Bmw 550xi Low Miles, Loaded, New Tires, Sweet on 2040-cars

Auto blog

BMW i5 could be a new kind of i PHEV

Just this month BMW North America CEO Ludwig Willisch made a point of saying "Not any time soon" to AutoblogGreen's question about the arrival of a BMW i5 - and that came after he clarified, in case we didn't know it, that no such model exists. But the rumors of its eventual appearance were swelled again by a report in Autobild that sticks more details and numbers on what could be the next offering in for the i brand. In February, Car magazine laid the i5 out as having a 245-horsepower four-cylinder engine in front, assisted by a 204-hp e-motor in the bow and a 90-hp e-motor in the stern, for about 544 total horsepower. Autobild claims the gas engine will have 218 hp, the front e-motor will have 150 hp and the rear will have 272 hp, for roughly 640 total horsepower. Where the two reports agree is that it - maybe called i5, maybe i7 - will be based on the China-market long-wheelbase 5 Series platform, it will incorporate cues from both the 7 Series and 6 Series Gran Coupe, and it will not be cheap: 100,000 euros ($105,686 US) is the estimate. The i8 starts at 130,000 euros in Germany. Weight for the i5 is figured to be around 3,300 pounds. Green Car Reports says what's important about the i5's drivetrain is that it's being maximized for electric running. Its evolution of the company's eDrive mechanicals will crank the ICE over only above 36 miles per hour, and even then, only in cases of "maximum power demand." Electric-only driving would offer a range of 78 miles, company officials suggesting that it could remain in that mode for "fully two-thirds of its usage cycle." Whenever a vehicle like this arrives, that is, which Autobild says could be in 2019.

EPA: Four 2014 Mini Cooper models need to drop mpg numbers

After the huge problems that Hyundai/Kia experienced with its mislabeled fuel economy labels, you'd think that any time an automaker has to adjust its mpg numbers, heralds would be shouting from the rooftops. But, after Ford admitted to three big mistakes with its numbers for the 2013 C-Max Hybrid and Mercedes-Benz had to lower the fuel economy rating for the C-Class, we understand if those heralds are a bit tired by now. The models affected include the 3-door and the 3-door S. Still, today's news is that BMW has to lower the fuel efficiency numbers for four versions of the 2014 Mini Cooper thanks to an audit conducted by the EPA and then some joint re-testing. The models affected include the 3-door with the 1.5-liter engine and the 3-door S with its 2.0-liter powerplant, with both manual and semi-automatic transmissions. As with the Benzes, the rating changes are not big ones, around one or two miles per gallon. The big exception is the manual S 3-door's highway number, which lost four mpg from 38 to 34. You can see all the numbers, new and old, in the press release below, but the EPA isn't saying what caused the problem this time. The Agency's new test procedures can't come fast enough. It should be noted that the 2015 Mini Cooper was recently delayed a bit because of the extra time it took to get the EPA numbers right. There's no confirmation that these two items are connected, but we would not be surprised to hear they were. EPA Requiring BMW to Correct Fuel Economy Labels for Four Mini Cooper Vehicles Washington - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is revising estimates for four 2014 BMW Mini Cooper vehicles to ensure consumers are given accurate fuel economy values. The EPA performed a fuel economy audit on the BMW Mini Cooper and obtained values that differed from those BMW submitted to EPA for certification. With EPA oversight, BMW conducted new emissions and fuel economy testing, and EPA conducted its own testing at its National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor, Michigan. As a result of this subsequent testing, EPA is requiring BMW to relabel four of its 2014 Mini Cooper models with lower fuel economy values. The specific changes to fuel economy stickers are listed in the table below.

Most reliable cars and trucks of 2022

Related: Least reliable cars and trucks of 2022   For years now, Consumer Reports has been one of the most prolific sources of vehicle reliability data around. The organization tests a number of vehicles each year and surveys its members on various automotive topics, including reliability. The results of its 2022 annual auto survey are in, and the list of most reliable vehicles has been revealed. Unsurprisingly, Toyota and Lexus dominated the list of most reliable vehicles, but BMW and Mini snuck into the top 10 as well. The list includes: Toyota Corolla Hybrid: 93 Lexus GX: 91 Mini Cooper: 89 Toyota Prius: 89 Mazda MX-5 Miata: 85 Lincoln Corsair: 82 Toyota Corolla: 81 Subaru Crosstrek: 80 BMW 3 Series: 80 Toyota Prius Prime: 77 In terms of the most reliable vehicle type, Consumer Reports says that sedans remain the best choice. Their average score is 58, which is notably better than SUVs’ average score of 51. Minivans and pickup trucks are lower, at 44 and 39, respectively. As Consumer Reports notes, many sedans are older models that have allowed their manufacturers to iron out the wrinkles, making them more reliable. Domestic automakers' SUVs and trucks performed better in the survey than their imported counterparts, with scores of 45 and 41, respectively. The study also showed that hybrids and plug-in hybrids are becoming more reliable, and have climbed the score ladder to the tops of their segments in many cases.  Consumer Reports says its study includes 17 trouble areas, including small stuff like creaks and rattles and much larger problems like drivetrain failures. The organization states that it weights each issue based on its severity to create its predicted reliability scores, with 100 being the best. A car must be in production for at least two model years to be considered for the list. Related video: Green BMW Lexus Lincoln Mazda MINI Subaru Toyota Car Buying Maintenance Ownership Convertible Coupe Crossover Hatchback SUV Hybrid Sedan Consumer Reports reliability