2013 Supercharged Used 5l V8 32v Automatic 4x4 Suv Premium on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Jaguar Land Rover to drop supercharged V8 for turbocharged BMW power

There are few things that sound as good as Jaguar's 5.0 liter supercharged V8. As great as it is when the supercharger whines or the exhaust cracks and pops on throttle lift-off as the air pressure equalizes, the basic design dates back to the '90s. Plainly, the engine isn't as efficient as it needs to be, but designing a new V8 from the ground up is an expensive proposition. Instead, Automobile reports that Jaguar Land Rover is set to use a twin-turbocharged V8s supplied by BMW. Scalable architecture is all the rage as automakers streamline designs in order to save costs. For example, Jaguar's current supercharged V6 is quite literally a V8 with two holes missing. They didn't even change the length of the block. It seems both of those designs are on their way out, with the V6 being replaced by a inline-six closely related to the company's inline four. It seems that rather than designing an new and expensive V8 for their top of the line models JLR, is sourcing from BMW. From 1994 to 2000, BMW owned Land Rover. A few models, including the Land Rover Range Rover, used BMW engines then and in the initial years of Ford's JLR stewardship. It seems things have now come full circle. BMW currently makes a twin-turbo 4.4 liter V8 that produces anywhere from 440 to 600 horsepower, depending on the application. Automobile says that a new 4.0 liter V8 is in the works and that it will most likely be the engine that JLR uses. Expect it to be more powerful, more fuel efficient, and lighter than what both BMW and JLR currently offer. This seems like a win for both companies. BMW gets to offset the cost of a new motor while JLR, a smaller company, doesn't have to invest in a whole new architecture. As automakers search for ways to cut costs, expect collaborations like this to continue. Infiniti and Mercedes-Benz both share a four-cylinder engine. Ford and GM have worked together to design a shared 10-speed automatic. While we may lament the loss of that wonderful Jaguar Land Rover engine, we can still be happy that they haven't abandoned the V8. Related Video: News Source: Automobile Rumormill BMW Jaguar Land Rover

BMW X6 M said to lap the 'Ring in 8:20

Bimmer Today reports that the German rag Auto Zeitung ran an Audi RS3 and a BMW X6 M around the Nurburgring together, and the hotted-up sports activity vehicle came in just five seconds behind the white-hot hatch. Driven by 'Ring regular Horst von Saurma, the RS3 ran its lap in 8 minutes, 15 seconds, and the X6 M ran an 8:20. If those times are accurate, that makes the X6 M the second fastest production SUV on the lap-time list according to Wikipedia: ahead of it is the 550-hp Range Rover Sport SVR, which ran a time of 8:14. That time puts BMW's 575-horsepower, 5,200-pound SUV four seconds ahead of the time registered by the last-gen, 555-hp X6 M, and well ahead of the Porsche Cayenne Turbo S that Sport Auto clocked an 8:34 with. It would not, however, match the predictions that X6 M project manager Herbert Bayerl made for it in an interview with Sport Auto earlier this year. Bayerl said "The new BMW X6 M moves at the level of M3," speaking of the E92 BMW M3 that Sport Auto ran around the 'Ring in 8:05. It is, though, two seconds faster than the E46 M3, which lapped in 8:22. Bayerl called out the Range Rover Sport SVR directly, saying, "We have been traveling much faster in testing and have undercut the time of Range Rover several times," and "We don't need any special attachments to go faster." Auto Zeitung's report on the lap is only for subscribers so we'll have to wait for more official news. For the apples-to-apples comparison we'll be looking forward to Sport Auto's hot lap, then we'll know if the Range Rover has anything to fear. Related Video:

Rising aluminum costs cut into Ford's profit

When Ford reports fourth-quarter results on Wednesday afternoon, it is expected to fret that rising metals costs have cut into profits, even as rivals say they have the problem under control. Aluminum prices have risen 20 percent in the last year and nearly 11 percent since Dec. 11. Steel prices have risen just over 9 percent in the last year. Ford uses more aluminum in its vehicles than its rivals. Aluminum is lighter but far more expensive than steel, closing at $2,229 per tonne on Tuesday. U.S. steel futures closed at $677 per ton (0.91 metric tonnes). Republican U.S. President Donald Trump's administration is weighing whether to impose tariffs on imported steel and aluminum, which could push prices even higher. Ford gave a disappointing earnings estimate for 2017 and 2018 last week, saying the higher costs for steel, aluminum and other metals, as well as currency volatility, could cost the company $1.6 billion in 2018. Ford shares took a dive after the announcement. Ford Chief Financial Officer Bob Shanks told analysts at a conference in Detroit last week that while the company benefited from low commodity prices in 2016, rising steel prices were now the main cause of higher costs, followed by aluminum. Shanks said the automaker at times relies on foreign currencies as a "natural hedge" for some commodities but those are now going in the opposite direction, so they are not working. A Ford spokesman added that the automaker also uses a mix of contracts, hedges and indexed buying. Industry analysts point to the spike in aluminum versus steel prices as a plausible reason for Ford's problems, especially since it uses far more of the expensive metal than other major automakers. "When you look at Ford in the context of the other automakers, aluminum drives a lot of their volume and I think that is the cause" of their rising costs, said Jeff Schuster, senior vice president of forecasting at auto consultancy LMC Automotive. Other major automakers say rising commodity costs are not much of a problem. At last week's Detroit auto show, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV's Chief Executive Officer Sergio Marchionne reiterated its earnings guidance for 2018 and held forth on a number of topics, but did not mention metals prices. General Motors Co gave a well-received profit outlook last week and did not mention the subject. "We view changes in raw material costs as something that is manageable," a GM spokesman said in an email.