2010 Turbo (4dr Hb Turbo) Used Turbo 4.8l V8 32v Automatic Awd Hatchback Premium on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Pininfarina teases its Tesla- and Bugatti-baiting EV supercar

Pininfarina isn't being bashful when it comes to getting into the car business. The Italian design house has revealed a sketch of the PF0 Concept, an electric supercar aimed directly at the world's fastest and most expensive vehicles. With upward of 1,000 horsepower, along with an expected price in the millions of dollars, this extreme EV is meant as a calling card for Pininfarina's upcoming range of electric cars and SUVs. So should the likes of Tesla, Porsche, Ferrari, Bugatti and Lamborghini be worried? Pininfarina might be new to building its own cars, but the company has many decades of experience designing and engineering some of the most desirable cars of all time — including many of the finest supercars to have worn a Ferrari badge on their nose. As we reported earlier this year, Pininfarina has teamed with Indian auto manufacturer, Mahindra, to develop a range of high-end EVs. With this roughly $500 million investment, not to mention some engineering help from Croatian supercar manufacturer, Rimac, Pininfarina aims to start high. The company will first introduce a hypercar, based on the PF0 Concept, within two years, then bring along a range of more affordable electric cars and SUVs. These will more directly take on the likes of Porsche Cayenne, Lamborghini Urus, and Tesla Model X. So yes, if you're in the business of building expensive cars, especially ones with a lot of batteries positioned inside them, Pininfarina's plans for the PF0 (that's a zero, not the letter "O," by the way) should make you sit up and take notice. "Automobili Pininfarina is a pioneering new business created to service the most discerning clients in the world," said Michael Perschke, CEO for Automobili Pininfarina. "Our product portfolio will launch with an innovative, zero-emissions hypercar that represents the progression we aim to make at the pinnacle of the luxury and sports car market." According to its press release, Pininfarina is currently presenting its "business and product plans to prospective retailer partners, clients and media in New York this week." After its tour of the Big Apple, look for Pininfarina to officially reveal the PF0 Concept during Monterey Car Week in August. Related Video: Design/Style Green Bugatti Lamborghini Porsche Tesla Electric Future Vehicles Luxury Performance Pebble Beach supercar mahindra hypercar Rimac

MotorWeek proves '90s were awesome with Supra, Stealth, RX-7, Corvette, 968, 300ZX comparo

Oh, the heady days of 1993, back when the Clinton Presidency was just getting underway, and it seemed like every hot new rock band was coming out of Seattle. Sports cars in the US had finally shaken off the shackles that slowed them during the '70s and '80s, and you could buy any number of legitimately quick vehicles again. MotorWeek recently went digging into its archives to find this six-model test from 1993 showing off some of the best semi-affordable performance coupes that money could buy at the time, and it's priceless.
Featuring the 1994 model year Toyota Supra in twin-turbo guise and MY 1993 versions of the Porsche 968, Nissan 300ZX TT, Mazda RX-7, Dodge Stealth R/T Turbo and Chevrolet Corvette LT-1, MotorWeek definitely covered all of the bases. One thing that might surprise younger readers is these cars' performance. The video only provides 0-60 acceleration times, but several of these vehicles would still be considered pretty potent today - over 20 years since going on sale. The Supra is especially impressive, hitting 60 miles per hour in just 5 seconds. Even today, that's nothing to sneeze at.
Given their performance potential and still-attractive looks, it's amazing that some of these coupes are old enough to drink now. The progress of interior design and safety equipment in the intervening years is pretty shocking, though. In most of these models, having two airbags is touted as a big deal. Scroll down to watch a Throwback Thursday blast from the past about some of the '90s best sports cars.

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.