The BMW i8 hybrid sports car, formerly known as the EfficientDynamics concept, will be debuting as a production car at the end of 2013, with deliveries beginning in early 2014. The 1.5 litre 3-cyllinder turbo-charged engine producing 163 hp and 214 lb-ft torque, plus 2 additional electric engines make sure the BMW i8 lives up to its nickname “the supercar of the future.” Its revolutionary design and high-tech features aren’t so bad, either.

Among the other BMW vehicles to be featured in the film is the all-new BMW 6 series convertible, which will be featured in a gripping car chase scene. Equipped with all the latest features and backed with a TwinPower turbo V8 engine, this BMW convertible is show-stopping.

The movie (which comes out this December), will give you the urge to drive a BMW If you don’t feel like waiting, you can come into Budds’ BMW Oakville for a test drive! We sincerely hope the BMW i8 comes to Canada—who wouldn’t want to be like Ethan Hunt?

Through this industry-first combination of attributes, the M5 redefined the capabilities of a sedan with levels of power, precision, balance and linear control never before imaginable.  Since then, finding new ways to expand the boundaries of what is possible with existing BMW models has been the singular purpose of the craftsmen at BMW M.  Now the BMW X5 M and the BMW X6 M are the first all-wheel-drive models to offer the remarkable performance, dynamic driving experience, athletic design, and premium quality of a BMW M product.

 

Official BMW X6M X5M Full Press Release

Both models are powered by a newly-developed 4.4-liter V8 M engine delivering 555 hp at 6,000 rpm and 500 lb-ft of torque from 1500 to 5,650 rpm.  This new M engine is the world’s first with a pulse-tuned exhaust manifold encompassing both rows of cylinders combined with high-performance twin-scroll twin turbo technology.

For the X5 M and X6 M, engineers at BMW M pushed the capabilities of BMW’s intelligent xDrive all-wheel-drive system and the Dynamic Performance Control system to manage the power and performance potential of these two new vehicles. The special M suspension includes Adaptive Drive and newly-developed Servotronic power steering.  These features combine to push the limits of what was previously possible with a sport-oriented vehicle, and guarantee driving behaviour characteristic of a BMW M product: incredible stability and precisely controlled steering qualities abound throughout the performance envelope.

2010 BMW X6M X5M Photo Gallery

�

Even though the project received the axe, we did learn that the CS Concept might make its return in the future, most likely as under the Rolls-Royce brand. The CS Concept was rumored for months to take on different name conventions, starting with CS, then the revival of 8 Series or even GT. 

The fellows at Autobild spotted two photos of what it seems to be a model based on the new 7 Series but with some differences, especially on the front-end.

EnI, a member of Germancarzone, as someone close to BMW, confirms that the CS Project is still going on, but most likely, it will emerge as a baby Rolls-Royce. 

I was told although BMW GT project had been ready to begin the initial testing when BMW Board of Directors decided not to offer this car under BMW but under RR badge. Of course RR design is far from being ready; the design process has just begun. But the BMW-like CS prototypes are starting the testings as scheduled – until RR design is ready.�
 

What’s certain at this point is that BMW has not completely erased the CS out of their Road Map and the state of the economy will dictate their future plans. We can only hope now!

[Source: BMWToday ]

So which carmaker is the world’s cleanest? Not sure? Well, an independent survey released last week has found that BMW has most improved its average fuel efficiency and CO2 emission rate. Indeed, it’s done so to an extent which will embarrass other carmakers.

The study, began from 1990-2005 by Environmental Defense, a US-based non-profit environmental advocacy group, which shows BMW has improved fuel economy by 14 per cent and carbon emissions by 12.3 per cent.

The next best reduction was Toyota’s 3 per cent. The C02 performance of every other leading carmaker deteriorated.

BMW has made much of the fact that the report covers a period when its US sales increased fourfold.

The Americans, of course, buy more big X5 SUVs than the rest of the world combined. The report, Automakers’ Corporate Carbon Burdens, studied the impact of 12 major carmakers’ product strategies on fuel efficiency and overall automotive carbon emissions.

BMW improved fuel economy on several key models, including the 3 Series, 5 Series, 7Series, Z4 M Coupe, M5 Sedan and X5 SUV. Of course, the group’s Mini Cooper accounted for almost half of BMW’s overall fuel economy improvements.

BMW Australia spokesman Toni Andreevski says the group has made further substantial improvements to fuel consumption and emissions since the end of the survey period.

“Already in 2007, one-third of new BMWs sold in Europe have a CO2 rating of no more than 140g per kilometre,” he says. “Basically it is a great result that shows that we can continue to optimise current engines. It also shows petrol and diesel engines that outperform existing hybrid technology at comparable costs.”

