1966 Porsche 912 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar Land Rover seeks to block U.S. imports of Porsche, Audi, Lamborghini, VW SUVs

You wouldn’t know it was about Jags and Lambos, to judge by its rather dry name: In the Matter of Certain Vehicle Control Systems. But thatÂ’s the complaint Jaguar Land Rover Automotive Plc filed on Thursday to block U.S. imports of Porsche, Lamborghini, Audi and Volkswagen sport utility vehicles it says are using its patented Terrain Response technology without permission. Jaguar Land Rover, a British carmaker owned by IndiaÂ’s Tata Motors Ltd., said in its filing with the U.S. International Trade Commission that the technology helps negotiate a “broad range of surfaces” and is a key feature in JaguarÂ’s F-Pace and Land Rover Discovery vehicles. “JLR seeks to protect itself and its United States operations from companies that have injected infringing products into the U.S. market that incorporate, without any license from JLR, technology developed by JLR and protected by its patent,” JaguarÂ’s lawyer, Matthew Moore, said in the filing. Representatives of Volkswagen didnÂ’t immediately respond to emails seeking comment on the complaint. Jaguar wants to block imports of PorscheÂ’s Cayenne; LamborghiniÂ’s Urus; AudiÂ’s Q8, Q7, Q5, A6 Allroad and e-tron vehicles; and VWÂ’s Tiguan vehicles. It said there are plenty of other luxury midsize SUV and compact crossover vehicles to meet consumer demand if the SUVs are banned from the U.S. Still, the premium Porsche and Audi lines provide much of the profit VW is using to fund its investments in technology for electric vehicles, autonomous vehicles and further innovations. In addition to the four brands, Volkswagen Group owns other upscale nameplates, including Bentley and Bugatti. The International Trade Commission is an independent, quasi-judicial agency that investigates complaints of unfair trade practices, like patent infringement. It canÂ’t award damages but does have the power to block products from entering the U.S. Owners of patents and trade secrets like it because it can work faster than the federal district courts -- the typical investigation is completed in 15 to 18 months. But Jaguar also filed patent lawsuits against the companies in federal courts in Delaware and New Jersey, seeking cash compensation for the use of the technology. Those cases are likely to be put on hold once the trade commission launches its investigation. The case is In the Matter of Certain Vehicle Control Systems, 337-3508, U.S. International Trade Commission (Washington).

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.

40+ cars that barely avoid the gas guzzler tax

The Gas Guzzler schedule, with mpg ratings and charges that haven't changed since 1991, lays out which fuel-swillers owe what to Uncle Sam.
I started thinking about the "Gas Guzzler Tax" - considerably less well known as The Energy Tax Act of 1978 - when I was driving Dodge's new Challenger SRT Hellcat last week. Unsurprisingly for a car that can burn 1.5 gallons of gas per minute at max tilt, theoretically able to empty a full tank of premium in about 13 minutes, the Hellcat will be subject to the Gas Guzzler Tax schedule when it goes on sale.