Certified One-owner Clean Carfax 26k Miles! Navi,bose,21 Alloys,cooled Seats on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Porsche finally moving ahead with flat four engine

When Porsche released the first Boxster in 1996 and the first Cayman in 2005, the idea was to create an entry-level model for the German automaker's sports car range. The latest iterations of both closely related models, however, have begun to encroach dangerously on the 911's territory, particularly in their newest GTS specifications. That could be about to change, however, with the introduction of a four-cylinder engine for the compact mid-engined coupe and roadster.
According to Automotive News, Porsche is finally preparing to launch a new boxer four engine in the Boxster and Cayman, following years of speculation. The engine would be based on the same architecture as the company's famous flat six, but with two fewer cylinders to cut weight. Don't expect it to cut much in the way of performance, however: Porsche chief Matthias Muller indicates that the new engine could produce as much as 395 horsepower - significantly more than even the 340hp flat six in the Cayman GTS, suggesting that the engine could even find its way into the 911 as well.
It's no more clear which markets would get the four-cylinder engine, either. But wherever it is offered and in whichever form, it wouldn't be the first time we'd see a Porsche with a four-pot engine. Not by a long shot. Both the classic 912 and 356 were powered by boxer fours, as was the 914 - not to mention the 718 pictured above and the iconic 550 Spyder. The front-engined 924, 944 and 968 packed inline-four engines, but the last of those were discontinued in the 1990s. The prospect of a four-cylinder Boxster/Cayman has been rumored for many years now, most recently joined by the possibility of a four-pot Macan as well.

Porsche testing four-cylinder Boxster at the N?rburgring

Porsche recently introduced a four-cylinder version of the new Macan for markets outside of North America, carrying Zuffenhausen's first four-pot since the 968 ended its production run the better part of two decades ago. But you can bet the compact crossover won't be the only Porsche to get the four banger before all's said and done. These spy shots, we're told, are evidence of just that.
Spotted undergoing testing at the Nürburgring (where else), this modified Boxster, our spy photographers tell us, sounds more like a four-cylinder engine than the flat six that's powered (in displacements ranging from 2.5 liters to 3.4) every version of the little roadster since its introduction in 1996, the year after the last four-cylinder Porsche ended production.
The test mule is also wearing modified wheel arches and aerodynamic aids under the bumpers, front and rear. Just what they're doing there we're not sure, but we'll probably find out sooner or later.

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.