Auto blog

2016 BMW X4 M40i Quick Spin

There's only so much you can do to disguise the SUV-ness of a crossover. The physics are simply against it. Essentially a jacked-up wagon, the X4 is heavier and has a higher center of gravity than a 3 Series longroof. No matter how many badges or what sort of fancy suspension you throw at it, you can't defy the essential laws that govern the mechanics of the universe. This isn't to say that BMW is standing in the surf, ordering the waves to roll backward. The X4 is a valiant, if misguided effort, in injecting some sportiness into a very niche vehicle. The X6 M, a "full" M Division offering, does a decent job at this: it's quick like a rocket-assisted hippopotamus, and uses some black magic to stay planted. The X4 M40i, a less-full-blown M Performance model, is less dramatic, and less compelling. Here's the operating theory: this crossover won't sell on its dynamic charms, however superior to its X4 xDrive28i and xDrive35i siblings. It'll sell because it's the top of the X4 heap, the most expensive of the three ($58,795!), and with the most "M" badges. Anyone looking for utility and strong handling dynamics should examine a 3 Series xDrive Sports Wagon with the M Sport Package and the $700 Adaptive M Suspension, pocket the $10k, and marvel at the size and shape of the cargo area. Driving Notes: This is the same engine as seen in the brand new M2, making 355 horsepower and 343 pound-feet of torque in this application. That's 10 hp down from the M2. There's lots of torque, and with an intentional stab of the go-pedal, this X4 will scoot. The eight-speed auto is great heading through the ratio range – its shifts are swift and sharp. The paddles will hold gears to redline in manual mode, but would you really want to? We ignored them. The adaptive dampers have their work cut out for them. This is a 4,235-pound vehicle – a full 340 pounds heavier than a diesel, all-wheel-drive, 3 Series Sports Wagon, and 7.6 inches taller – and this is where physics comes into play. Slalom-like quick corners produce an uncomfortable jacking effect as the outer wheels unload and transfer weight to the other side. It handles well, for a hippo. Since hustling the X4 M40i is possible but not all that rewarding, know that it's very pleasant in Comfort mode. The extra oomph is realized as a thick, broad, rich torque band, and that's never a bad thing around town. It's nicely dampened in Comfort, without much wallow.

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.

Did BMW drag its feet on Mini recall?

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is opening an investigation into BMW's reporting of a recall for 30,456 examples of the 2014-2015 Mini Cooper Hardtop, Cooper S, and the 2015 John Cooper Works. According to the government, "it appears from a review of NHTSA's databases that BMW may have failed to submit recall communications to NHTSA in a timely manner." The automaker issued the recall in July because crash tests showed the models didn't meet side impact requirements for passengers in the back seat. While there were no reported injuries at the time, the company decided to install energy-absorbing material in the space between the rear interior panels and the exterior. However, NHTSA has decided to investigate whether this campaign should have started much earlier, given the evidence the company had. According to the government's report, the Cooper Hardtop failed side-impact tests in 2014, although one of these tests was five-miles-per-hour faster than the Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard. The agency claims: "In January 2015 BMW verbally committed that it would conduct a service campaign to add padding to the rear side panels of MY 2015 Mini 2 Door Hardtop Cooper models. However, BMW did not initiate the service campaign and failed to inform NHTSA of its failure to do so." A subsequent crash test of an example with this fix showed it to make the vehicle compliant with the rules. Mini spokesperson Mariella Kapsaskis told Autoblog: "Regarding the NHTSA audit query, BMW Group is evaluating the request and will respond to NHTSA as appropriate." INVESTIGATION Subject : BMW Reporting & Timely Recall Execution Date Investigation Opened: SEP 24, 2015 Date Investigation Closed: Open NHTSA Action Number: AQ15004 Component(s): STRUCTURE All Products Associated with this Investigation Vehicle Make Model Model Year(s) MINI COOPER 2014-2015 MINI COOPER S 2014-2015 MINI JOHN COOPER WORKS 2015 Details Manufacturer: BMW of North America, LLC SUMMARY: NHTSA is opening this AQ to better understand and evaluate BMW's process(es) for its notification procedures and for timely and efficient execution of its safety recall campaigns. In mid-2014, NHTSA's New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) had side impact moving deformable barrier (MDB) tests performed on two model year (MY) 2014 Mini 2 Door Hardtop Coopers. These two tests were performed at a speed 5 mph higher than required by Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard (FMVSS) 214, Side impact protection.