1 Owner Low Miles Certified 6 Spd Stick Manual Power Glass Moonroof Sunroof Ipod on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Toyota and Subaru file patents for performance FR-S and BRZ

People have longed for a more powerful version of the Subaru BRZ, Scion FR-S, and Toyota GT86 since the triplets arrived on the market. So far, neither partner in the deal has launched a model to fully satiate that hunger. However, the Japanese patent office recently approved documents from Toyota for the design of a vehicle that looks just like the Subaru STI Performance Concept (pictured above). According to AutoGuide, the filing also gives Fuji Heavy Industries credit for the design. The STI Performance Concept debuted at this year's New York Auto Show as an early step in STI's attempt to expand its reach here. The BRZ-derived coupe featured a body with a ground-scraping front bumper, tweaked headlights, wider fenders, a massive rear wing, and diffuser with a center-exit exhaust. All of these elements also show up on the patent renderings. The concept was just as exciting under the hood because STI installed a 2.0-liter, turbocharged boxer four-cylinder from its GT300 racer, and upgrades for the chassis, suspension, and brakes came from the Japanese market's BRZ tS. While the coupe made hearts race, the company was clear it didn't necessarily plan to build the model. Patent filings aren't a guarantee for production, and even if this one does arrive in showrooms, it might not come to the US. That's because Subaru and Toyota have a history of creating Japan-exclusive versions like the tS or Style Cb. That being said, spy shots have revealed a camouflaged GT86 testing in Europe, and rumors indicate more power from the engine. Subie's boss has even confirmed the existence of a partnership to create a next-gen model. Related Video:

2016 Scion iM Review [w/video]

Scion is all grown up. When the brand launched in 2003, it was as if Scion wanted to be the anti-Toyota. You could almost imagine it saying, "We aren't our parents, dude. We're different." Scion's decision to eschew mainstream vehicles was largely successful. The original xA, xB, and tC were affordable, economical, stylish, and – most importantly – different. But the brand's aging lineup couldn't keep the interest of the young, urban buyers it so coveted. Sales suffered severely after the 2009 industry collapse and have failed to return to their 2006 peak. So much like the bearded 20-something that's finally realized an artisanal headcheese startup isn't going to pay the bills, Scion has finally introduced its first truly mainstream model, the 2016 iM. You already know the basics on the iM, courtesy of Managing Editor Steven Ewing's testing in California in June. But since there's little substitute for more mileage and extra time with the car, we ventured out to Michigan's second largest city, Grand Rapids, for a second look. The iM is exactly the kind of vehicle Scion needs right now. Ewing spent most of his time on California's beautiful winding roads, but our second go in the iM was much more sedate, consisting largely of freeway cruising and some city driving. In short, these miles backed up our original assessment: the iM is exactly the kind of vehicle Scion needs right now. But that's not without a few problems. We spent almost all of our drive time behind the wheel of the continuously variable transmission model which, in many ways is better than the six-speed manual-equipped car we originally tested. Toyota's CVT works well; it's on par with the industry's best. The transmission keeps the revs low and responds quickly to throttle inputs, but at the same time, the tach needle is quick to retreat when acceleration isn't demanded. The stepped nature of the CVT is a bit off-putting at first – it feels a lot more sudden on the "upshifts" – but it's easy to ignore. Weirdly, there are no paddle shifters, but you can still pick your "gears" via the floor-mounted shifter. The iM doesn't hate a little bit of fun. We played with the CVT's sport setting, and while we wouldn't recommend using it on a regular basis, we liked the way it kicked up the revs upon corner entry. The engine never felt flat-footed midway through a turn, giving the impression that the iM doesn't hate a little bit of fun.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study