2006 Very Clean Porsche Cayman S, Premiumplus, Nice Clear Bra, Call 480-421-4530 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche hybrids come up short at Le Mans

Two cars, one finish, zero victories. That's a brief synopsis of Porsche's hybrid-vehicle performance in the 24 Hours of Le Mans race in France. There's always next year. Porsche entered two 919 Hybrid vehicles in the race. The No. 14 car essentially limped to the finish line after encountering drivetrain problems. The other Porsche hybrid, No. 20, was driven by Germany's Timo Bernhard, New Zealand's Brendon Hartley and Australia's Mark Webber. That car ran for more than 22 hours before its own powertrain issues did that racing team in for good. Both vehicles ran towards the front of the pack at times during the race, and the No. 20 car actually led the race after about 20 hours. Still, both teams said they were disappointed in the results. Porsche sister company Audi came up big for the 13th time in the race's long and storied history. One Audi R18 E-Tron Quattro won the race, while another finished second. The Toyota that had pole-position and was winning much of the race shut down after 15 hours of racing because of electrical issues and Nissan had trouble with is ZEOD RC. Check out Porsche's press release below, and read here for a more general race recap. STRONG PERFORMANCE BY PORSCHE 919 HYBRIDS BUT NO DREAM ENDING IN PROTOTYPE RETURN TO LE MANS Le Mans. After a strong performance by both Porsche 919 Hybrids, the Porsche Team was left empty-handed after a dramatic final stage of the race. Following more than 22 hours, car No. 20 driven by Timo Bernhard (Germany), Brendon Hartley (New Zealand) and Mark Webber (Australia) suffered a powertrain problem at the world's most famous endurance race, the 24 Hours of Le Mans. Earlier in the race the LMP1 class car was leading overall for a significant period of time. The second innovative and highly complex prototype – in the hands of Romain Dumas (France), Neel Jani (Switzerland) and Marc Lieb (Germany) – likewise proved to be very competitive, but was hampered by a drivetrain problem. However, their No. 14 car crossed the finish line under its own power. After a thrilling start to the race with changing weather conditions, numerous accidents and a relatively calm night, Bernhard took the overall lead in the No. 20. The longtime Porsche factory driver returned to the top spot after 20 of the 24 hours. At 12:36 (CET) on Sunday, he handed the leading car over to Webber. Less than 20 minutes later the Australian was forced to slow down and drove solely on electric power back to pit lane.

Aston Martin renames Vantage GT3 after Porsche throws hissy fit

Porsche has a long history of using the name "GT3" for its hardcore, naturally aspirated 911 models, and that means it's certainly not going to share it with the likes of Aston Martin. See, it seems the arrival of the Aston Martin Vantage GT3 at the 2015 Geneva Motor Show didn't sit well with Stuttgart, which opted to lawyer up. According to Goodwood Road and Racing, attorneys from both sides of the Channel have been in discussion for months over the issue, with Porsche arguing it's been using the GT3 name since 1999, and that makes it theirs. Aston, though, argues that the FIA GT3 racing series makes the name fair game for road cars. Moreover, the Brits point out that the alphanumeric was in use well before Porsche got its mitts on it – GRR rightly points out the Lotus Esprit GT3 hit the streets three years before the 996 GT3. And while we're on the subject, Bentley has its own GT3, but we're guessing its status as one of Porsche's siblings means its immune to this kind of squabbling. Rather than getting into a knock-down, drag-out courtroom brawl with one of the Volkswagen Group's prized brands, though, Aston has taken the high road. The company will rechristen both the road-going Vantage GT3 and Vantage racer as the GT12. While Porsche is no stranger to aggressively protecting what it views as its closely held vehicle names, we have to admit, it seems like Aston actually has something of a case. Do you think the Brits were right to settle and change the Vantage's name, or should they have taken the fight to Porsche? Have your say in Comments.

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.