2008 Porsche Boxster Roadster-25k-automatic-pwr Seats-tiptronic-heated Seats on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 Porsche Boxster GTS [w/video]

You know the sound: the startling pop-brraaap-pop-pop shotgun fire of unspent flammables coursing through exhaust pipes that usually signals a raw, naughty powerplant beneath the hood.
But when you're nestled in the Porsche Boxster GTS' snug seats, it's not a crackling small block V8 or a high-strung Italian flat crank making the devilish racket, but rather the new king of the Boxster/Cayman lineup, a 3.4-liter flat-six that produces 330 horsepower and 273 pound-feet of torque.
Within the emotional vacuum of a spec sheet, the Boxster GTS' pumped-up grunt seems pretty mild, with a gain of only 15 hp and 7 lb-ft, respectively. But the reworked acoustical experience goes a long way towards suggesting the GTS has a trace of racing blood in its veins, and might even be missing its catalytic converters. In addition to the sonorous, centrally positioned tailpipes, the cabin also fills with lovely mechanical strains thanks to the "Sound Symposer" acoustical amplifier that's trickled down into the Boxster/Cayman lineup from the 911 for the first time. Boxster S, we hardly knew ya.

Driving 50 years of Porsche 911 history

Raiding The Porsche Museum For A Fun Track Day
It seems everyone is celebrating anniversaries this year: it's Aston's hundredth, Lamborghini's fiftieth, Ford Mustang's fiftieth, Chevy Corvette's sixtieth - and Tesla just turned ten or something. It's been a little out of hand, frankly, all these forced marketing festivities, but if we had to pick one milestone to really celebrate hard and party all night, the Porsche 911 would be at the top of our list.
Get ready for a major 911 blowout bash at next week's Frankfurt Motor Show. It was on September 12 back in 1963 at this very show where Porsche unveiled its "901" painted in a rather boring shade of beige. Though drably finished, the car caused a worldwide frenzy in the budding German sports car sphere.

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.