M Sport Cabriolet Smg Automatic Leather Power Soft Top Premium Sound on 2040-cars

Auto blog

FCA joins BMW, Intel and Mobileye on autonomous car project

Today, BMW, Intel and Mobileye announced that FCA would be joining their effort to build a sharable and scalable platform for autonomous cars. This project has been moving ahead full steam, with Intel purchasing Mobileye earlier this year, not long after Tesla and Mobileye parted ways. Not long after that, parts supplier Delphi joined the autonomous effort. The group's current goal is to have 40 autonomous test vehicles on the road by the end of 2017. The eventual end game is to create a new architecture that each partner can use and adapt to its needs. The platform will support level 3 to level 4/5 automated driving, and can be adapted to suit brand identity. The main headquarters for the effort will be in Germany. FCA staff will join the already established group of engineers from BMW, Intel and Mobileye. The group expects this new platform to hit the streets by 2021. It's unclear how this will affect FCA's relationship with Waymo, Alphabet's autonomous vehicle project. Waymo currently uses modified Chrysler Pacificas for its fleet. In addition to FCA, the trio of BMW, Intel and Mobileye have extended an invitation to any other automakers and suppliers that want to join the project. Related Video: News Source: BMW/Intel Green BMW Chrysler Fiat Autonomous Vehicles mobileye

2016 BMW X1 First Drive [w/video]

Perhaps more than any other model, the X1 exemplifies the shift going on at BMW. That the X1 is the first front-drive-based car to wear the BMW badge in the US is both remarkable and doesn't matter at all. Some background: The first X1, sold here for the latter half of its six-year run, was an Old BMW. Based on E90 3 Series underpinnings, it was basically a tall, last-gen 3 wagon, a car on short stilts. We loved it. It drove almost exactly like a good 3 Series at a time when that 3 Series was no longer available. It sold in okay numbers. It's gone now. This new X1, the 2016 model, is a sort of about face, or at least a right-hand turn in the engine compartment. This is New BMW. The base engine is again a 2.0-liter four-cylinder, a new design based on the company's modular engine architecture that can spit out threes, fours, and sixes using the same component set. It's mounted transversely, not longitudinally like in the rest of BMW's US offerings. It loses some horsepower to the last X1's 2.0 (228 hp versus 240) and a bit of torque (258 lb-ft down from 260). Again, few will notice. The optional 3.0-liter turbocharged six from the last generation is gone. Not many customers chose it, and the six likely wouldn't fit under the hood of this rearranged X1. EPA fuel-economy numbers match those from the 2015 xDrive28i exactly – 22 mpg city, 32 highway – so no gains there. So packaging won. There's really no other explanation for the longitudinal-transverse swap, except that maybe it's less expensive to build this way. EPA fuel-economy numbers match those from the 2015 xDrive28i exactly – 22 mpg city, 32 highway – so no gains there. But the packaging advantages are abundant. The interior is somewhat narrow, but it's opened up a bit by the lack of a transmission tunnel that would normally eat space between the front occupants. Instead, the center console is set low, with a tall shift lever rising practically from the floor up to meet your hand. There's storage forward of the shifter and a folding center armrest that opens for small items. The original X1 was sold here with rear-wheel as well as all-wheel drive. For obvious reasons, that won't be the case this time around. BMW also won't sell a front-drive model here (although one is offered in Europe and elsewhere) likely because it would involve the admission that this is not your average BMW, but instead a New BMW, one designed for more people and fewer enthusiasts.

BMW, Hyundai score big in JD Power's first Tech Experience Index

While automakers are quick to brag about winning a JD Power Initial Quality Study award, the reality, as we've pointed out before, is that these ratings are somewhat misleading, since IQS doesn't necessarily distinguish genuine quality issues. JD Power's new Tech Experience Index aims to solve that problem. The new metric takes the same 90-day approach as IQS but focuses exclusively on technology – collision protection, comfort and convenience, driving assistance, entertainment and connectivity, navigation, and smartphone mirroring. It splits the industry up into just seven segments, based loosely on size, which is why the Chevrolet Camaro is in the same division (mid-size) as Kia Sorento and the Mercedes-Benz GLE-Class is in the same segment as the Hyundai Genesis (mid-size premium). It makes for some screwy bedfellows, to be sure. Still, splitting tech experience away from initial quality should allow customers to make more informed and intelligent decisions when buying new vehicles. In the inaugural study, respondents listed BMW and Hyundai as the big winners, with two segment awards – the 2 Series for small premium and the 4 Series for compact premium, and the Genesis for mid-size premium and Tucson for small segment. The Chevrolet Camaro (midsize), Kia Forte (compact), and Nissan Maxima (large) scored individual wins. Ford also had a surprising hit with the Lincoln MKC, which ranked third in the compact premium segment behind the 4 Series and Lexus IS. This is a coup for the Blue Oval, whose woeful MyFord Touch systems made the brand a victim of the IQS' flaws in the early 2010s. But Ford and other automakers might not want to celebrate just yet. According to JD Power, there's still a lot of room for improvement – navigation systems were the lowest-rated piece of tech in the study. Instead, customers repeatedly saluted collision-avoidance and safety systems, giving the category the best marks of the study and listing blind-spot monitoring and backup cameras as two must-have features – 96 percent of respondents said they wanted those two systems in their next vehicle. But this isn't really a surprise. Implementation of safety systems from brand to brand is similar, and they don't require any input from users, unlike navigation and infotainment systems which are frustratingly deep.