We Finance 2008 Land Rover Range Rover Sport 4wd Navigation Harmankardon on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2019 BMW X7 vs luxury SUV rivals: Comparing specs and photos

Today we get our first-ever look at the first-ever 2019 BMW X7 crossover. We've actually already had our first-ever drive in an X7 Prototype. And so, we thought it appropriate to follow that up today with the first-ever X7 comparison of specs between BMW's first-ever three-row crossover with legitimate room for seven and its many high-dollar competitors. On paper, the 2019 X7 definitely seems to most closely align with the Mercedes-Benz GLS-Class. Their similar dimensions, interior space, engine choices and price would certainly imply where BMW placed the target when developing X7. We used those same elements to determine three-row vehicles likely to be cross-shopped or that should be cross-shopped. These include the Audi Q7, Land Rover Discovery, Volvo XC90 and Lincoln Navigator. Yes, the latter is a truck-based SUV as opposed to a crossover, but tell that to all the people lining out the door at the local Lincoln emporium. They do not care, and neither shall we. We also included the 2019 BMW X5, which was completely redesigned for this year and therefore not the first-ever. That makes it less appealing? Either way, lining the new X5 up with the SUV that leapfrogs it atop BMW's SUV hierarchy should provide a good idea of just how much more you get by going up a model number. Engines and model lineup Again, the X7 aligns closest with the GLS, offering a base six-cylinder in its xDrive40i model and an upgrade turbo V8 in the xDrive50i. The Mercedes engines have greater output, but the GLS still accelerates slower than the BMW. As the 2019 X5 offers the exact same engines, we would also expect the X7's fuel economy to be superior to the GLS once its estimates are announced. It should be noted, though, that the GLS offers a high-powered AMG model whereas we anticipate the X7 to offer a plug-in hybrid model comparable to the X5 upcoming xDrive45e model. The other luxury SUVs diverge in their engine choices and model lineup. The Audi Q7 offers a base turbocharged four-cylinder, as does the Volvo XC90 in its T5 model, which we left out of the above chart entirely for space reasons. That the Q7 3.0 TFSI supercharged V6 gets the same fuel economy estimates as the four-cylinder is proof positive that engine is purely around for its lower base price.

Jaguar Land Rover to badge vehicles based on horsepower

Add Jaguar and Land Rover to the list of automakers changing their nomenclature due to the realities of engine downsizing. Spy photos of an unreleased Jaguar F-Type model show a badge reading P380 AWD. The letter P evidently refers to Petrol (British for gasoline), and 380 is the engine's horsepower. According to Auto Express, the entry-level F-Type will be badged P300, indicating the power output of its 2.0-liter turbocharged four-cylinder engine. Land Rover is expected to follow suit with the new badging nomenclature. Diesel models will get a D instead of a P, while electric and hybrid models will get an E badge, along with a number corresponding to total system power. So, expect the I-Pace to sport an E400 badge on its hind end. One question we have, though, is how the disparity between mechanical, metric and imperial horsepower will be dealt with. While such power-specific badges are arguably unnecessary, we expect the trend to proliferate as engines continue to get smaller but turbocharging and electrification keep horsepower climbing. At least JLR's badges are easier to understand than the messy way Audi plans to rename its models or the way BMW completely dismisses actual engine size in its naming convention. Related Video: News Source: Auto ExpressImage Credit: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg via Getty Design/Style Green Jaguar Land Rover Convertible Crossover Hatchback SUV Wagon Luxury Performance Sedan jaguar land rover

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.