Beautiful 2011 Porsche Cayenne, Only 11,961 Miles, Warranty on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Preserving automotive history costs big bucks

$1.8 million is spent each year to maintain GM's fleet of 600 production and concept cars.
When at least two of the Detroit Three were on the verge of death a few years back, one of the tough questions that was asked of Ford, General Motors and Chrysler execs - outside of why execs were still taking private planes to meetings - was why each company maintained huge archives of old production and concept vehicles. GM, for example, had an 1,100-vehicle collection when talk of a federal bailout began.

VW Group to split brands under four holding companies

The Volkswagen Group is planning a tremendous shift in its internal structure that will decentralize operations by splitting its 12 brands into four different holding companies. Here's the breakdown. Things will be split logically, considering the inter-sharing of parts, platforms, and engines. The Volkswagen brand, Seat, and Skoda make up a passenger vehicle division led by former BMW man Herbert Diess. Audi, which is tightly intertwined with Lamborghini and motorcycle manufacturer Ducati, will be managed by current Audi exec Rupert Stadler. Porsche and Bentley, which are already quite close, will be joined by Bugatti and run by Matthias Mueller. Finally, a commercial vehicles division will include Volkswagen Commercial, Scania, and Man. Former Daimler exec Andreas Renschler will take care of the big vehicles. The massive move, according to Automotive News Europe, is part of an internal VAG effort to move away from the structure established by ousted Chairman Ferdinand Piech, who favored a compact, but highly centralized, management structure to oversee the independent actions of the company's brands. Criticism of Piech's arrangement stemmed from the company's slow responses to changes in the market, ANE reports. The new structure should make for a more efficient, streamlined company that's better able to make crucial decisions. What are your thoughts? Should VAG decentralize, or did Piech have the right idea? Have your say in Comments.