Convertible on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 BMW X7 vs luxury SUV rivals: Comparing specs and photos

Today we get our first-ever look at the first-ever 2019 BMW X7 crossover. We've actually already had our first-ever drive in an X7 Prototype. And so, we thought it appropriate to follow that up today with the first-ever X7 comparison of specs between BMW's first-ever three-row crossover with legitimate room for seven and its many high-dollar competitors. On paper, the 2019 X7 definitely seems to most closely align with the Mercedes-Benz GLS-Class. Their similar dimensions, interior space, engine choices and price would certainly imply where BMW placed the target when developing X7. We used those same elements to determine three-row vehicles likely to be cross-shopped or that should be cross-shopped. These include the Audi Q7, Land Rover Discovery, Volvo XC90 and Lincoln Navigator. Yes, the latter is a truck-based SUV as opposed to a crossover, but tell that to all the people lining out the door at the local Lincoln emporium. They do not care, and neither shall we. We also included the 2019 BMW X5, which was completely redesigned for this year and therefore not the first-ever. That makes it less appealing? Either way, lining the new X5 up with the SUV that leapfrogs it atop BMW's SUV hierarchy should provide a good idea of just how much more you get by going up a model number. Engines and model lineup Again, the X7 aligns closest with the GLS, offering a base six-cylinder in its xDrive40i model and an upgrade turbo V8 in the xDrive50i. The Mercedes engines have greater output, but the GLS still accelerates slower than the BMW. As the 2019 X5 offers the exact same engines, we would also expect the X7's fuel economy to be superior to the GLS once its estimates are announced. It should be noted, though, that the GLS offers a high-powered AMG model whereas we anticipate the X7 to offer a plug-in hybrid model comparable to the X5 upcoming xDrive45e model. The other luxury SUVs diverge in their engine choices and model lineup. The Audi Q7 offers a base turbocharged four-cylinder, as does the Volvo XC90 in its T5 model, which we left out of the above chart entirely for space reasons. That the Q7 3.0 TFSI supercharged V6 gets the same fuel economy estimates as the four-cylinder is proof positive that engine is purely around for its lower base price.

Dinan S3-R BMW 1M Coupe

I nearly shed tears a few years ago upon learning that BMW was only planning to produce a very limited quantity of its then-new 2011 1 Series M Coupe. In simplest terms, the two-door was a 1 Series fitted with a modified version of the automaker's twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-six, and the running gear (gearbox, driveshaft, axles) from contemporary M3 models. It was also a return to form for the brand. Aggressively short and stubby in stature but packing telltale flared wheel arches that hinted at its potential, the four-seater was a spiritual successor to the original (and much loved) E30 M3 from decades earlier.
After spending a day with the original high-performance 1 at New York's Monticello Motor Club, I declared, "The little coupe with the big flares is old-school retro cool and deliciously fun to drive ... the new BMW 1 Series M Coupe doesn't target boy-racers, it targets enthusiasts." Yet sadly - and despite strong demand - BMW limited the model's production to just one year. All told, only 740 units made it to the States, and each was gobbled up at a starting price of $46,135, a price tag history will show to be a bargain.
Since I had little hope of even driving one again, I deliberately pushed all memories of BMW's 1 Series M Coupe from my mind - until my phone rang recently. On the other end was a representative from Dinan Engineering who wanted to know if I would be interested in driving the company's new S3-R BMW 1M. A quick Google search revealed it to be a heavily modified version of the discontinued 1 Series M Coupe. As if they needed an answer...

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.