2012 Porsche 911 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Is Porsche planning a GT5?

A trademark application filed in Europe suggests Porsche could be planning a GT5 model to slot at the bottom of its track-focused sports car lineup. The German automaker's GT skunkworks division in Weissach earned its reputation with enthusiasts producing the GT3 and GT3 RS versions of the 911, and previously offered GT2 and even GT1 models as well (although the latter was a limited homologation special). It recently extended itself slightly downmarket with the launch of the Cayman GT4, but this trademark application – already reportedly accepted in Germany and currently being reviewed by the European office – suggests an even more accessible model could be on its way, Autocar reports. Just what form a GT5 would take, however, remains a mystery. The numerical progression would suggest that Porsche is planning a hardcore version of an even smaller sports car, if such a project ever got off the ground to slot in below the Boxster and Cayman. Given that the 911 has bred both GT2 and GT3 versions, Weissach could alternatively be planning an additional GT version of the Cayman, or planning a hardcore version of the Boxster. The prospect of a GT5 version of the Macan, Cayenne, or Panamera seems unlikely as the alphanumeric designation has never been applied to anything other than a two-door coupe, but then we never really know what the future will bring: Before 2002 Porsche had never done anything with more than two doors altogether. These designations are typically borrowed from their corresponding racing class, and of course there is no GT5 category. But then most of these racing classes have been amalgamated into GT3 anyway, unless Porsche is planning on using the name for its own entry-level spec racing series. But at this point we're just spitballing. It's just as likely that the company has simply filed the trademark application to keep its options open for the future. Related Video:

The mid-engine Porsche backstory

As an automaker's identity evolves over years, its signature becomes defined by any number of factors - heritage (Mercedes-Benz), image (Lamborghini), or market share (Toyota). In the case of Porsche, it was an engineering quirk that forged the German company's most enduring character trait.
Porsche would not have survived - let alone, thrived - in today's saturated landscape had it not been for the 911, and that slope-tailed sports car wouldn't have sprung to life without its predecessor, the 356. While phenomenal success of those rear-engine icons built the company, forays into the mid-engine configuration have played a significant part in establishing the brand's identity.
The Mid-Engine Prototype Of Ferry Porsche's Dreams