With its latest diesel and lean-burn direct-injection petrol engines, (the latter is no good for Australia because of the high sulphur content of our petrol) BMW has taken its own hybrid direction. This week at the Frankfurt motor show, it showcased its new dual-mode hybrid that returns a claimed 20 per cent economy improvement on the highway and in town.

BMW’s other more vaunted green gambit is the Hydrogen 7, the first hydrogen-powered luxury sedan. Driven in Germany last year by carsguide, the Hydrogen 7 emits primarily vapour when running on a non-petrol engine.

Toyota rated second best, reducing CO2 3 per cent overall, a result in part due to its introduction of the Prius hybrid, but mainly to improvements made to the best-selling Corolla.

The report also rated the overall ‘carbon burden’ that carmakers placed on the environment, derived from factors including vehicle emissions and the number sold. GM came out on top, with a 6.5per cent reduction in overall carbon burden, though its carbon emissions rose by 3 per cent. Toyota, while low in CO2, grew its carbon burden by 125 per cent because of an increase in overall sales.

Snapshot: Carbon savings

BMW: reduced 12.3 per cent
Toyota: reduced 3 per cent
Volkswagen: up 1.3 per cent
Subaru: up 1.6 per cent
General Motors: up 3per cent
Mitsubishi: up 4 per cent
Honda: up 4.4 per cent
Ford: up 4.7 per cent
DaimlerChrysler: up 4.8 per cent
Nissan: up 9.2 per cent
Hyundai: up 17 per cent
Kia: up 30 per cent

Written By:Paul Pottinger
Published on:www.carsguide.com.au
Source: US Environmental Defense group

– “Seven Little Girls Sitting in the Back Seat,” by Paul Evans and the Curls (1959)

You all probably know some drivers with whom you don’t mind being a passenger. They have a certain confidence in their manner behind the wheel, which inspires the same in you.

They might even drive faster than some of the others within your circle.

So, what is it that makes the better drivers that much better?

I got a clue while being chauffeured from Innsbruck, Austria to Bolzano, Italy recently to attend a press event.

I’d flown all night, and despite a few hours of sleep on the plane, I was still dozing on and off as the driver, a 30-ish woman, ferried me to my destination.

The on-and-off part of that was largely due to the occasional lurch in the older Mercedes every time she changed direction, whether on the autobahn/autostrada, or even in town.

Nothing violent, nothing that would brand her as a terrible driver. Just not smooth.

I looked for clues, and immediately found one: her hands were all over the steering wheel. Turning to the right, even for a lane change, she would slide her right hand up the rim, and tug the wheel down.

Reverse above procedure for a left.

For tighter turns, as in parking lots, she reversed her hand, gripping the rim from the inside to twirl her way in and out.

Again, not smooth, but a continuous series of lurches.

And her hands were in constant motion.

Never in my experience has the superiority of the well-known and often-taught quarter-to-three steering wheel hand position been better illustrated than when contrasted with a bad example.

About 90 per cent of all driving can be done without moving your hands from the 9 o’clock and 3 o’clock positions.

Doesn’t it follow that 90 per cent of the time, your hands should be in these positions? There’s no need to move them at all.

With this approach, most city corners and all freeway manoeuvres can be accomplished with a single sweeping arc one way, with a similar smooth return the other way, back to dead ahead.

Why quarter-to-three rather than the also-common ten-to-two?

At quarter-to-three you know exactly where the wheel is at all times. Your hands are balanced, gravity pulling the weight of both equally, the straight line connecting them exactly level with the hood of the car, and with the horizon.

Also, most steering wheels now have either spokes or at least thumb rests at the quarter-to-three locations, again making this position more stable, more comfortable.

Another problem this woman had was that, uncharacteristic for gender, she sat too far from the wheel. Thus she could not reach the top of the wheel with either hand without lifting her shoulders away from the seat back.

This eliminates the support needed to execute smooth steering action.

What if the turn is tighter than you can do with only 180 degrees of steering wheel rotation?

There are generally two schools of thought here: hand-shuffle, or hand-over-hand.

Most advanced driving schools I have been involved with prefer hand-over-hand.

Once your arms get to the point where they’re locked – usually a few degrees before a half-revolution of the wheel – release the lower hand (the right hand in a right-hand corner, the left in a leftie) and re-grasp the wheel just above the other hand, and continue the steering motion.

When returning to straight ahead, don’t just let go of the wheel; feed it back hand-over-hand until you are dead-straight ahead again.

In most modern cars anyway, one such hand-over-hand manoeuvre will take care of all but the tightest of parking situations.

Hand shuffle, which used to be taught in older British schools when the steering wheels were huge and car steering had no power assist, involves (for a right-hand corner) sliding the right hand up and the left hand down, tugging the wheel down, and repeating as needed.

