2012 Used Cpo Certified Turbo 1.6l I4 16v Manual Awd Suv Premium Moonroof on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2014 Mini Cooper interior spied uncovered in China

As we approach the November 18 debut of the new Mini Hardtop, the trickle of news is starting to increase. We've already shown you the exterior of the new hatchback, and now we can show you the interior. These images, captured by Car News China, show a cabin that maintains a few key Mini styling items, but is a fairly progressive evolution of the current R56 model.
Mini's most iconic interior treatment, its center-mounted speedometer, is now gone. The new speedo sits atop the steering column, flanked by a (too tiny, in our opinion) tachometer. In the speedometer's former position are the radio controls. Our friends in China put it best when they say, "The large dial is much uglier than before." There's a mass of buttons and unfriendly black plastic that, at first glance, look far cheaper than the rest of the cabin. Of course, we'll wait to see how this is all ironed out for the production-spec car.
The other parts of the interior, however, look quite good. There's a small bank of toggle buttons at the bottom of the center stack, and the checkerboard dash insert looks clean as well. The seats sport extensions for the bottom cushions, meaning there'll be the option of more support for drivers with longer legs. GTI fans might also notice the plaid bolsters on the seats. Mini's treatment is a bit more subtle than what you'd see on a Volkswagen, though.

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.

Lexus tops JD Power Vehicle Dependability Study again, Buick bests Toyota

It shouldn't surprise anyone, but Lexus has once again taken the top spot in JD Power's Vehicle Dependability Study. That'd be the Japanese luxury brand's fourth straight year at the top of table. The big news, though, is the rise of Buick. General Motor's near-premium brand beat out Toyota to take second place, with 110 problems per 100 vehicles compared to Toyota's 111 problems. Lexus owners only reported 89 problems per 100 vehicles. Besides Buick's three-position jump, Scion enjoyed a major improvement, jumping 13 positions from 2014. Ram and Mitsubishi made big gains, as well, moving up 11 and 10 positions, respectively. In terms of individual segments, GM and Toyota both excelled, taking home seven segment awards each. The study wasn't good news for all involved, though. A number of popular automakers finished below the industry average of 147 problems per 100 vehicles, including Subaru, (157PP100), Volkswagen (165PP100), Ford/Hyundai (188PP100 each) and Mini (193PP100). The biggest losers (by a tremendous margin, we might add) were Land Rover and Fiat, recording 258 and 273 problems per 100 vehicles. The next closest brand was Jeep, with 197PP100. While the Vehicle Dependability Study uses the same measurement system as the Initial Quality Survey, the two metrics analyze very different things. The VDS looks at problems experienced by original owners of model year 2012 vehicles over the past 12 months, while the oft-quoted IQS focuses on problems in the first 90 days of new-vehicle ownership. Like the IQS, though, the VDS has a rather broad definition of what a problem is. Because of that, a low score from JD Power is no guarantee of extreme unreliability, so much as just poor design. In this most recent study, the two most reported problems focused on Bluetooth connectivity and the voice-command systems. The former leaves plenty of room for user error due to poor design (particularly true of the Bluetooth systems on the low-scoring Fords, Volkswagens and Subarus), while the second is something JD Power has already confirmed as being universally terrible. That makes means that while these studies are important, they shouldn't be taken as gospel when it comes to automotive reliability. News Source: JD PowerImage Credit: Copyright 2015 Jeremy Korzeniewski / AOL Buick Fiat Ford GM Hyundai Jeep Land Rover Lexus MINI Mitsubishi RAM Scion Subaru Toyota Volkswagen Auto Repair Ownership study