2006 Bmw 525i Silver on 2040-cars

Auto blog

EPA: Four 2014 Mini Cooper models need to drop mpg numbers

After the huge problems that Hyundai/Kia experienced with its mislabeled fuel economy labels, you'd think that any time an automaker has to adjust its mpg numbers, heralds would be shouting from the rooftops. But, after Ford admitted to three big mistakes with its numbers for the 2013 C-Max Hybrid and Mercedes-Benz had to lower the fuel economy rating for the C-Class, we understand if those heralds are a bit tired by now. The models affected include the 3-door and the 3-door S. Still, today's news is that BMW has to lower the fuel efficiency numbers for four versions of the 2014 Mini Cooper thanks to an audit conducted by the EPA and then some joint re-testing. The models affected include the 3-door with the 1.5-liter engine and the 3-door S with its 2.0-liter powerplant, with both manual and semi-automatic transmissions. As with the Benzes, the rating changes are not big ones, around one or two miles per gallon. The big exception is the manual S 3-door's highway number, which lost four mpg from 38 to 34. You can see all the numbers, new and old, in the press release below, but the EPA isn't saying what caused the problem this time. The Agency's new test procedures can't come fast enough. It should be noted that the 2015 Mini Cooper was recently delayed a bit because of the extra time it took to get the EPA numbers right. There's no confirmation that these two items are connected, but we would not be surprised to hear they were. EPA Requiring BMW to Correct Fuel Economy Labels for Four Mini Cooper Vehicles Washington - The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is revising estimates for four 2014 BMW Mini Cooper vehicles to ensure consumers are given accurate fuel economy values. The EPA performed a fuel economy audit on the BMW Mini Cooper and obtained values that differed from those BMW submitted to EPA for certification. With EPA oversight, BMW conducted new emissions and fuel economy testing, and EPA conducted its own testing at its National Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor, Michigan. As a result of this subsequent testing, EPA is requiring BMW to relabel four of its 2014 Mini Cooper models with lower fuel economy values. The specific changes to fuel economy stickers are listed in the table below.

BMW looking to save billions with cost cuts

BMW is planning a fairly extensive overhaul in a bid to recoup some its annual costs, with CEO Norbert Reithofer (pictured above) aiming to save three to four billion euro ($4 to $5.4 billion) per year to help keep the company's profit margins between eight and 10 percent, while also maintaining investments in production expansion and new tech. BMW's profit margins sat at 9.4 percent in 2013.
According to Automotive News Europe, Reithofer is none too pleased about costs at Mini and on the 1 Series, although neither AN nor its source story, from Germany's Manager Magazin, elaborate on what steps could be taken to improve losses on either project. That makes it hard to figure out just where the fat will be trimmed from.
What may happen, though, is that BMW attempts to trim 100 million euros ($135 million) from its German labor costs each year; a solution hinted at a few weeks ago by Germany newspaper Muenchner Merkur. While a dramatic cost reduction, 100 million euros still doesn't begin to even approach the savings envisioned by Reithofer.

Tier 1 suppliers call GM the worst OEM to work with

Among automakers with a big US presence, General Motors is the worst to work for, according to a new survey from Tier 1 automotive suppliers, conducted by Planning Perspectives, Inc.
The Detroit-based manufacturer, which has been under fire following the ignition switch recall and its accompanying scandal, finished behind six other automakers with big US manufacturing operations. Suppliers had issues with trust and communications, as well as intellectual property protection. GM was also the least likely to allow suppliers to raise their prices in the face of unexpected increases in material cost, all of which contributed to 55 percent of suppliers saying their relationship with GM was "poor to very poor."
GM's cross-town competitors didn't fare much better. Chrysler finished in fifth place, ahead of GM and behind Dearborn-based Ford, which was passed for third place this year by Nissan. Toyota took the top marks, while Honda captured second place.