2010 Porsche Certified 911 4s Cab - We Finance, Take Trades And Ship. on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche Cayman GT4 spotted at the N?rburgring

It was just the other day that we first caught wind of Porsche's plans to build a GT4 version of the Cayman, and now we're already looking at spy shots of the vehicle in question undergoing testing at - where else? - the Nürburgring.
With more aggressive front-end aero, a GT3-style air vent ahead of the front hood, a large wing at the back, and spindly alloys packed with over-sized brakes at each corner, this Cayman is clearly more extreme than even the range-topping GTS. The rear diffuser and central exhaust tips look about the same as those you'd find at the back of the Cayman GTS, though.
What we can't see, of course, is what Porsche has slotted in under the rear glass, how it's upgraded the interior and how much weight it's stripped out of the thing to get it down to fighting weight, but you can bet it'll come with a substantial power bump and a stripped-out interior with racing buckets and little else to open the gap between it and the GTS... and close the gap to the 911 GT3 which it will join as the baby brother in Porsche's performance-focused lineup. Click above to view the double-batch of spy shots.

2013 Goodwood Festival of Speed statue unveiled

Each year at the Goodwood Festival of Speed, a single marque is celebrated with a large and ornate "Central Feature" sculpture, with recent automakers including Audi in 2009, Alfa Romeo in 2010, Jaguar in 2011 and Lotus last year. This year, Porsche gets the honor, and it is using the opportunity to commemorate 50 years of the 911.
The sculpture features three generations of the 911 towering over the Goodwood House. The most recent 991 911 has the lowest position, with an original 1963 car second highest and a 1973 2.7 RS at the top of the pile. Be sure to check out the sculpture for yourself in the gallery of images above.

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.