1975 Porsche 914 2.0 Litre on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Audi welcomes Porsche back to Le Mans like any sibling would

Ah, sibling rivalry. It really is a beautiful thing. It's even more beautiful when said siblings are automakers with very, very well-known racing histories. That's how you get videos like this, which is Audi's way of welcoming Porsche back to the top flight of Le Mans racing.
Yes, Audi has taken its R18 E-Tron Quattro back onto public roads, wowing schoolboys and scaring farmers (who appear to be riding classic Porsche tractors), as it travels from Ingolstadt to Zuffenhausen, just to taunt its corporate frenemy.
Take a look below for a video to see just what that teasing looks like.

eGarage video features Helmuth Bott's personal Porsche 959 prototype

"We thought we were going to build a super-911," said Peter Schutz, former CEO of Porsche AG of the development of the Porsche 959. That was before it started getting expensive. At that point, Helmuth Bott, Porsche R&D director got frightened. Costs ballooned because of the all-wheel drive, sequential turbocharging and other technology Porsche had never even thought about when it set out to build a 911 to compete in Group B. Schutz continued, "The amount of resources we were committing got totally out of hand." Instead of pulling the plug, Bott doubled down and drew on the strength of his brilliant team to build a car whose impact is still echoing aross the industry.
"It's probably one of our most prized possessions" says Don Leatherwood, Director of the Brumos collection where Dr. Bott's personal prototype resides, and where Frazer Spowart went to see the car and create a video for eGarage. Check out the sights and sounds of the 959 before it was the 959, and get personal takes on the car from Hurley Haywood, Peter Schutz and Don Leatherwood. Keep reading to see the video.

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.