2000 Subaru Impreza Rs Coupe 2-door 2.5l on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Ever wonder how to really pronounce Japanese automaker names?

People tend to get very set in their ways when it comes to the pronunciation of words. Just look at the endless debates over whether or not to say the final 'e' in Porsche (which you should in terms of correct German enunciation). Or the argument about whether to follow the British convention and give the 'u' in Jaguar a special delivery or to say the 'ua' diphthong as more of a 'w' sound, as usually happens in the US.
This short video doesn't answer either of those automotive questions, but it does allow a native Japanese speaker to demonstrate the accepted pronunciations for several, major automakers from the country. One benefit is that it clears up the occasional debate over whether Nissan should be said with a long or short 'i' sound. Also, listen closely to how the female host says Mazda as Matsuda, the way it's actually said in the language. Even if this doesn't change the way you enunciate these brands, at least now you know the accurate way in Japanese.

Subaru uses a mime and a toy car to explain why it loves the boxer engine

I will freely admit to struggling with why Subaru continues to stubbornly employ a boxer engine design while so few other automakers do the same. After all, with twice the number of cylinder heads and cams as a traditional inline four-cylinder engine, a boxer four is more complex, more expensive to manufacture and more cumbersome to service with few tangible benefits. Until recently, the company's engines struggled to meet the fuel economy numbers of its competitors while offering no real boon in horsepower or torque. Subaru seems to recognize I'm not the only one scratching my head.
In order to help us non-believers understand what's what, the company has employed a pair of mimes, a toy car and a few clay engines to demonstrate the folly of every other automaker on the planet. Subaru says the boxer offers up a lower center of gravity than either an inline four-cylinder engine or a V6, which I will gladly concede. The company also says the design offers up smoother operation.
I'll offer just two counterpoints here. First, an engine with a low center of gravity is excellent, but when vehicles like the Forester, XV Crosstrek and Outback boast more ground clearance than most mainstream SUVs, that argument flies out the window. Second, anyone who's spent any amount of time behind the wheel of a vehicle equipped with an inline four and then proceeded to move into one propelled by a boxer can tell you the latter has all of the idling manners of a small tractor. Check out the video below to see for yourself.

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