2011 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Studiotorino shows new Cayman-based Moncenisio sports car

While the recent bankruptcy of Bertone shows that it has become very difficult to be a coachbuilder today, it seems there is still a business case in creating unique bodies for premium vehicles. Case in point, Studiotorino a small, Italian coachbuilder that has been creating limited-edition cars since 2005. Its latest creation is the Moncenisio, which debuted as a prototype at the National Automobile Museum of Turin on March 21. It's named after the 1902 Susa-Moncenisio race in Italy, the first automotive hillclimb in the world.
The Moncenisio begins life as Porsche Cayman S, and each car will be built to order with a planned production run of 19 examples. The chassis, mechanicals and engine are all left untouched. The only thing that Studiotorino alters are the body panels and interior appointments. Prices start at at a heady 145,000 euros ($200,420 US), plus the cost of the donor vehicle.
Architect Daniele Gaglione penned the shape of the Moncenisio, taking inspiration from the 1963 Porsche 904. The sports coupes receive carbon fiber pieces that replace the front bumper, side panels and rear bumper. Studiotorino also covers the rear side windows with welded metal panels. The design is still clearly a Cayman, especially from the front, but the extended roof and support pillars create a new look from behind, which features a new exhaust treatment and rear spoiler. The interior receives leather upholstery on the engine compartment cover, the partition between the engine and seats, ceiling and A-pillars. Scroll down to view a walkaround of the Moncenisio and read the full press release about it.

Porsche's former CEO Wiedeking to stand trial over VW-share manipulation

Former Porsche CEO Wendelin Wiedeking (left in the above photo) could potentially be facing some time in the slammer after all. The last we had heard, he and former Chief Financial Officer Holger Haerter (right) had avoided a trial in April due to a lack of evidence. However, an appeals court in Stuttgart has looked at the case again and overruled the earlier decision, finding that the executives should be tried for share manipulation during Porsche's failed attempt to take over Volkswagen in 2008, Bloomberg reports.
The judges in the appeal "list numerous indications that could suggest that there was a hidden decision to increase the stake as they could suggest the opposite evaluation by the lower court," said Stefan Schueler, a spokesperson for the court, in a statement cited by Bloomberg. Wiedeking and Haerter put out their own releases saying that there was no merit to the charges.
The prosecutors allege that Wiedeking and Haerter had a plan to buy up VW stock options in 2008 to take the automotive giant over but hid it from investors. The whole thing was a massive failure and eventually allowed VW the chance to acquire Porsche and forced the two execs to step down. In addition to the criminal investigation, hedge funds have attempted to sue the company multiple times in civil court for the same reason, but they have repeatedly failed.

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.