2006 Bmw 530xi Sports Wagon 66k Metallic Blue Cream Interior Cartop Carrier on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Mini Vision Next 100 concept invokes an alternate universe

Sir Alec Issigonis, designer of the 1959 Mini, would probably find Mini's new Vision Next 100 concept amusing. The original Mini was largely an exercise in efficient packaging and clever engineering. That it was handsome, and became iconic, was more a product of its wild success than an intentional product of its exterior styling. While the Mini concept is undoubtedly cleverly packaged, it's almost purely a styling exercise, no matter what sort of futuristic connected/autonomous functionality Mini says it'll have. Mini doesn't seem able to move past the Mini as a caricature of itself. The heavy, floating roof, the vestigial round and friendly "headlamps", the oversized gauge pod. This seems very German, the inability to communicate essential brand attributes without using cliches. Mini is in a styling rut, trying to evolve the same basic styling language with each new generation, stretching it over larger hard points. The Vision Next 100 program would have been a great time to communicate to the public that Mini is more than just styling tropes: it's an attitude, a way of thinking, a connectedness to the driver. More than a badge or bug-eyed headlights. To its credit, the interior is massively decluttered. That's in part to the rear-engine layout, but more on that in a follow-up piece. The comparatively vast footwell and ultra-minimalist dash pair well with the giant windscreen. It feels light, airy, and authentic to the ideals of the originally Mini in terms of space efficiency, without being overly sentimental. Futurism is a thankless profession, and we can't take this concept literally as a vision of what the brand will be in 100 years. We can say this: it doesn't seem that Mini will be able to transcend the styling tropes that currently define Mini. Let's hope they find a way out of their rut. Related Video: Featured Gallery Mini Vision Next 100 Concept View 38 Photos Design/Style BMW MINI Coupe Hatchback Concept Cars Future Vehicles vision next 100

BMW can't build enough M3 wagons, but the U.S. won't see any

Why, oh why, won’t the automobile companies that supposedly cater to Americans give us a viable touring wagon? Seems that BMW is one manufacturer thatÂ’s aware of the question, but skirts the answer. WhatÂ’s more frustrating is that the German company, and others, have for years been off-handedly tossing out the same refrain: “Maybe weÂ’ll bring a wagon back to the U.S.” Not. All the more irritating then is the news that the Bavarians have increased production in Munich of its M3 Touring longroof version to keep up with demand. The information comes via Bimmer Today, which spoke with BMW M CEO Frank van Meel. He said that the company was surprised by the amount of interest in the M3 Touring since its debut during last year's Goodwood Festival of Speed. In fact, he said, the company had to facilitate a production ramp-up within its Munich facility. Despite that increased production, the backlog of orders means that customers are still on wait lists, he said. Last year, van Peel admitted that demand for M-wagons in the U.S. has been steadily increasing, and exporting a touring example was a concept BMW was "taking into consideration.” Crossovers certainly are this decadeÂ’s version of the wagon, which leaves American enthusiasts will few choices: only expensive versions from Audi, Volvo and Mercedes-Benz and a couple of others. Details that were announced last year — a few months before the wagon went into production for sale in Europe, the U.K. and elsewhere — noted that the M3 Touring was only available in Competition spec with xDrive all-wheel drive and a 3.0-liter twin-turbo inline-six with 503 horsepower and 479 pound-feet of torque. Pricing started at GBP80,550 ($105,000 U.S.) More data on the M3Â’s intro here. Related video:

What would you drive in 1985?

Bereft of live baseball games to watch, I've turned to the good ship YouTube to watch classic games. While watching the 1985 American League Championship Series last night, several of the broadcast's commercials made its way into the original VHS recording, including those for cars. "Only 8.8% financing on a 1985 Ford Tempo!" What a deal! That got me thinking: what would I drive in 1985?  It sure wouldn't be a Tempo. Or an IROC-Z, for that matter, despite what my Photoshopped 1980s self would indicate in the picture above. I posed this question to my fellow Autobloggists. Only one could actually drive back then, I was only 2 and a few editors weren't even close to being born. Here are our choices, which were simply made with the edict of "Come on, man, be realistic."  West Coast Editor James Riswick: OK, I started this, I'll go first. I like coupes today, so I'm pretty sure I'd drive one back then. I definitely don't see myself driving some badge-engineered GM thing from 1985, and although a Honda Prelude has a certain appeal, I must admit that something European would likely be in order. A BMW maybe? No, I'm too much a contrarian for that. The answer is therefore a 1985 Saab 900 Turbo 3-Door, which is not only a coupe but a hatchback, too. If I could scrounge up enough Reagan-era bucks for the ultra-cool SPG model, that would be rad. The 900 Turbo pictured, which was for auction on Bring a Trailer a few years ago, came with plum-colored Bokhara Red, and you're damn sure I would've had me one of those. Nevermind 1985, I'd probably drive this thing today.   Associate Editor Byron Hurd: I'm going to go with the 1985.5 Ford Mustang SVO, AKA the turbocharged Fox Body that everybody remembers but nobody drives. The mid-year update to the SVO bumped the power up from 175 ponies (yeah, yeah) to 205, making it almost as powerful (on paper, anyway) as the V8-powered GT models offered in the same time frame. I chose this particular car because it's a bit of a time capsule and, simultaneously, a reminder that all things are cyclical. Here we are, 35 years later, and 2.3-liter turbocharged Mustangs are a thing again. Who would have guessed?