Porsche 944 1984 Original 83k Miles on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche 911 GT3 Cup ANDIAL Edition First Drive

There is only one Porsche 911 GT3 Cup ANDIAL Edition on the planet, and its owner is standing patiently in the hot pits at Oklahoma's Hallett Motor Racing Circuit, watching attentively as his prized possession circles the challenging road course at speed. I'm the lucky soul strapped firmly in the cockpit of the white-and-blue racecar. The tight carbon-fiber seat is cutting into my hips, the racket from the gearbox is making me deaf and a river of sweat is flowing off the tip my nose – blame the high ambient temperatures combined with the stress of driving someone else's expensive machine on an utterly unfamiliar circuit. But don't expect me to complain, gripe or come into the pits early, as I'm having the time of my life – I've eagerly waited nearly half-a-year for this moment, and short of me blacking out, there's no way I'm cutting it short. It's been said that ANDIAL-prepared cars and engines have claimed victories on every major racetrack in this country. Belting into the driver's seat of an ANDIAL-prepared Porsche fulfills a personal dream that started decades earlier when I thumbtacked a picture of a white Porsche 935 on my dorm room wall, its colorful bodywork stenciled with "ANDIAL" along the bottom of the driver's door. In the 1980s, the name of the privately held racing company was synonymous with Porsche and victory – it's been said that ANDIAL-prepared cars and engines have claimed victories on every major racetrack in this country. As its founders retired and the company focused on smaller specialty projects, ANDIAL's business model changed, but its relationship with Porsche remained strong. In early 2013, it was announced that the Porsche Motorsports North America, Inc. (PMNA) had purchased the brand – yet there was still no word as to how the famed ANDIAL name, an anagram made from the names of the founding members – the late Arnold Wagner (AN), Dieter Inzenhofer (DI) and former PMNA president and current consultant Alwin Springer (AL) would be used. Some answers emerged in February of this year when I received a phone call from Porsche. The company offered to have me to visit ANDIAL's shop in Southern California, which is now operating entirely under the direction of PMNA. Entering one of the shop's bays, I found myself face-to-face with a lightly used 997 GT3 Cup racecar. The vehicle was in the early stages of a complete teardown and rebuild – in preparation for its rollout in traditional red, white and blue ANDIAL livery.

2012 TechArt Porsche 911 is visually dazzling, both inside and out

One way to ensure that your brand-new Porsche 911 (a.k.a. 991) won't look like the one in your neighbor's driveway is to give TechArt a call. The famed German tuner has rolled out its version of the latest Carrera and Carrera S at the Geneva Motor Show and trust us, it won't be mistaken for anything from the factory in Stuttgart.
Up front, TechArt has fitted its own unique two-part spoiler with integrated splitter while more aggressive side skirts adorn the rocker panels. The rear has a new lower diffuser, wrapped around the TechArt exhaust, and a large fixed rear wing (complete with an integrated third brake light). Look more closely to notice the subtle trim panels on the exterior mirrors and front headlights. The wheels are lightweight forged 20- and 21-inch alloys with matching paint on their rims.
Inside the heavily modified cabin are even more drastic enhancements (let's say TechArt has gone over the top). Don't let the aluminum pedals be a distraction as you inspect the black Alcantara and high-grade leather covering nearly every square inch. Flirting with gaudy, the dark upholstery is contrasted by vehicle-color-coordinated stitching and painted trim splashed throughout. However, the icing on the cake is an insanely thick TechArt three-spoke sports steering wheel.

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.