Technology oriented cars fare best on J.D. Power & Associate's APEAL study, led by Porsche, with Jaguar, BMW and Mercedes-Benz (tied) and Lexus making up the rest of the top five. APEAL stands for Automotive Performance, Execution, and Layout, and is a touchie-feelie survey of what excites buyers about their new cars. Basically, if you build a high-end, technology-oriented, exciting brand, you're likely to score near the top. And if you're near the bottom, as Kia, Pontiac, Jeep, Subaru, and Suzuki are, it's tougher to attract buyers or get good word of mouth.

Porsche has been the top scorer since 2005 on APEAL and also has improved its standing each year. Over the past three years, only Volkswagen has shown more improvement on APEAL, moving from the lower rungs three years ago (No. 27) to No. 14 this year. The top 20 brands are above average. Others with significant gains over the past three years have been BMW, Jaguar, Mini, Saturn, Mercedes-Benz, Saab, Cadillac, Lexus, and Audi. Those with the biggest three-year drops in APEAL scores, relative to the industry average, have been: Hummer (biggest decline), Pontiac, Jeep, Subaru, and Suzuki. Some of the drop may be related to what buyers think of brands with gas guzzlers across the model line. Land Rover over three years fell from 2 points out of first place three years ago to No. 9 this year, and Hummer has fallen from No. 8 to No. 19.

Top 10: 7 Europeans, 2 Asian, 1 American
This year the top 10 comprises seven European cars; two Asian cars, Lexus and Infiniti; and one American car, Cadillac. The only non-luxury brands above average are Volkswagen, Scion, and Mazda, along with three that might be luxury or not, depending on your definition: Mini, GMC, and Buick. According to Power, "APEAL measures owners' delight with the design, content, layout and performance of their new vehicles."

What it means?
What does all this mean for buyers? With most cars pretty reliable now, you might want to consider brands that tickle your fancy. They're more likely to have the technology that entertains and keeps you safe on long trips. Since other owners feel good about them, they're likely to be popular in the future, and that helps resale value. Conversely, if you want a good deal and don't care what others think about what you drive, you might start at the bottom of the rankings and work up. For example: No matter that Subaru is one from the bottom; the Forester is an excellent tall wagon / SUV replacement. Hyundai, No. 31 of 36, builds solid, reliable, if unexciting cars, although the Hyundai Genesis could change the world view of Hyundai.

More trouble for U.S. automakers
This is another study that doesn't augur well for the traditional U.S. automakers. Of the dozen U.S. brands, only GM had more than brand at or above average (4 of 7), while Ford had just one of three, and Chrysler had none of three. And that's about how most analysts rank the automakers: GM has problems but appears on the road to recovery, Ford has challenges along with hope for the future (Ford Flex, the Sync music and bluetooth system), while Chrysler continues to face a difficult future - and not much help from APEAL with brands ranked 27, 30, and 34 out of 36.

J.D. POWER 2008 APEAL STUDY
Automotive Performance, Execution, and Layout
1. Porsche, 2008: 854 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +31 points
2. Jaguar, 2008: 844 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +27 points
3. BMW, 2008: 841 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +28 points
3. Mercedes-Benz, 2008: 841 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +24 points
5. Lexus, 2008: 834 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +14 points
6. Cadillac, 2008: 827 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +16 points
7. Mini, 2008: 823 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +26 points
8. Audi, 2008: 822 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +12 points
9. Infiniti, 2008: 819 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +3 points
10. Land Rover, 2008: 818 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -3 points
11. Acura, 2008: 807 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +6 points
12. Lincoln, 2008: 802 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +6 points
13. Volkswagen, 2008: 797 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +34 points
14. Saab, 2008: 792 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +19 points
15. Volvo, 2008: 791 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -7 points
16. GMC, 2008: 778 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +3 points
16. Hummer, 2008: 778 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -34 points
18. Scion, 2008: 773 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -4 points
19. Mazda, 2008: 771 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +4 points
20. Buick, 2008: 770 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +1 points
-- Industry Average, 2008: 770 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +0 points
21. Mitsubishi, 2008: 769 points, vs. 3-year industry average: 2 points
22. Ford, 2008: 768 points, vs. 3-year industry average: 0 points
23. Saturn, 2008: 767 points, vs. 3-year industry average: +25 points
24. Honda, 2008: 764 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -10 points
25. Nissan, 2008: 763 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -15 points
26. Toyota, 2008: 760 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -12 points
27. Chrysler, 2008: 759 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -7 points
28. Chevrolet, 2008: 757 points, vs. 3-year industry average: 4 points
29. Mercury, 2008: 755 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -18 points
30. Dodge, 2008: 747 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -6 points
31. Hyundai, 2008: 747 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -4 points
32. Kia, 2008: 744 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -16 points
33. Pontiac, 2008: 737 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -30 points
34. Jeep, 2008: 722 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -26 points
35. Subaru, 2008: 719 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -26 points
35. Suzuki, 2008: 719 points, vs. 3-year industry average: -24 points
Table lists 2008 APEAL score and indexed 3-year trend vs. the industry average (770 in 2008, 855 in 2005)