2013 Porsche 911 Carrera 4s Coupe on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche Macan Turbo vs Cayman GTS in track battle

"Well this is stupid." On the surface, that was our reaction to this video, as well. Why would you compare the hottest Porsche Cayman with a crossover of any kind, even if it is the 400-horsepower Macan Turbo?
We're guessing because it'd be bloody good fun, as evidenced Auto Express's latest track battle. To be fair, there is some interesting stuff here. The two do have a similar starting price, separated by less than $3,000 here in the US market. And, factoring in the Macan's hefty horsepower and torque advantages - 60 horsepower and 126 pound-feet - does make for a slightly interesting comparison.
We won't spoil the verdict, so check out the full video from Auto Express, and then let us know what you think in Comments.

NHTSA closes probe into 2011 Porsche 911 coolant leaks

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has announced that it will end its investigation into rapid coolant loss in 24,635 Porsche 911s built between 2001 and 2011. The models affected included the standard 911, GT2, GT3 and Turbo, as well as their variants (GT2 RS, GT3 RS and Turbo S).
NHTSA was investigating for "rapid coolant loss caused by coolant pipe-fitting failure, allegedly resulting in vehicle disablement and/or loss of vehicle control due to reduced traction for the affected vehicle or following traffic," according to the regulators website. "Most of the leak complaints did not appear to involve complete separation of the fittings and many were detected when the vehicle was parked," said NHTSA's statement.
There were 63 complaints and 336 warranty claims, although the investigation was initiated after ten complaints from customers. There have been no reports of crashes or injuries attributed to rapid coolant loss.

Jaguar Land Rover seeks to block U.S. imports of Porsche, Audi, Lamborghini, VW SUVs

You wouldn’t know it was about Jags and Lambos, to judge by its rather dry name: In the Matter of Certain Vehicle Control Systems. But thatÂ’s the complaint Jaguar Land Rover Automotive Plc filed on Thursday to block U.S. imports of Porsche, Lamborghini, Audi and Volkswagen sport utility vehicles it says are using its patented Terrain Response technology without permission. Jaguar Land Rover, a British carmaker owned by IndiaÂ’s Tata Motors Ltd., said in its filing with the U.S. International Trade Commission that the technology helps negotiate a “broad range of surfaces” and is a key feature in JaguarÂ’s F-Pace and Land Rover Discovery vehicles. “JLR seeks to protect itself and its United States operations from companies that have injected infringing products into the U.S. market that incorporate, without any license from JLR, technology developed by JLR and protected by its patent,” JaguarÂ’s lawyer, Matthew Moore, said in the filing. Representatives of Volkswagen didnÂ’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the complaint. Jaguar wants to block imports of PorscheÂ’s Cayenne; LamborghiniÂ’s Urus; AudiÂ’s Q8, Q7, Q5, A6 Allroad and e-tron vehicles; and VWÂ’s Tiguan vehicles. It said there are plenty of other luxury midsize SUV and compact crossover vehicles to meet consumer demand if the SUVs are banned from the U.S. Still, the premium Porsche and Audi lines provide much of the profit VW is using to fund its investments in technology for electric vehicles, autonomous vehicles and further innovations. In addition to the four brands, Volkswagen Group owns other upscale nameplates, including Bentley and Bugatti. The International Trade Commission is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that investigates complaints of unfair trade practices, like patent infringement. It canÂ’t award damages but does have the power to block products from entering the U.S. Owners of patents and trade secrets like it because it can work faster than the federal district courts -- the typical investigation is completed in 15 to 18 months. But Jaguar also filed patent lawsuits against the companies in federal courts in Delaware and New Jersey, seeking cash compensation for the use of the technology. Those cases are likely to be put on hold once the trade commission launches its investigation. The case is In the Matter of Certain Vehicle Control Systems, 337-3508, U.S. International Trade Commission (Washington).