2013 Range Rover Evoque Pure Plus, 5 Door White With Cirrus Lunar Interior on 2040-cars

Auto blog

BMW X6 M said to lap the 'Ring in 8:20

Bimmer Today reports that the German rag Auto Zeitung ran an Audi RS3 and a BMW X6 M around the Nurburgring together, and the hotted-up sports activity vehicle came in just five seconds behind the white-hot hatch. Driven by 'Ring regular Horst von Saurma, the RS3 ran its lap in 8 minutes, 15 seconds, and the X6 M ran an 8:20. If those times are accurate, that makes the X6 M the second fastest production SUV on the lap-time list according to Wikipedia: ahead of it is the 550-hp Range Rover Sport SVR, which ran a time of 8:14. That time puts BMW's 575-horsepower, 5,200-pound SUV four seconds ahead of the time registered by the last-gen, 555-hp X6 M, and well ahead of the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S that Sport Auto clocked an 8:34 with. It would not, however, match the predictions that X6 M project manager Herbert Bayerl made for it in an interview with Sport Auto earlier this year. Bayerl said "The new BMW X6 M moves at the level of M3," speaking of the E92 BMW M3 that Sport Auto ran around the 'Ring in 8:05. It is, though, two seconds faster than the E46 M3, which lapped in 8:22. Bayerl called out the Range Rover Sport SVR directly, saying, "We have been traveling much faster in testing and have undercut the time of Range Rover several times," and "We don't need any special attachments to go faster." Auto Zeitung's report on the lap is only for subscribers so we'll have to wait for more official news. For the apples-to-apples comparison we'll be looking forward to Sport Auto's hot lap, then we'll know if the Range Rover has anything to fear. Related Video:

NHTSA is investigating FCA shifters for roll-away accidents again, this time the rotary units

It seems FCA's shifter troubles aren't over yet. Now, just a few months after issuing a recall to resolve user-related issues with its monostable shifters, the company is again under investigation by NHTSA. The issue is related to the potential for cars to roll away when the rotary-style shifter is not properly placed in park. Two FCA models are the subject of this investigation: the 2013–2016 Ram 1500 and the 2014–2016 Dodge Durango. NHTSA estimates about 1,000,000 vehicles would be affected if a recall is issued. The investigation was started following 43 complaints of vehicles rolling away while supposedly being in "park." Among the complaints were reports of 25 crashes and 9 injuries. NHTSA does point out that in every incident, the parking brake was not engaged. A representative from FCA also gave us an official statement regarding the investigation: "FCA US is cooperating fully with NHTSA's investigation, the scope of which is limited. Other vehicles equipped with rotary shifters are not included. In accordance with prudent practice, the Company joins NHTSA in urging all drivers to use their vehicles' parking brakes." View 35 Photos As mentioned above, other Chrysler products with rotary shifters, such as the Pacifica minivan and 200 sedan, are not involved in this investigation. One of the key differences, as the representative told us, is that these vehicles have electronic parking brakes that automatically engage if the driver does not select park and then opens the door with the seatbelt unbuckled. The Ram 1500 and Durango feature mechanical, manually operated parking brakes and therefore cannot activate the brake automatically. Because this is currently an investigation, an exact cause for the incidents has yet to be determined, and none of the vehicles have been recalled. It's possible there could be a mechanical defect. However, the issue could be a confusing interface causing user error, as was the case with FCA's monostable shifters, where drivers think they've put the car in park but actually haven't. Something that indicates it could be a case of confused users is that NHTSA also opened an investigation into 2012–2014 Jaguar XF and Land Rover Range Rover Evoques for similar issues. Both vehicles use a rotary shifter and have had roll-away complaints levied as well. Even if it is a case of user error, FCA and Jaguar Land Rover may still have to recall their vehicles.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study