1997 Porsche Boxster White Rwd Power Covertible Soft Top Bose Audio on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Watch a Cayenne Turbo S, Range Rover SVR, and Cherokee SRT drag race

We live in a weird world where high-performance SUVs could win a 60-mile-per-hour sprint against sports cars from just a few years ago. Here, Top Gear sets up a three-way drag race against the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S, Land Rover Range Rover Sport SVR, and Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT, and the results show just how quickly these high-riding models can cross the quarter mile. The Cherokee SRT is the patriotic choice among the three, but it's down on power in this fight. Meanwhile, the Range Rover's menacing growl sounds the best, and the Cayenne Turbo S has the most horsepower. You'll have to watch the video to see which SUV will win this battle. Related Video:

Listen to the Porsche Macan's exhaust note ahead of its LA debut

As if we need further proof that the Porsche Macan won't just be another small CUV, it'll be a small Porsche CUV, the German automaker has released a video of the vehicle's raucous exhaust note. In short, the Macan will sport a far racier soundtrack than most of its competitors.
The raspy sound coming from one of the Macan's two turbocharged V6 engines sounds great (the video isn't clear as to whether we're listening to the base 3.0-liter or the Turbo model's 3.6-liter engine), and it's accompanied by a nice crackle on overrun. It isn't like a 911 or other flat-six model, but it is more or less what we expect a Porsche to sound like. We'll have all the details on the newest member of the Porsche lineup when it debuts later this month at the 2013 Los Angeles Auto Show. Scroll down for an official press release from Porsche, as well as the video of the Macan, and be sure to turn your speakers up.

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.