1993 Bmw 525i 5-speed Showroom Condition With Low Mileage E34 M5 E30 325is 318is on 2040-cars

Auto blog

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.

Porsche tops JD Power APEAL study for 12th time

JD Power's 2016 Automotive Performance, Execution, and Layout (APEAL) study hasn't changed much this time around with Porsche coming in at No.1 for the 12th consecutive year, while BMW was close behind in second. Jaguar and Mercedes-Benz tied for third with Land Rover, Lexus, and Lincoln tied for No.5. The APEAL Study, according to JD Power, measures owners' level of excitement and emotional attachment across 77 parameters. Brands and cars are rated on a 1,000-point scale. The study found that new cars with modern safety features including low speed collision avoidance and blind spot monitoring have higher APEAL scores than vehicles without the features. The overall industry score increased from 798 to 801, which JD Power claims was helped by the launch of a variety of new vehicles. This year, 22 out of 30 new or redesigned cars received a higher score than the vehicle's respective segment average. Porsche is once again at the top of the list as the automaker's score increased by three points to 877. BMW outscored Jaguar to take second place with a score of 859, while the British automaker dropped three points from last year with 852 points. Volkswagen overtook Mini to become the top-ranked non-premium brand with 809 points, while the latter automaker trailed behind by one point. At the end of the scale, Smart came in at the very bottom for the second year in a row with a score of 745 points, which represents an increase of 62 points over last year. Fiat's score increased by six points to 755, but still confined the automaker to second-to-worst place for a consecutive year. Mitsubishi's score increased to 770, up from 755, to become the fourth-worst brand, while Jeep fell to third-worst with a decrease in seven points to 756. General Motors received six segment-level awards, followed by Hyundai with five, and BMW and VW earning four apiece. Surprise segment victories include the Chevrolet Camaro, which outscored the Dodge Challenger, and the Lexus RC which ranked above the BMW 4 and 3 Series. For more information on how the automakers ranked, check out the official release on the 2016 APEAL Study below or visit JD Power's website to analyze the graphs. Related Video: Porsche Ranks Highest in APEAL for 12th Consecutive Year; General Motors Receives Six Segment-Level Awards, Hyundai Motor Company Receives Five DETROIT: 27 July 2016 — Popular driver-assist technologies help make vehicles considerably more appealing to their owners, according to the J.D.

Dealers mobilize to protect their margins from automaker subscription services

Six individual auto brands — Lincoln, Cadillac, Porsche, Mercedes, BMW and Volvo — have established or are trialing a vehicle subscription service in the U.S. Three third-party companies — Flexdrive, Clutch and Carma — run brand-agnostic subscription services. And three automakers — Mercedes-Benz, BMW, and General Motors — have also launched short-term rental services. Dealers, afraid of how these trends might affect their margins, are building political and lawmaking campaigns to protect their revenue streams. So far, three states are investigating automaker subscriptions, and Indiana has banned any such service until next year. It's certain that those three states are the first fronts in a long political and legal battle. Powerful dealer franchise laws mandate the existence of dealers and restrict how automakers are allowed to interact with customers to sell a vehicle. On top of that, Bob Reisner, CEO of Nassau Business Funding & Services, said, "Dealers and their associations are among the strongest political operators in many states. They as a group are difficult for state politicians to vote against." In California earlier this year, the state Assembly debated a bill with wide-ranging provisions to protect against what the California New Car Dealers Association called "inappropriate treatment of dealers by manufacturers." One of those provisions stipulated that subscription services need to go through dealers, but that item got stripped out when dealers and manufacturers agreed to discuss the matter further. In Indiana, Gov. Eric Holcomb signed a moratorium on all subscription programs by dealers or manufacturers until May 1, 2019, to give legislators more time to investigate. Dealers in New Jersey have taken their campaign to the state capitol, asking that the cars in subscription programs get a different classification for registration purposes. Automakers run the current subscription services and own the vehicles. Sign-ups and financial transactions happen online or through apps, leaving dealers to do little more than act as fulfillment centers to various degrees, with little legal recourse as to compensation amounts when they're called on to deliver or service a car. That's a bad base to build on for business owners who've sunk millions of dollars into their operations.