A lot more confusing, a lot more work, and it’s harder to keep track of exactly where you are; especially in an emergency manoeuvre, you need to know where straight ahead is.

With hand shuffle, that’s tough.

Some drivers have returned to hand-shuffle because they’re afraid of having their arms broken if the steering wheel air bag goes off.

Well, if you’re in a crash severe enough to trigger the air bag, you probably have little or no control of where your arms are anyway.

And if hand-over-hand gives you better control of the car – and I am convinced it does – it reduces the chances of an air-bag-deploying crash happening in the first place, and surely that’s the top priority.

So this is the setup:

Seat adjusted so you can grasp the very top of the wheel with either hand, while keeping the elbow slightly bent, and the shoulders in constant contact with the seat back.

Hands at quarter-to-three at all times, unless in a very tight corner; hand-over-hand if you need more steering lock.

Why not give it a try?

And don’t be surprised if your friends and family start preferring to drive with you.

Jim Kenzie
Toronto Star

The Hinwil based team “realises the importance of continuity”, a statement read, confirming that Nick Heidfeld would again drive alongside Robert Kubica.

As reported earlier, Timo Glock has not yet been confirmed as next year’s official test driver because he is currently negotiating for a race deal elsewhere in pitlane.

A BMW statement confirmed: “With regard to signing a test and reserve driver, an announcement will be made at a later stage.” (GMM)

Through the program, BMW hopes to underscore the fact that the Hydrogen 7 is a production model, not a concept car, and that it has successfully completed the entire product development process and meets all standards necessary for driving on U.S. roads. During the program, 25 of the 100 cars produced will be used in evaluation programs in the U.S. The vehicle is currently not for sale, but the company says it is “considered to be a milestone in bringing forward hydrogen as the sustainable fuel for individual transportation.”

BMW says it believes hydrogen will replace petroleum as the long-term alternative to fossil fuel, and hopes the Hydrogen 7 will play a pioneering role in driving forward hydrogen technologies

Nick Heidfeld secured a beautiful 3rd place podium finish while teammate Robert Kubica followed closely behind him picking up fifth spot. With BMW picking up another ten points, this puts them 38 points infront of the cars which won the world championship for the past two years, Renault. It certainly wasn’t easy though for Nick to keep Fernando Alonso from breathing down his back as he was being chased for several laps until the end.

Be sure to catch round 12 of the championship when the teams battle it out in Turkey in 3 weeks time.

OTTAWA — Could it really be so – that GM’s Hummer is more than 40 per cent greener than Toyota’s Prius? That Ford’s F-Series pickup is greener? That GM’s Silverado pickup is greener? That Dodge’s Ram pickup is greener? That Cadillac’s DTS, a full-sized luxury sedan with a V8 engine, is greener? Could it be, in fact, that seven different luxury-class automobiles are all greener – and that three of them are Cadillac models?

Well, indeed, it really could be. And, if so, Finance Minister Jim Flaherty’s new-car incentive program is a huge environmental mistake.

Oregon-based CNW Marketing Research Inc. has conducted the world’s most comprehensive analysis of the “life cycle” energy requirements of more than 100 makes and models of cars and trucks. Given the thousands of parts and processes in the manufacturing and operation of cars, it was a complex task and took the company two years to complete. Volvo once tried to do it – and gave up in frustration (though it does publish “life cycle” analysis for its own makes).

CNW identified 4,000 “data points” for each car, ranging from the energy consumed in research and development to energy consumed in junkyard disposal. It calculated the electrical energy needed to produce each pound of parts. It calculated greenhouse gas emissions. It calculated mileage, too – adjusting for the differences between rush-hour Tokyo and rural America.

The company describes this exercise as “dust to dust” analysis. CNW has now published its second annual report, a 400-page production.

To keep it relatively free of technical jargon, the company expresses energy requirement as the dollar cost of energy for every mile across a vehicle’s anticipated years of use – “U.S. dollars per lifetime mile.” Thus it reports the lifetime energy requirement of a Hummer as $1.90 a mile; the lifetime energy requirement of a Prius as $2.86 a mile.

It reports by model name and by category. For 22 models of economy cars, the average lifetime energy cost is $0.85. For six models of pickup trucks, it’s $2.58. For 14 models of smaller-sized sports utility vehicles, it’s $2.07; for nine models of larger-sized SUVs, it’s $3.98. For 10 models of gas-electric hybrids, it’s $3.65.

Compare the SUVs against the hybrids and you get a sweep in favour of conventional technology. The best-rated smaller SUVs are more than twice as eco-friendly as the hybrids: Dodge’s Durango, $1.57; Ford’s Explorer, $1.61; Chevrolet’s TrailBlazer, $1.61; Jeep’s Grand Cherokee, $1.80.

