2011 Porsche Panamera 4 / With Sunroof / Fully Loaded / Low Miles / One Owner on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Why you must buy an air-cooled Porsche 911 now

"Because" might be a good response to our headline, but as a vintage (purists might call 'proper') Porsche 911 is hardly cheap, we suspect you'll need a better explanation than that. Enter Drive editor Mike Spinelli.
Spinelli sits down with Zac Moseley and Mick Prichinello from Classic Car Club Manhattan to first explain why the market for old, air-cooled 911s has gotten so hot over the past few years, and to discuss if it's a bubble that's about to burst. Following that, this video is really is just three guys sitting around talking about old Porsches for 35 minutes. Which, you know, we're pretty onboard with.
Scroll down and have a look at the latest episode of After/Drive, from Drive.

2014 Porsche Panamera 4S Executive

If the idea of a Porsche sedan (or, long hatchback) is still off-putting to you, then you might want to look away now. For 2014, the polarizing Panamera has received a midcycle refresh bringing slightly different styling, as well as adding two new models to the lineup, the S E-Hybrid and the stretched-wheelbase Executive. Having focused most of my recent trip to Germany on a First Drive of the intriguing plug-in Panamera, I also got to spend some time with the roomier Executive model.
Offered in both 4S and Turbo guise, the Panamera Executive has been stretched by almost six inches for the sole purpose of improving rear passenger space. Although it's hard to imagine anyone would willingly buy a Porsche and opt to sit in the back seat, I'd have to say that if I'm going to be chauffeured around in a car, why not make it a Porsche? For the most part, though, I'm guessing that many Panamera Executive sedans will be owned by people who want to one-up their buddy driving a stretched BMW 7 Series or Mercedes-Benz S-Class.
Driving Notes:

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.