Turbo Nav Cd Awd Full Custom Carbon Interior Wide Body Build on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Investigators blame speed in fatal Paul Walker crash

When the tragic news first came in that actor Paul Walker had been killed in a car crash, family, friends and fans were left searching for answers. They now have at least one key question answered, with the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department blaming "unsafe speed" for the fatal accident.
According to a statement released by the LACSD, "Investigators determined the cause of the fatal solo-vehicle collision was unsafe speed for the roadway conditions". The investigation into the November, 2013 crash determined that Walker's 2005 Porsche Carrera GT had been driven by his business partner and racer, Roger Rodas, at speeds between 80 and 93 miles per hour - less than the 100+ mph initially suspected, but still far too fast for the road on which they were traveling, which carried a posted limit of 45 mph.
In the investigation into the death of the Fast & Furious star and his friend, some people were quick to finger the Porsche in which they were riding as the culprit. The Carrera GT does, after all, have the reputation of being a notoriously difficult car to control. But after an exhaustive investigation, law enforcement officials in California have vindicated the car and dismissed any mechanical fault as the cause of the accident.

Porsche testing four-cylinder Boxster at the N?rburgring

Porsche recently introduced a four-cylinder version of the new Macan for markets outside of North America, carrying Zuffenhausen's first four-pot since the 968 ended its production run the better part of two decades ago. But you can bet the compact crossover won't be the only Porsche to get the four banger before all's said and done. These spy shots, we're told, are evidence of just that.
Spotted undergoing testing at the Nürburgring (where else), this modified Boxster, our spy photographers tell us, sounds more like a four-cylinder engine than the flat six that's powered (in displacements ranging from 2.5 liters to 3.4) every version of the little roadster since its introduction in 1996, the year after the last four-cylinder Porsche ended production.
The test mule is also wearing modified wheel arches and aerodynamic aids under the bumpers, front and rear. Just what they're doing there we're not sure, but we'll probably find out sooner or later.

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.