2005 Mini Cooper Convertible Fwd Parkingsensors Cdplayer Foglamps We Finance!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mini to introduce all-wheel-drive Clubman

The latest Mini Clubman shows how the diminutive brand will go in a larger, more utilitarian direction in the future. The next step might make the wagon an even more versatile option for buyers. A rumor from MotoringFile that cites "sources familiar with the plans" claims that the vehicle will get the automaker's next-gen All4 all-wheel-drive system as soon as spring 2016. Allegedly the all-wheel-drive system derives from the setup that's available on the BMW 2 Series Active Tourer, which shares the Mini's UKL platform. The layout uses a multiple-disk clutch at the rear axle to manage power to the back wheels and can route up to 100 percent of the grunt to the tail in a pinch. When extra traction isn't needed there, power goes exclusively to the front. The All4 system will allegedly be available on both the Clubman Cooper and Cooper S models, and MotoringFile estimates the cost of ticking the option box at around $1,500. After introducing the tech on the standard versions, a hotter John Cooper Works model capable of powering all of its wheels will also reportedly begin production around next November. Mini will reportedly also offer this all-wheel-drive tech in the next-generation Countryman. The vehicle will use the UKL platform like the rest of the brand's lineup, but the crossover will grow even larger to look more off-road ready, according to rumors. We reached out to Mini USA spokesperson Mariella Kapsaskis, who says "she can't confirm anything officially about an all-wheel drive Clubman or JCW variant." Related Video:

Chinese ministry uploads Mini Aceman pictures and info

Next up for photo day at the China's Ministry of Industry and Information Technology, the Mini Aceman. The Aceman can be seen as a replacement for the Mini Clubman, the four-door version of the two-door Cooper (or five-door depending on your nationality) sized below the Countryman that Mini killed after its third generation. The Chinese data declares the Aceman either 160.5 or 161.2 inches long depending on base or S trim, 69.1 inches wide and 59.6 inches high on a 102.6-inch wheelbase. The Clubman of yore was 168.5 inches long, 70.9 inches wide, and 56.7 inches high on a 105.1-inch wheelbase. Before a debut that we've been told isn't far off, we'll guess much of the difference between the two length has been cut from the hood and cargo areas, not the passenger compartment.  In China, the four-door will only be offered with electric powertrains, sidestepping Mini's "Power of Choice" mantra applied to other models with their hybrid and diesel options. The Aceman for other international markets will be produced in the UK; it's not clear yet if they'll be restricted to EV power as well. This means a base version (the darker car in the gallery above) powered by a 40.7-kilowatt-hour battery turning a motor on the front axle making 181 horsepower and 213 pound-feet of torque, or a 54.2-kWh pack turning a motor with 214 hp and 243 lb-ft in Aceman S guise. These are the same outputs we'll get in the U.S.-spec Cooper E and Cooper SE. Put through China's CLTC fuel economy test, the base Aceman is estimated to go 300 kilometers (186 miles) on a charge, the more powerful Aceman S about 400 km (249 miles). As for the looks, they're the chunkiest we've seen on the new, modern range of Minis. The photo cars also suggest the merest hint of clunky, too, but we're going to put that down to the drab paint schemes and lighting. The form should perk up dressed in Mini standards like Blazing Blue, Legend Grey, Melting Silver III, Nanuq White and Smokey Green under a color-contrasted roof and the numerous chances to brighten up various bits inside and outside the car. Different to other Mini models, headlights and size aren't the only tells, the Aceman fitting some unmissable, squared-off wheel arch cladding. Beyond that, the polygonal DRL shape surrounding round projectors gives the Aceman more anthropomorphic character than its siblings. The S is distinguished by yellow trim and a yellow "S" placed around the body, plus LED headlights and a silver skid plate up front.

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