Convertible 3.0l Nav Navaigation Idrive Warranty Premium Package on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 BMW 4 Series Coupe officially debuts, priced from $41,425*

Well, that didn't take long. Less than two hours after the first images of the 2014 BMW 4 Series Coupe leaked onto the Internet, we've been given the go-ahead to publish the whole kit and caboodle. And while we won't say we told you so, it looks as though the car's official details are standing true to our earlier predictions.
In other words, BMW will offer the 4 Series in 428i and 435i models, both of which can be had with xDrive all-wheel drive. Just like in the 3 Series, the 428i is powered by a 2.0-liter turbocharged inline four-cylinder engine, good for 240 horsepower and 255 pound-feet of torque, and the 435i gets BMW's turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-six making 300 hp and 300 lb-ft. In three of the four models, both a six-speed manual and eight-speed automatic transmission are available; the 428i xDrive can only be had with the auto 'box. The 428i (with rear-wheel drive, we assume) can hit 60 miles per hour in 5.7 seconds (though BMW doesn't specify with which transmission), and the 435i will do that same sprint in 5.3 seconds with the manual and five seconds flat with the eight-speed auto.
We've already dissected the 4 Series' visuals, but the numbers show just how different it is from the 3 Series sedan. The 4 Coupe is one-tenth of an inch longer overall, while riding on the same 110.6-inch wheelbase, is 0.6 inches wider, and has a roofline that's a full 2.7 inches closer to the ground. It looks sleek, incorporating BMW's new design language from the 3 Series with an overall profile that's similar to the larger 6 Series coupe.

Why this could be the perfect time for Apple to make a car play

While the automotive and technology worlds have been pouring billions into autonomous vehicles (AVs) and preparing to bring them to market soon as shared robo-taxis, Apple has mostly sat on the sidelines. Of course, Apple is the last company to ever make its intentions known, and the super-secret tech cult giant hasn't been totally out of the AV game based on the clues that have slipped out of its Cupertino, Calif., citadel over the past few years. Related: Apple self-driving cars are real — one was just in an accident News first broke in 2015 that it had assembled an automotive development team, in part by poaching high-profile talent from car companies, to work on a top-secret self-driving vehicle project code-named Titan. (Thank you very much, Nissan.) Apple also subsequently broke cover by making inquiries into using a Northern California AV testing facility and receiving a permit to test AVs on public roads in California. But then as the AV race started to heat up in the last few years, Apple reportedly began scaling back its car activities by downsizing team Titan. More recently, Apple's car project has shown signs of life with the hiring a high-level engineer away from Waymo and luring one Tesla's top engineers and a former employee back to Apple. It also inked a deal with Volkswagen to provide a technology platform and software to convert the automaker's new T6 Transporter vans into autonomous shuttles for employees at tech company's new campus. That is a far cry from giving rides to Wal-Mart shoppers, like Waymo is doing as part of its AV testing in Phoenix. But this could be the perfect time for Apple to enter the AV market now that ride-sharing is reaching critical mass and automakers and others are planning to deploy fleets of robo-taxis. Apple could easily establish a niche as a high-end ride-sharing service – and charge a premium – given its cult-like brand loyalty and design savvy. The growth of car subscription models could also play in Apple's favor since is already has many people hooked on paying for phones in monthly installments – and eager to upgrade when a new and better model becomes available. To achieve this, some believe Apple will fulfill co-founder and CEO Steve Job's dream of building a car. And as the world's first and only $1 trillion company it's sitting on a mountain of cash that certainly gives it the means. But other tech darlings like Tesla and Google have discovered how difficult it can be to build cars at scale.

Poor headlights cause 40 cars to miss IIHS Top Safety Pick rating

Over the past few months, we've noticed a number of cars and SUVs that have come incredibly close to earning one of the IIHS's highest accolades, the Top Safety Pick rating. They have great crash test scores and solid automatic emergency braking and forward collision warning systems. What trips them up is headlights. That got us wondering, how many vehicles are there that are coming up short because they don't have headlights that meet the organization's criteria for an "Acceptable" or "Good" rating. This is a revision made after 2017, a year in which headlights weren't factored in for this specific award. This is also why why some vehicles, such as the Ford F-150, might have had the award last year, but have lost it for this year. We reached out to someone at IIHS to find out. He responded with the following car models. Depending on how you count, a whopping 40 models crash well enough to receive the rating, but don't get it because their headlights are either "Poor" or "Marginal." We say depending on how you count because the IIHS actual counts truck body styles differently, and the Infiniti Q70 is a special case. Apparently the version of the Q70 that has good headlights doesn't have adequate forward collision prevention technology. And the one that has good forward collision tech doesn't have good enough headlights. We've provided the entire list of vehicles below in alphabetical order. Interestingly, it seems the Volkswagen Group is having the most difficulty providing good headlights with its otherwise safe cars. It had the most models on the list at 9 split between Audi and Volkswagen. GM is next in line with 7 models. It is worth noting again that though these vehicles have subpar headlights and don't quite earn Top Safety Pick awards, that doesn't mean they're unsafe. They all score well enough in crash testing and forward collision prevention that they would get the coveted award if the lights were better.