Convertibl Convertible Steering Wheel Trim: Leather Shift Knob Trim: Leather on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2016 X6 M brings the power at LA show

BMW tore the cover off the second generation 2016 X6 M Wednesday at the Los Angeles Auto Show.
BMW tuned the 4.4-liter twin-turbo V8 to push out 567 horsepower, up from the last model's 555 hp. Torque also leaps to 553 pound feet, compared with the previous output of 500 lb-ft. The V8 is paired with an eight-speed automatic transmission, which swaps in for the old six-speed. This potent powertrain allows the crossover to hit 60 miles per hour in about four seconds.
The X6, which features slightly more dramatic styling and an angled rear roofline, debuted alongside the more conventionally styled 2016 BMW X5 M at the LA show.

2015 BMW X4 xDrive28i

When BMW unveiled the X6 back in 2008, critical reviews were mixed, to say the least. By all accounts, the heavyweight crossover actually drove quite well, but the idea of a BMW X5 that traded a lot of functionality for polarizing looks and a higher price tag seemed like a tough sell. Then it went on sale and quickly proved to be a cash cow. Today, the German brand has moved over a quarter million of the things worldwide. Unsurprisingly, this success has moved BMW to double down on its so-called Sport Activity Coupe by adding a smaller variant. The all-new X4, while not a bad steer in and of itself, makes even less sense than its big brother, particularly when viewed alongside BMW's other offerings. Like the X6 and X5, the X4 borrows heavily from another of the brand's utility vehicles, in this case, the less-costly X3. Also like the X6, this new crossover-coupe's styling is sure to cause a schism among critics and consumers alike. You can probably guess where the majority of the Autoblog camp falls. To be totally frank, the exterior of the X4 is simply ghastly to this writer, particularly in this tester's eye-catching paint. Admittedly – and much like the X6 – there's not much objectionable from the A-pillar forward, where the X4 has a lot in common with the X3. It's only once moving towards the rear that things well and truly go wrong. There's just so much visual mass, and it's been made worse by the way BMW designers wussed out. Bear with me. Compare the profile of the X6 with the X4, and pay particular attention to the roofline on the bigger vehicle. The angle of the roofline is noticeably more dramatic on the X6, which comes at the expense of second-row headroom (an oft-criticized area for the big boy). For the X4, designers tried to have their cake and eat it too, maintaining second-row headroom but with a coupe-like profile. The result is an X4 that is bulbous and uncouth from the B-pillar back, more hunchbacked Gran Turismo than svelte Gran Coupe. BMW might have been better served if its exterior work had followed the stylings of the cabin, which is more or less a clone of what's on offer in the X3. Material quality is still great, with soft-touch plastics and available cool-to-the-touch brushed aluminum throughout. I really dug the Ivory White Nevada leather and contrast red stitching on this test vehicle, as it provided an eye-pleasing departure from the sea of blacks, grays and tans so typical of the luxury crossover market.

Here’s how 20 popular EVs fared in cold-weather testing in Norway

Electric vehicles are known to suffer diminished performance in cold weather, but some do a better job than others hanging onto their range capacity while cabin heaters and frigid outdoor temperatures sap power from their batteries. Recently, the Norwegian Automobile Federation put the 20 of the best-selling battery-electric vehicles in the country to the test, to see not only how winter weather affected their range but also their charging times. The major findings: On average, electric vehicles lost 18.5% of their official driving range as determined by the European WLTP cycle. Electric vehicles also charge more slowly in cold temperatures. And interestingly, the researchers learned that EVs don’t simply shut down when they lose power but instead deliver a series of warnings to the driver, with driving comfort and speed levels maintained until the very last few miles. Because itÂ’s Norway, the worldÂ’s top market for electric and plug-in hybrid vehicles by market share, the test included many EVs that arenÂ’t available here in the U.S. But there are many familiar faces, among them the Nissan Leaf, Tesla Models S, 3 and X, Hyundai Kona (known here as the Kona Electric) and Ioniq, and Audi E-Tron. In terms of range, the top-performing EV was the Hyundai Kona, which lost only 9% of its official range, which the WTLP rated at 449 kilometers, or 279 miles, compared to its EPA-rated range of 258 miles on a full charge. It delivered 405 km, just enough to nudge it ahead of the Tesla Model 3, which returned 404 km. Other top performers included the Audi E-Tron, in both its 50 Quattro (13% lower range) and higher-powered 55 Quattro (14% lower) guises; the Hyundai Ioniq (10% lower); and Volkswagen e-Golf (11% lower). At 610 km (379 miles) the Tesla Model S has the longest WLTP range of all models tested and went the furthest, but still lost 23% of its range, though it also encountered energy-sapping heavy snow at the end of its test, when many cars had dropped out. The Model 3 lost 28% of its range. The worst performer? That goes to the Opel Ampera-e, better known stateside as the Chevrolet Bolt. It traveled 297 km (about 184 miles) in the test, which was nearly 30% lower than its stated WLTP range. We should also note that Opel, now owned by Groupe PSA, is phasing the car out in Europe and that Chevy recently upgraded the Bolt here in the U.S.