2013 Porsche Cayenne Turbo! Best Color Combo White/umber! Fresh Service! Loaded! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

The 10 car brands most expensive to maintain over 10 years

Car maintenance has got to be one of the least fun things you can do with your free time, right behind going to the dentist and filing your taxes. However, depending on the brand you buy, your time spent at the shop could be much more than you bargained for. Consumer Reports’ new study on the most- and least-expensive-to-maintain car brands found that European car companies are most likely to break your wallet with costs nearly five times that of the automakers at the other end of the spectrum. Land Rover had the highest ten-year maintenance costs, at an average of $19,250. Porsche was second worst with $14,090 in costs. 10 car brands most expensive to maintain over 10 years: Land Rover: $19,250 Porsche: $14,090 Mercedes-Benz: $10,525 Audi: $9,890 BMW: $9,500 Volvo: $9,285 Infiniti: $8,500 Acura: $7,800 Mini: $7,625 Subaru: $7,200 The Euro brands at the “top” of this list arenÂ’t all that surprising. Land Rover has consistently landed as one of the most expensive vehicle brands to maintain for years now, though Porsche is generally viewed as being one of the more solid performance brands. That could suggest that some models donÂ’t always require more repairs, but the fixes they do need are significantly more expensive. Tesla, Buick, and Toyota were the three cheapest to maintain car brands, with 10-year maintenance costs of $4,035, $4,900, and $4,900, respectively. Consumer Reports noted that these numbers could be slightly skewed due to the fact that some automakers offer free maintenance for the first few years of ownership, and all companies cover their new vehicles for at least a few years after the purchase. Routine maintenance is a great way to avoid costly repairs over time, as itÂ’s much cheaper to catch a problem before it starts causing other issues. Check your oil, rotate your tires, and avoid driving like a wild person, and youÂ’ll likely fare much better than others, even if you own one of the scarier-to-maintain brands.

Porsche names new motorsport chief

Though it may have expanded into crossovers and sedans, Porsche is still a company with racing at its heart. You might even argue that Cayenne and Panamera sales only serve to fund the company's motorsports activities. Competition-spec 911 coupes still make up a large portion of the grid in any GT racing series, and those activities are presided over by the Porsche GT division (separate from its LMP1 program), which has just announced a changing of the guard.
Porsche's GT unit - which is responsible both for racing models like the 911 RSR and road-going models like the 911 GT3 - has until now been steered by Hartmut Kristen (pictured above, left) in his capacity as Vice President of Motorsport at Porsche AG. During his ten-year tenure, Kristen gave birth to the RS Spyder that competed in the American Le Mans Series and the pioneering 911 GT3 R Hybrid. He also fostered what Porsche characterizes as "arguably the most comprehensive youth development program in motor racing" and saw the marque return to Le Mans last year with a dominant 1-2 class victory.
Kristen, now 59 years old, is leaving the German automaker, but will remain an advisor to the company's R&D department. Taking over as VP of Motorsport will be Dr. Frank-Steffen Walliser, who has until now been head of the 918 Spyder project (a responsibility he will continue). Walliser (pictured above, right) was previously Porsche's general manager for motorsport strategies and will now be responsible for Porsche's GT projects on and off the track, while Fritz Enzinger continues at the helm of the LMP1 program in pursuit of better results next year than the 919 Hybrid achieved at Le Mans last month.

Audi CEO's Dieselgate arrest threatens fragile truce among VW stakeholders

FRANKFURT — The arrest and detention of Audi's chief executive forces Volkswagen Group's competing stakeholders to renegotiate the delicate balance of power that has helped keep Audi CEO Rupert Stadler in office. Volkswagen's directors are discussing how to run Audi, its most profitable division, following the arrest of the brand's long-time boss on Monday as part of Germany's investigations into the carmaker's emissions cheating scandal. The supervisory board of Audi, meanwhile, has suspended Stadler and appointed Dutchman Bram Schot as an interim replacement, a source familiar with the matter said on Tuesday. Schot joined the Volkswagen Group in 2011 after having worked as president and CEO of Mercedes-Benz Italia. He has been Audi's board member for sales and marketing since last September. The discussions risk reigniting tensions among VW's controlling Piech and Porsche families, its powerful labor representatives and its home region of Lower Saxony. VW has insisted the development of illegal software, also known as "defeat devices," installed in millions of cars was the work of low-level employees, and that no management board members were involved. U.S. prosecutors have challenged this by indicting VW's former chief executive Martin Winterkorn. Stadler's arrest raises further questions. Audi and VW said on Monday that Stadler was presumed innocent unless proved otherwise. Munich prosecutors detained Stadler to prevent him from obstructing a probe into Audi's emissions cheating, they said on Monday. Stadler is being investigated for suspected fraud and false advertising. Here are the main factors deciding the fate of Audi. Background: Audi's role in Dieselgate Volkswagen Group was plunged into crisis in 2015 after U.S. regulators found Europe's biggest carmaker had equipped cars with software to cheat emissions tests on diesel engines. The technique of using software to detect a pollution test procedure, and to increase the effectiveness of emissions filters to mask pollution levels only during tests, was first developed at Audi. "In designing the defeat device, VW engineers borrowed the original concept of the dual-mode, emissions cycle-beating software from Audi," VW said in its plea agreement with U.S. authorities in January 2017, in which the company agreed to pay a $4.3 billion fine to reach a settlement with U.S. regulators.