2015 Porsche 911 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

James May's 1984 Porsche 911 is priced to sell at Goodwood

James May needs money. He's out of work, has payments to make on his Ferrari, and has resorted to doing less than stellar work to make ends meet. He and his colleague Richard Hammond sold their motorcycles to raise some extra scratch, and now Captain Slow is selling his Porsche, too. Of course, with years of paychecks form Top Gear and other TV appearances, several books, and a weekly column in The Daily Telegraph, it's unlikely that May is worried about debtor's prison. Mostly because that doesn't exist in the UK anymore, but also because he's probably loaded. The vehicle in question is a 1984 Porsche 911 Carrera, complete with air-cooled 3.2-liter flat-six. He became acquainted with the car in 2007 when he borrowed it from specialist Paul Devyea to record a Radio 4 documentary, and evidently fell in love, so he bought it. He even had it on air for a couple of specials for Top Gear and James May's Toy Stories. He loaned it to his dad for a while, but with his time on Top Gear now at an end, he's consigned it to Bonhams (the same house that handled his bike sale) to auction off at the upcoming Goodwood Festival of Speed. Its pre-sale estimate is quoted at GBP28,000-34,000 ($44-53k), which would seem a bit low – especially considering its celebrity provenance and low 55,000 miles on the odometer. Bonhams specialist Sholto Gilbertson tells Autoblog that "the estimate placed on the car has been designed to attract interest and ultimately achieve a stronger price for Mr. May."

Paul Walker's daughter files wrongful death suit against Porsche [UPDATE]

UPDATE: This post has been edited to include a statement from Porsche. While police blamed the crash that killed Fast and Furious star Paul Walker and racecar driver Roger Rodas on excessive speed, Walker's daughter, Meadow, thinks Porsche is at fault. The 16-year-old has now filed a wrongful death suit against the German manufacturer to back up that allegation. According to legal documents obtained by E! Online, the suit alleges that the Carrera GT that Walker and Rodas died in "lacked safety features ... that could have prevented the accident or, at a minimum, allowed Paul Walker to survive the crash," with Porsche Stability Management being called out in particular. Federal motor vehicle safety standards didn't require new cars sold in the US to be equipped with electronic stability control until 2012. The suit focuses not only on the Carrera GT's lack of electronic safety systems and "history of instability and control issues," but on an allegedly defective seatbelt. It claims that upon impact, the belt "snapped Walker's torso back with thousands of pounds of force, thereby breaking his ribs and pelvis," and prevented him from exiting the car before it caught fire, roughly a minute and 20 seconds after the initial impact, according to TMZ. Soot found in Walker's windpipe supports the theory that he was alive and breathing when the fire started, the suit continues. Like the suit Roger Rodas' widow filed against Porsche in 2014, Walker's filing also alleges that the Carrera GT wasn't traveling at 80 to 93 miles per hour, as a police investigation concluded. But where Mrs. Rodas claimed the Carrera GT was going 55 at the time of the crash, this suit claims the hypercar was moving at 63 to 71 mph. That's a more manageable figure to be sure, and if true would have a serious impact on the way the car behaved, but it's still well above the road's posted 45-mph speed limit. "The bottom line is that the Porsche Carrera GT is a dangerous car," Meadow Walker's lawyer told TMZ. "It doesn't belong on the street. And we shouldn't be without Paul Walker or his friend, Roger Rodas." Porsche, meanwhile, has stood by the reports from the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department and other authorities.

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.