Light Blue, 67k Miles, Power Train Warranty on 2040-cars

Auto blog

On Location in California with BMW and Mini

A mid-winter escape from frigid Michigan to drive a trio of new BMW and Mini products? It'd be a busy couple of days, but you can't argue with Southern California in February. The temperatures in LA, where we drove the Mini Cooper S Convertible, hovered in the mid-80s, and it was solidly in the 70s further north, at Monterey, where we drove the M2 and X4 M40i. The highlight of the trip was Mazda Raceway Laguna Seca, which is a rewarding track to drive in a street car. The M2 was a blast there. The canyon roads above Malibu in the Mini were a close second, but even the lazy drive down the PCH to Big Sur was a blast. More important is the California state of mind we were in when driving all three of these cars. I've spent a lot of time in this state, and it has a complicated relationship with the car – and there's also a huge difference in attitude between the greater Bay Area and Southern California. Ample sun and twisty roads clash with image-consciousness, eco-consciousness, and brutal urban gridlock, and each BMW dealt with that paradox admirably, in its own way. Take a quick jaunt to California with me and check out the locations and experiences that helped form our impressions of these vehicles: the 2016 BMW M2 First Drive, the 2016 Mini Cooper S Convertible First Drive, and the 2016 BMW X4 M40i Quick Spin.

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.

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