2012 Bmw X5 Xdrive35i Premium, 1-owner, Navigation, Pan. Roof, 3rd Row, Rr Cam on 2040-cars

Auto blog

BMW X4 M probably not in the cards

BMW is preparing to exploit its latest market niche - those that find themselves unable to choose between the 3 Series, 4 Series and X3 - with the X4. If you're looking for an M product, though, you'll remain limited to the 3 and 4 Series. BMW's Bernhard Ederer, at the Australian launch of the X5, told Car Advice he wouldn't "bet on it," when asked about a hotter X4.
Oddly, Ederer's reasoning, according to the Aussies, is out of concern for the X6 M, whose sales the X4 M would apparently cannibalize. That's like saying the M3 doesn't make sense because it will cannibalize M5 sales - the logic just doesn't really hold up. "The question is what customers are we talking to? And are we talking to someone that is willing and able to afford [an X6 M]?" Ederer told Car Advice.
Car Advice seems to feel the same way, claiming the X3-based X4 will share its powertrains with its donor platform, and will eventually spawn an M variant, albeit a few years down the line.

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?

BMW M3 takes on Mercedes-AMG C63 S in track battle from Evo

Over the last few decades, BMW has firmly established an enviable reputation among automotive enthusiasts by making what many consider to be the very best sporty sedans and coupes in the world. Every few years, a new challenger appears from one of the German brand's long list of competitors, but the result always seems to be the same: Close, but no cigar. The latest challenger to BMW's on-track crown comes from Mercedes-AMG in the form of the C63 S sedan. The AMG has a lot more power, an excellent and balanced chassis and it looks beautiful. But is it good enough to outperform the latest BMW M3? We're not going to spoil it for you. Watch the latest Deadly Rivals video from Evo to find out which competitor comes out on top.