95 Porsche 911 Turbo Cab 13k Miles 1 Of 5 Built One Owner Red Calipers 96 97 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Hyundai, Porsche top J.D. Power APEAL study

Just as they did in the Initial Quality Study, Porsche and Hyundai have taken the premium and non-premium crown, respectively, for the 2014 J.D. Power APEAL study. This is the tenth consecutive year for that Porsche has been rated the best premium make in the APEAL study, which attempts to figure out how pleased owners are with their purchases. For 2014, it asked 86,000 owners of MY2014 cars to rate their vehicles in 77 different categories 90 days after their initial purchase. The resulting figures were plugged in deliver the APEAL score, which is rated on a 1,000-point scale. The industry average sits at 794 points for 2014, although that's a one-percent decline over last year's rating. In this year's study, premium brands averaged 840 out of 1,000, while non-premium makes average 785. For their part, Porsche netted an impressive 882 points, while Hyundai earned an 804. Interestingly, only four non-premium brands (Hyundai, Ram, Volkswagen and Mini) finished above the industry average for 2014. It's also interesting to see the clear delineation between premium and non-premium brands, with an eight-point gap between the non-premium champ, Hyundai, and the lowest-rated premium brand, Volvo. Porsche and Hyundai weren't the only automakers to take home recognition. Dodge managed to tie Porsche for the most segment awards, with three. The Challenger, Charger and Dart all topped their market. There were a number of two-segment winners, as well, with Audi, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Nissan capturing a pair of segments each. Scroll down for the full press release from JD Power on this year's winners. Automakers Struggle to Impress Owners with Increased Usefulness of In-Vehicle Technologies And Features on All-New and Redesigned Models Dodge and Porsche Each Receive Three Segment-Level Awards; Audi, Ford, Mercedes-Benz and Nissan Each Receive Two WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif.: 23 July 2014 - Although manufacturers are putting more and more technologies and functionality in their new and redesigned models, satisfaction with these features is not significantly higher among owners of those models than among owners of carryover models, according to the J.D. Power 2014 U.S. Automotive Performance, Execution and Layout (APEAL) StudySM released today. The APEAL Study, now in its 19th year, serves as the industry benchmark for new-vehicle appeal. Owners evaluate their vehicle across 77 attributes, which combine into an overall APEAL score that is measured on a 1,000-point scale.

Petrolicious explores long-term living with Porsche's 914/6

After its last video starred none other than the spectacular Ferrari 250 GTO, where was there for the video team at Petrolicious to go? Certainly, in the realm of classics, there are only a few other vehicles that can match the badge and pedigree of the ultra-rare Ferrari. Maybe a Jaguar D-Type or an Aston Martin DBR1? No, this latest video doesn't star either of those British icons. It stars an oft-misunderstood, occasionally derided entry from Germany's most sporting manufacturer - Porsche.
Yes, we've gone from a Ferrari 250 GTO to a Porsche 914/6. As is often the case with Petrolicious, though, the story told about the car by its owner are often more important than the make or model of car being highlighted. That's exactly the case here, as Jack Griffin talks about the 38 years he's spent with this particular Porsche.
Having been born into the Volkswagen fold and introduced to Porsche in the best way possible - behind the wheel of a 356 - Griffin has some interesting stories (including his attempt at running the 12 Hours of Sebring), and he knows a fair bit about some of the 914's attributes.

Audi CEO's Dieselgate arrest threatens fragile truce among VW stakeholders

FRANKFURT — The arrest and detention of Audi's chief executive forces Volkswagen Group's competing stakeholders to renegotiate the delicate balance of power that has helped keep Audi CEO Rupert Stadler in office. Volkswagen's directors are discussing how to run Audi, its most profitable division, following the arrest of the brand's long-time boss on Monday as part of Germany's investigations into the carmaker's emissions cheating scandal. The supervisory board of Audi, meanwhile, has suspended Stadler and appointed Dutchman Bram Schot as an interim replacement, a source familiar with the matter said on Tuesday. Schot joined the Volkswagen Group in 2011 after having worked as president and CEO of Mercedes-Benz Italia. He has been Audi's board member for sales and marketing since last September. The discussions risk reigniting tensions among VW's controlling Piech and Porsche families, its powerful labor representatives and its home region of Lower Saxony. VW has insisted the development of illegal software, also known as "defeat devices," installed in millions of cars was the work of low-level employees, and that no management board members were involved. U.S. prosecutors have challenged this by indicting VW's former chief executive Martin Winterkorn. Stadler's arrest raises further questions. Audi and VW said on Monday that Stadler was presumed innocent unless proved otherwise. Munich prosecutors detained Stadler to prevent him from obstructing a probe into Audi's emissions cheating, they said on Monday. Stadler is being investigated for suspected fraud and false advertising. Here are the main factors deciding the fate of Audi. Background: Audi's role in Dieselgate Volkswagen Group was plunged into crisis in 2015 after U.S. regulators found Europe's biggest carmaker had equipped cars with software to cheat emissions tests on diesel engines. The technique of using software to detect a pollution test procedure, and to increase the effectiveness of emissions filters to mask pollution levels only during tests, was first developed at Audi. "In designing the defeat device, VW engineers borrowed the original concept of the dual-mode, emissions cycle-beating software from Audi," VW said in its plea agreement with U.S. authorities in January 2017, in which the company agreed to pay a $4.3 billion fine to reach a settlement with U.S. regulators.