S Suv 4.5l Cd 14 Speakers Am/fm Radio Bose Digital Am/fm Sound System Abs Brakes on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Porsche finally gives up the goods on 2014 Macan

Preparing a beachhead in the marketplace for the 2014 Porsche Macan crossover has been a years-long project for the German company. We've been hearing and reporting on rumors of the vehicle from its ideation stage and have covered the Macan's birth thoroughly over the last 12 months, including teasers, rumors, spy shots, leaked videos and more. Now, just ahead of the LA Auto Show-debut of Porsche's first-ever compact crossover, the wait for details is at an end.
Porsche will offer the crossover in two flavors to start: Macan S and Macan Turbo. The S model will be fitted with a twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter V6 engine that makes 340 horsepower and will push the vehicle from 0 to 60 miles per hour in 5.2 seconds, then on to a top speed of 156 miles per hour. The Macan Turbo has even more impressive figures on all fronts: an all-new, 400-horsepower, twin-turbo 3.6-liter V6 engine; 0-60 mph in 4.6 seconds; top speed of 164 mph. Both models make use of Porsche's seven-speed PDK dual-clutch transmission as standard.
As impressive as these potent powertrains are the brakes Porsche is fitting to its new crossover. Six-piston monobloc fixed-caliper brakes live up front, grabbing 13.78-inch discs on the S model and tremendous 14.17-inch discs on the Macan Turbo. We're expecting serious stopping performance, to say the least.

24 Hours of Le Mans an on-and-off love affair

There was little usual about this year's 24 Hours of Le Mans - intermittent rain in the weeks before the race meant cars didn't get on track as much as they wanted, and intermittent rain during the race meant cars went off track a lot more than they wanted. The race started with a wet track, and one of the records broken because of the random downpours was the number of times the safety car led the field - 11 times this year - although the record of two hours and 53 minutes of lapping behind the safety car, set in 2011, was not eclipsed.
None of that served to dampen the action. With little more than an hour left in the race there were cars still only a few seconds apart fighting for position, leads still changing because of pit stops and everyone drafting anyone they could.
Things didn't go the usual way up front, either - well, not exactly...