1984 Bmw 633csi Base Coupe 2 Door In-line 6 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2015 BMW M4 Convertible will give the best bad hair days

BMW officially unveiled the 2015 M4 Convertible at the Javits Center in New York this morning. The droptop, which will slot in next to the M4 Coupe in BMW's performance line, offers infinitely more headroom, fresh air and sunshine for those that want a little more great outdoors and tousled hair with their M experience.
Visually, the M4 convertible is similar to the coupe, and carries on the hardtop's athletic stance with a long wheelbase, short front overhang, aerodynamic mirrors and in the case of this showcar, optional yellow-painted brake calipers. The car's expressive, angry face is perhaps the most notable aspect of its styling, screaming "get the hell out of my way!" with its signature twin-bar kidney grille, trio of air intakes and squinty LED headlights. Inside, the convertible employs three-temperature neck warmers (for chilly top-down days), an absurd amount of "M" logos and a wealth of luxury and technology features.
The rear-wheel-drive convertible uses the same engine as the coupe: a high-revving, twin-turbocharged 3.0-liter inline six producing 425 horsepower and 406 pound-feet of torque, mated to either a six-speed manual or a seven-speed M dual-clutch transmission. BMW says the car can make a 0-60 sprint in just 4.4 seconds when equipped with the manual.

Infiniti Q50 Red Sport 400 priced at $48,855, AWD at $50,855

Infiniti's most powerful production model, the new Q50 Red Sport 400, now has a starting price. You'll need at least $48,855 for the rear-drive model or $50,855 for all-wheel drive. (Both figures include the $905 destination charge.) A fully loaded, rear-drive Q50 RS400 with Direct Adaptive Steering, navigation, adaptive cruise control, a heated steering wheel, and Infiniti's entire alphabet soup of safety equipment, tops out at $57,045. (Again, add $2,000 for AWD). When it comes to rear-drive competition, the closest base price to the Q50 is the 320-hp BMW 340i. This German undercuts the Infiniti by two grand, $46,795 to $48,855. But the BMW outprices the Q50 as soon as you start selecting options. A 340i with similar equipment to a loaded Q50 Red Sport 400 costs just under $60,000. All-wheel-drive German competitors also lose out in the price war. Like with the rear-drive models, the BMW 340i xDrive undercuts the Q50 RS400 by around $2,000. Add the options, and the Infiniti becomes a better value. The other two big German rivals, the Audi S4 and Mercedes-Benz C450 AMG start at a higher price and only get more expensive. Technically the S4 starts cheaper than the Q50, but only with the standard manual transmission. Selecting the S-Tronic dual-clutch model kicks the price from $50,125 to $51,125, and going for the top-end Prestige trim will bump potential Audi owners up to $57,025. Throw on must-have S4 options, including adaptive cruise control, adaptive dampers, and a sport differential and you'll be shell out $64,425 for the Audi. The Mercedes-Benz C450 AMG is the priciest choice in this group, starting at $51,725, or roughly $900 more than a base Q50 RS400 with AWD. Options, again, are the downfall here. Building a C450 to match a loaded Infiniti will drive the Mercedes' price up to $64,315. While it occupies something of a weird space relative to these vehicles, it's also worth mentioning the Cadillac CTS VSport. It's the only car in this impromptu pricing comparo that can outgun the Q50, with its 3.6-liter, twin-turbo V6 good for 420 hp and 430 lb-ft of torque. It also starts at $60,950, although that includes plenty of standard equipment. All this means that the Q50 Red Sport 400 represents a relative value. It packs more power than the Germans – 80 more than the 340i, 67 more than the S4, and 38 more than the C450 – and a more comprehensive list of options, too.

Consumer Reports criticizes small turbo engines for misleading performance, fuel economy claims [w/video]

Consumer Reports has taken aim at at small-displacement, forced-induction engines, saying the powerplants don't manage to deliver on automaker fuel economy claims. Manufacturers have long held that smaller, turbocharged engines pack all power of their larger displacement cousins with significantly better fuel economy, but the research organization says that despite scoring high EPA economy numbers, the engines are no better than conventional drivetrains in both categories. Jake Fisher, director of automotive testing for Consumer Reports, says the forced induction options "are often slower and less fuel efficient than larger four and six-cylinder engines."
Specifically, CR calls out the new Ford Fusion equipped with the automaker's Ecoboost 1.6-liter four-cylinder engine. The institute's researchers found the engine, which is a $795 option over the base 2.5-liter four-cylinder, fails to match competitors in acceleration and served up 25 miles per gallon in testing, putting the sedan dead last among other midsize options.
The Chevrolet Cruze, Hyundai Sonata Turbo and Ford Escape 2.0T all got dinged for the same troubles, though Consumer Reports has found the turbo 2.0-liter four-cylinder in the BMW 328i does deliver on its promises. You can check out the full press release below. You can also read the full study on the Consumer Reports site, or scroll down for a short video recap.