2008 Porsche Boxster Base Convertible Beyond Pampered! 10,976 Miles!!! 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.

Son of Porsche 911 designer recalls 1963 Frankfurt debut

The Goodwood Revival is described by its presenters as the greatest motorsport racing party of the year. We often focus heavily on the motorsports, but you can't forget about the party. For the first preview of the new 911 Turbo in the UK, Porsche recreated its booth from the Frankfurt Motor Show in 1963 - the time and place of the original 911's public debut.
Porsche's cameras also caught up with Mark Porsche, the great grandson of Dr. Ferdinand Porsche and son of the late Ferdinand Alexander "Butzi" Porsche, who oversaw the design of the 911. Mark Porsche admires the 911's friendly design, which is set off by the round headlights, and says his mother, who was at the original Frankfurt booth in 1963, was milling around the booth at Goodwood - no doubt taking a trip down memory lane.

Roger Rodas' widow suing Porsche over Carrera GT crash

Investigations undertaken by local law enforcement may have vindicated Porsche from any wrongdoing in the crash that killed actor Paul Walker and racing driver Roger Rodas last year, but the latter's widow is apparently not convinced. According to emerging reports, Kristine Rodas has filed a lawsuit seeking unspecified damages from Porsche Cars North America.
In her suit filed with the Los Angeles Superior Court, Rodas' attorney Mark Geragos reportedly disputes the findings of the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department, which asserted that the vehicle was traveling at an unsafe speed of 90 miles per hour on city streets, identifying the speed as the cause of the accident. Instead the lawsuit claims that the vehicle was only going 55 mph and that the cause of the crash was improper equipment - namely a faulty right rear suspension and the lack of a crash cage and proper fuel tank.