Certified 1-owner Clean Carfax 10k Miles Sport Chrono,19turbo Ll Whls,bi-xenon on 2040-cars

Auto blog

McLaren P1 squares off against Porsche 918 in Evo track battle

Evo's side-by-side comparison of the McLaren P1 against the Porsche 918 Spyder isn't the first time we've seen England and Germany's ultimate automotive weapons sized up together; last month, Autocar tested them over the standing mile, with a Ducati 1199 Superleggera playing the joker. Evo throws a few curves at its test, though, taking the supercars to Anglesey Circuit in Wales to see which will lay down the fastest lap time with scribe Jethro Bovington at the wheel. In case the numbers haven't yet been seared into your memory, while both are assisted by electric motors, the 3,069-pound, rear-wheel drive P1 gets on with 903 horsepower and 664 pound-feet from a 3.8-liter, twin-turbocharged V8. The 3,750-pound, all-wheel-drive 918 Spyder does its job with 795 hp and 575 lb-ft surging out of a naturally aspirated, 4.6-liter V8. We're not told know which circuit layout he uses for the test, but both cars comfortably eclipse the mark set by the fastest coupe Evo's driven around it so far, the Ferrari 458 Speciale. Then, in an epilogue occasioned by a tire change, one of the supercars comfortably eclipses its own time again, before Bovington declares one the master of the track and the other the ruler of the street. Enjoy finding out which is which in the video above.

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.