2023 Porsche Boxster on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Is your new-car warranty good at the race track?

We've all heard the horror stories. Your buddy knows a girl that was dating a guy whose best friend's brother once broke his brand-new, recently purchased performance car while making runs at a drag strip or laps at a track day, and the manufacturer wouldn't cover the repair under warranty. True story? Urban legend? Complete crap? Yes, no, maybe. One thing's for sure: Automotive warranties have always come with caveats. In 1908, an ad in the Trenton Evening Times clearly stated: "All Ford Cars Guaranteed for One Year." Although it changed over time, by 1925 the Ford New Car Guarantee only covered 90 days on material and 30 days on labor, and it clearly stated that that there was "No guarantee whatever on Fan Belts, Glass, Bulbs, Wiring, Transmission, Bands, Hose Connections, Commutator Shells, Rollers, Spark Plugs or Gaskets." Whether or not Ol' Henry would pay to fix your Model T if you broke it shaving a tenth off your lap time at the local board track seems to be lost to history. We're guessing no. But what about today? Do new-car warranties in 2017 cover cars when they are driven on race tracks? We researched the warranties of 14 auto brands to find out, and the answer is yes, no, maybe, depending on the brand, in some cases the model, and whether or not your car is modified from stock. Acura has been out of the high-performance car game for a number of years, but jumps back into the party in 2017 with its hybrid-powered $173,000 NSX supercar. And Acura's warranty, as well as Honda's, clearly states that it does not cover "the use of the vehicle in competition or racing events." View 33 Photos So we asked Sage Marie, Senior Manager of Public Relations for Honda and Acura. "If the car is stock, the warranty covers it on a track just as it does on the street. No question," he told us. "However, if the car is modified, say with slick tires or other components that would put higher stresses on the vehicle's parts and systems, then we would have to investigate the circumstances further." Marie went on to say the same would be true for any Acura model or Honda vehicle, including the new 2017 Honda Civic Si. This became a common theme. Chevrolet actually started this practice with the fifth-generation Camaro on the high-performance ZL1 and Z/28 models.

Audi outlasts rivals to win 13th Le Mans title

As is so often the case, the 2014 Le Mans was a war of attrition, and Audi managed to prevail once again after all 24 hours had been recorded in the history books, with its Audi R18 E-Tron Quattro claiming first and second places, followed by Toyota in third. Drivers Marcel Fassler, Andre Lotterer and Benoit Treluyer inherited the lead in their No. 2 Audi after the No. 7 Toyota, driven by pole-sitter Kazuki Nakajima, was forced to retire with electrical problems in the 15th hour.
The No. 2 Audi led the race until it was forced to the pits to replace a turbocharger in the 17th hour, allowing the No. 1 Audi, driven by Lucas di Grassi, Marc Gene (who was a last-minute replacement for Loic Duval, who crashed hard during practice) and defending champion Tom Kristensen, led the race until the 21st hour, when it too had to pit with turbocharger issues. This gave the No. 20 Porsche of Timo Bernhard, Brendon Hartley, and Mark Webber the lead until it was forced off the track with gearbox problems, eventually finishing in 38th position.
In LMP2, the Jota Sport Zytek Z11SN-Nissan driven by Simon Dolan, Harry Tincknell and Oliver Turvey claimed victory, the first five LMP2 finishers all powered by Nissan. Down a level in GTE-Pro, No. 51 AF Corse Ferrari 458 Italia GT2 driven by Gianmaria Bruni, Toni Vilander and Giancarlo Fisichella finished one lap ahead of the leading Corvette Racing C7.R. And finally, the No. 95 Aston Martin Racing Vantage GTE driven by Kristian Poulsen, David HeinemeierHansson and Nicki Thiim won the GTE-Am race two laps ahead of a Proton Porsche 911 GT3 RSR.

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.