo S also gets dynamic chassis control, torque vectoring and Porsche's Sport Chrono package - all standard equipment.
Visually the Cayenne Turbo S differentiates itself from the lesser models in pretty subtle ways. Gloss black trim decorates the gawping front air intakes, as well as rear-view mirror trim panel. The SUV also wears 21-inch Turbo II wheels, a la the 911 Turbo.

Porsche offering short-term loans to Macan waitlisters

Walk into a Porsche dealer today, place an order for a Macan and you'll be looking at a waiting period of six months or more before you can expect delivery. That may be common enough for high-end European automakers, but the Macan is meant to lure new buyers to the brand, and the waitlist could be enough to deter them from sticking around.
The solution? Offer to lease them a Boxster or Cayman until their new Macan arrives. Shorter in term that the usual new-car lease, these six-month terms are designed to keep buyers from turning their backs, all the while experiencing the kind of vehicle Porsche does best.
Of course it doesn't hurt that the dealer then gets a used sports car to sell again once the short-term lease is up. And we wouldn't be surprised to see some buyers asking to hold on to their mid-engined sports car for a little longer, either.

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.