2012 Porsche Cayenne Awd Auto V6 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

New J.D. Power Initial Quality Study puts Porsche, GM in spotlight

J.D. Power and Associates has released its annual Initial Quality Study, and this year, Porsche and General Motors took the spotlight. The study, which asks new car owners to report problems experienced during the first 90 days of ownership, found that overall, the industry averages 113 problems per 100 vehicles.
Porsche managed a score of just 80 problems per 100 vehicles, while GMC took the second spot on the podium with 90. Lexus filled out the top three with 94 problems per 100 vehicles, followed by Infiniti at 95 and Chevrolet at 97. The study also looks at specific models, and found the Lexus LS to enjoy the best initial quality at 59 problems per 100 vehicles.
Interestingly enough, the report found that around two-thirds of most owner problems experienced in the first 90 days are attributable to vehicle design instead of mechanical failure. Specifically - echoing a refrain we've been hearing for the last few years - owners are having a hard time figuring out how to use the technology present in their new vehicles. Head over to the J.D. Power site for more information, or scroll down below for the company's related press release.

Porsche's high-tech 'mirror' turns every car into a Macan

Porsche calls it the "Magic Mirror," but it's less a reflective device and more 12 high-def screens that track drivers pulling into the valet area at a mall in Los Angeles. As they pass the screens in their cars, they get to see what they'd look like pulling up in a Macan, Porsche's newest and smallest crossover. It could be considered the experiential evolution of a prior campaign that let people imagine how a Porsche would look in their driveways, an idea that was taken even further by a dealer in Toronto a few years later. Check out the video to see how it was done and how it was received.

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.