Porsche 968 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche digitally dissects its 918 Spyder for your viewing pleasure

At this point, you'd think we'd know all there is to know about the 2015 Porsche 918 Spyder - except what it's like to drive - but Porsche has released a new video giving us a more in-depth look at its new plug-in hypercar all the same. The animated video gives us numerous cutaway looks at the 918 Spyder while giving a visual demonstration of the car's four hybrid driving modes.
Though nowhere near as exciting as watching the 918 blast around the Nürburgring in record time, this new video is nonetheless both interesting and informative. Scroll down to watch the video yourself, and be sure to check out our live gallery of the production version of the car along with a stock gallery.

Porsche 911 GT2 RS vs. Mercedes SLS AMG Black in battle of who can shred more rubber

We might be looking at the end of an era in European performance models. Mercedes-Benz is doing away with the SLS in favor of a rumored smaller and cheaper SLC, and Porsche has said that a new 911 GT2 isn't necessarily a sure thing, which means another 911 GT2 RS is even farther away. In its latest video, Evo's Jethro Bovingdon pits the ultimate versions of these German sports coupes against each other and finds two of the fastest cars the magazine has ever lapped around its track.
In one corner, there is the Mercedes SLS AMG Black Series that sits as the pinnacle of the company's halo model. It relies on the classic setup of a V8 mounted in front powering the rear wheels. On the other side, there is the 911 GT2 RS with a turbocharged flat-six mounted at the back, spinning the rear wheels. It was conceived to be Porsche's ultimate expression of a turbocharged 911, and while it's a few years old, Bovingdon shows that it's up to the task of racing a more modern rival.
Both of these rear-wheel-drive monsters are more than capable of some fantastically smoky power-slides, but they also show how great the last generation of sports cars was. Scroll down to check out 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.