1995 Porsche 911 993 Cabriolet 6 Speed Mint on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Porsche Cayman S

Second Fiddle Moves To First Chair
In the interest of full disclosure and a bit of bloodletting, allow me to admit that while I've always coveted the Porsche Boxster and its hard-hatted Cayman cousin, I've never really warmed to them visually. They've always had a certain push-me, pull-you, can't-decide-which-way-they're-going aesthetic that I've never really wrapped my head around. Porsche achieved the same thing with the original 550 Spyder's overturned bathtub bodyshell that would come to inspire the Boxster, but somehow that classic's even more symmetrical nature works for me. Fast-forward to this third generation, and at least for this enthusiast, Porsche's manchild has well and truly come of age as a design.
It's all there - a piercing stare thanks to squircle headlamps inspired by the 918 Spyder hypercar, newfound directional thrust afforded by a longer wheelbase and elongated greenhouse, and muscular rear haunches with a wider stance emphasized by larger side ductwork and snubbed overhangs. The body's teardrop shape terminates with an active spoiler that integrates into a gorgeous arc with the taillamps like a budding ducktail nod to 1973 911 Carrera RS. Despite casting a longer shadow than its predecessor, the 2014 Cayman still looks tidily proportioned, smooth and wieldy, the perfect skipping stone to ricochet down a canyon river road.

A spotter's guide to Super Bowl LIV car commercials

Set to kick off on Fox at 6:30 ET on Sunday, February 2, from Hard Rock Stadium in Miami, Florida, the big game will feature the Kansas City Chiefs and the San Francisco 49ers. Throughout Super Bowl LIV, viewers will see about 50 commercials, each of which costs as much as $5.6 million per 30 seconds, according to AdWeek. Originally, there were more than 77 ad slots, so several companies could be paying well more than $10 million for a single, longer commercial. Numerous car companies have already announced their commercials, or their intentions to show commercials, during the game. Here's a roundup of the ones we know about so far. During the game on Sunday, we'll be livestreaming and adding links to the new commercials as they become available, so check back with us for that post.  Audi: E-Tron Sportback Maisie Williams has experience wearing many faces, and in Audi's Super Bowl commercial, she does her best Elsa impression. In the spot, titled "Let It Go," Williams faces the rigorous task of getting through L.A. traffic, but she's alleviated by the comfort of the Audi E-Tron Sportback electric crossover. The commercial is meant to signal the company leaving its gas past behind and moving forward to a sustainable future.  Genesis: GV80 Genesis makes its Super Bowl debut with a commercial that will show its all-new SUV, the GV80, to viewers around the world (many of which will be seeing the vehicle for the first time). The ad features Chrissy Teigen and John Legend as the purveyors of "new luxury," while "old luxury" is left for the birds. GMC: Hummer General Motors is bringing back the Hummer nameplate as a premium electric GMC truck. GM says it will have 1,000 horsepower and will be capable of going zero to 60 mph in three seconds. GM brought in NBA legend and Hummer fanboy LeBron James for the debut commercial. Hyundai: Sonata Hyundai is known for bringing in the big-time celebrities for its commercials, and 2020 is no different. A new advertisement called "Smaht Pahk" features John Krasinski, Chris Evans, and Rachel Dratch, all three of whom are from the Boston area. The trio gets into full character as they discuss the new high-tech parking feature on the redesigned 2020 Hyundai Sonata, and David Ortiz makes a cameo at the end. Even when New England isn't in the Super Bowl, New England is in the Super Bowl.

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.