2021 Porsche 911 Targa 4s Heritage Design Edition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ford GT dominates Le Mans qualifying, gets slapped with performance adjustment

Fifty years after Bruce McLaren and Chris Amon drove the Ford GT40 to victory at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, Ford is poised for a historic return to the Circuit de la Sarthe. The new Ford GT took the top two qualifying positions in the LMGTE Pro class, and four of the top five. Ferrari's 488 filled in the rest of the spots in the top seven, the first two from AF Corse. In other words, we're primed for a reboot of the classic Ford-Ferrari feud at this year's race. Or not, as the ACO, which organizes the 24 Hours of Le Mans, announced sweeping pre-race Balance of Performance (BOP) adjustments this morning that make this year's GT class anybody's race. In LMP1, last year's overall winner Porsche locked up the top two spots with the 919 Hybrid and will lead the entire field at race start. Toyota's two-car factory effort followed with qualifying times 1.004 and 2.170 seconds behind the pole lap. Audi rounds out the manufacturer-backed LMP1 class in fifth and sixth. Full qualifying results can be found here. The storyline for the GT cars is perfect - some say too perfect. Ford's class-leading times came after BOP adjustment to the Corvette Racing C7.R before qualifying. BOP is intended to level the playing field in the class by adjusting power, ballast, and fuel capacity. (Check out this explainer video for more, or even just if you love French accents.) But the process is riddled with unknowns and ripe for accusations of sandbagging. That is, if the Ford cars were intentionally slow in practice they could hope for BOP adjustment to improve their race chances. On the Corvette side, last year's GTE Pro winner went from the top of the field to the bottom, barely improving from practice to qualifying. If you think Le Mans is as rigged at the NBA Playoffs, well, it's not that simple. Because if Ford and Ferrari held back until qualifying - the eighth-place Porsche 911 RSR is three-and-a-half seconds off the class pole time - it was a pretty dumb strategy. This morning, the ACO tried to put things back in order by limiting the boost in the Ford GT's twin-turbo V6 and adding 11 pounds of ballast. Ferrari was also given extra weight but allowed more fuel capacity. The Corvette and Aston Martin teams were both given breaks on their air restrictors, which will allow their engines to make more power. Both Ford and Porsche also received extra fuel capacity.

Best electric sedans of 2024

While the American automotive trends tend to lean toward SUVs and trucks, and sedans seem to be dying out, there are some great four-doors out there in the EV market. They may not have the bulk, the high vantage point, or the storage capacity of the utes, but some folks still want a car that’s, well, a car. A sedan might not always have as much room to cram in a big battery pack, either, but they also donÂ’t weigh as much. They tend to be more lithe, sexy and agile. And theyÂ’re generally cheaper than their bigger brethren, too, though some of the full-size luxury sedans can still get well into six-figure pricing. If thatÂ’s not your thing, you can check out the best electric SUVs, but if youÂ’ve read this far, you probably enjoy sedans as much as us. WeÂ’ve tested quite a few, and these are the best electric sedans of 2024.   Best electric sedans below $60,000 Tesla Model 3 — $40,380 The Tesla Model 3 is one of just two sedans (along with the Hyundai Ioniq 6) to make it onto our list of best EVs under $50,000. ItÂ’s quite the value, too, with a starting price of just $40,380. ItÂ’s also fun to drive. Yes, it has some quirks, including too many vehicle functions residing exclusively in infotainment menus, but the Model 3's idiosyncrasies are easy to forgive based on its price and range, and they're things you can quickly get used to or possibly even appreciate. No wonder this EV is so popular.   Hyundai Ioniq 6 — $43,565 Of the sedans on this list, the Ioniq 6 is one of the most affordable (starting at $43,565), and one of the best. ItÂ’s quite efficient, with long driving range — up to 361 miles. Its cabin is creative in its design while being practical and comfortable. Interestingly, the Hyundai Ioniq 6 is the sportiest version of Hyundai and KiaÂ’s E-GMP cars, apart from the high-performance Kia EV6 GT. Its design, value, range, fast charging and other useful tech easily make it one of best electric sedans you can buy.   BMW i4 — $53,195 Though the BMW i4 is essentially an electric version of the 4 Series Gran Coupe, this EV sedan is something special. ItÂ’s packed with power and great driving dynamics in true BMW style. The rear-drive i4 eDrive40 is one quick car, but the i4 M50 is ridiculously fast. If you can get past the questionable nose and the iDrive 8 infotainment system, the i4 is an electric sleeper, and a performance bargain.

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.