1964 Porsche 356 C Coupe Project on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Father-son team grows close by building tuned Porsche

We've seen several heartwarming videos of kids bonding over cars with their parents, whether racing together or giving them as gifts. The story of Leh Keen and his father McGrath, though, is somewhat different. Not many dads are looking for a vehicle quite this mental.
As Leh tells it, his dad saw a video online of one of the wild Porsches from Japanese tuner Rauh-Welt Begriff and decided that he needed one of the creations in his own garage. Since Leh knows something about cars himself as a driver for Alex Job Racing in the United SportsCar Championship, McGrath put his son in charge of managing the build from the company.
When the car made it to the US for completion from Rauh's famed builder Nakai, father and son bonded over the red, widebody 993-platform 911. The final product is certainly eye-catching. Scroll down to watch the video that features not only an engrossing father-son tale but also a seriously wicked, tuned Porsche from one of Japan's finest.

Watch 1,208 Porsche 911s collect at Silverstone for world record

Porsche has been spending the majority of 2013 celebrating the 50th birthday of the 911, with its latest stunt taking the German brand to the home of British motorsports, Silverstone. To celebrate, Porsche invited enthusiasts to take their personal 911s on a lap of the former airfield, and boy, did the Porschephiles show up. 1,208 911s took part in the lap around the Grand Prix circuit, making it the largest-ever gathering of the iconic, rear-engined cars.
This wasn't just a celebration of 50 years for the 911, though. Funds raised were channeled towards Hope For Tomorrow, a cancer charity that works with the United Kingdom's National Health Service in operating mobile chemothereapy units that make life just a little bit easier on cancer patients.
Take a look at the long video below, and enjoy the passing of what are likely examples of every 911 model ever built.

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.