***no Reserve*** 2009 Porsche Cayenne Turbo S Fully Loaded!!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche reveals new 911 Turbo Cabriolets, starting from $160,700*

Porsche has come a long way from the days when its entire model line revolved essentially around the 911, but its prototypical rear-engined sports car is still what it's known for best, and still keeps the German automaker pretty busy. With a seemingly endless array of variations on the theme, the 911s just keep on coming until a new generation arrives and then it starts all over again. And what we have here is the new king of the hill (for now, anyway).
Set to debut at the Los Angeles Auto Show a little less than two months from now are the new Porsche 911 Turbo Cabriolets. And no, that's not a typo: that's cabriolets, plural, because what you're looking at are two new models. First up is the 911 Turbo Cabriolet, whose 3.8-liter twin-turbo flat-six develops 520 horsepower, driving the droptop to 60 miles per hour in 3.3 seconds. That's Porsche's claim, and we have a feeling it's a bit conservative. But if that's still not enough, the 911 Turbo S Cabriolet adds an extra 40 hp for a total of 560 to drop the benchmark acceleration run down to 3.1 seconds.
That makes the new topless Turbos 30 horses stronger and 0.2 seconds quicker than the respective models they replace, but the weight penalty involved with replacing a fixed roof with a folding one (and the necessary structural reinforcement) does make the new 911 Turbo Cabs a smidgen more lethargic than their contemporary coupe counterparts, which run the gauntlet in 3.2 and 2.9 seconds in standard Turbo and upgraded Turbo S specs, respectively. They only lose a single tick on the top speed, though, which clocks in at a follicle-tickling 195 mph in either spec. Otherwise the specifications are as identical as you might expect.

Porsche 911 Reimagined by Singer

An Iconic Sports Car, Restored to Seduce
I have been strapped behind the iconic Momo Prototipo steering wheel for a little more than an hour, all windows down as I carve my way up a rugged canyon during an unusually warm Southern California evening, and I am overwhelmed with emotion. My heart is pounding out of my chest, my breathing is heavy and my palms are sweaty because I am completely absorbed by this wondrous machine.
After waiting patiently for nearly four years, I am finally behind the wheel of a classic Porsche 911 restored, modified and tuned by Singer Vehicle Design. The vehicle that surrounds me never rolled off an automaker's assembly line in its current configuration, yet its physical appearance is timeless, build quality breathtaking and driving dynamics peerless.

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.