More remarkably, one of the larger SUVs, Ford’s Expedition, beats the hybrids with an eco-cost of $3.54.

CNW found wide differences, however, within classes of vehicles. For 18 models of luxury cars, the average energy cost is $4.45. Yet the best of these luxury cars are superior, in lifetime energy use, to hybrids.

The luxury cars that rival hybrids: Lincoln’s Town Car, $2.66; Acura’s RL, $2.80; Cadillac’s CTS, $3.19; BMW’s 5 Series, $3.19; Mercedes-Benz’s E-Class, $3.48; Toyota Land Cruiser 80 series, $3.49; Cadillac’s STS (Seville), $3.56; Cadillac’s DTS (DeVille), $3.65.

CNW’s assessment of the hybrids has irritated some of the car companies.

Toyota says that CNW credited Prius with only half its 200,000 lifetime miles. CNW says that Prius owners drive less than 7,500 miles a year – meaning that these cars will be scrapped long before they use their expected lifetime mileage (in 26 years). CNW says that hybrids fare poorly because of increased complexity. Honda’s conventional Accord gets rated at $2.18; its Accord Hybrid gets rated at $3.29 – an environmental cost 50 per cent higher.

Take the batteries, for example. Toyota buys 1,000 tonnes of nickel a year from Ontario (mined and smelted in Sudbury). This nickel gets shipped to Wales for refining, then to China, for further processing, and then to Toyota’s battery plant in Tokyo – a 10,000-mile trip, mostly by petrol-gulping container ships and diesel-powered locomotives.

Toyota, however, still has some of the greenest vehicles on earth. The Scion has the lowest energy cost of all at 48 cents a mile. The Corolla, at 72 cents, and the Echo (Yaris), at 77 cents, are also in the best-on-earth class. Low-energy competitors include Dodge’s Neon (64 cents) and Saturn’s Ion (67 cents). Cars with the highest energy requirement include the Rolls Royce ($10.97) and the equally elegant German-made Maybach ($15.83).

In his March budget, Mr. Flaherty made fuel efficiency – gas mileage alone – the sole basis for the environmental rating of new cars. He will reward high-mileage cars (with rebates from $1,000 to $2,000) and punish low-mileage cars (with surcharges from $1,000 to $4,000). The program could well be a phenomenal waste of energy. Junk it, Mr. Flaherty. It’s not fit for the road.

Gerhard Richter is vice president, BMW M Gmbh — the man responsible for the new generation of M cars. He began his career at BMW in the chassis development department, helping to engineer the first-generation BMW 7 Series. He then became the project engineer for BMW M’s first everyday road car, the 1979 M535i, and he has worked at M ever since. Gerhard Richter was interviewed at the launch of the new 2008 BMW M3 by Inside Line’s Alistair Weaver.

How would you define the role of the M3 in the BMW M range?
The M3 stands for our philosophy. It is the best representation of the M character, combining the feeling of a racecar with that of a normal street car. We concentrate on what we call “concept harmony,” by which we mean that we look at the car as a whole. This is what separates us from everyone else.

How difficult has it been to replace the old inline-6 engine with a V8?
It was not so easy. The six-cylinder is the traditional engine for an M3. But the old engine had reached its limits. We had to develop an all-new engine and it made sense to design a V8. For fans of the six-cylinder engine, we have the M Coupe. This is our entry-level M model.

Will there be a new version of the lightweight M3 CSL?
We built the last M3 CSL to test how many euros customers are willing to pay for less weight. For 20 years, they’ve learnt to pay for more power, not less weight. The reaction to the CSL was very positive and you will already see in the new M3 that we’ve spent a lot of money bringing down the weight.

The last M3 CSL was very successful and fun to drive. From now on, there will always be a CSL version of the M3.

The M3 has grown up, both in terms of size and price. Is there room for a smaller, entry-level M car, based around the new 1 Series coupe available in Europe?
Theoretically, yes. A 1 Series coupe would be a good base for such a car, but there has been no decision yet.

It is true that the M3 has grown over several generations and the latest car is a similar length to an old 5 Series. But we also have the M Coupe for those who want a small car that concentrates on driving fun.

How do you decide which engine to develop for each car?
We’re looking for the best performance for the type of car. For the M5 and M6 we use a V10, and for the M3 we use a V8. If you only develop one engine for all your cars, then you cannot have the perfect car. If the engine in the smaller car is too big, you will not have the right harmony.

What are your main targets when developing a new model?
We concentrate on several targets — high revs, lower fuel consumption. There are lots of targets but our main target is that the car must be fun to drive. Raw horsepower is not as important as how agile the car is and how the driver feels.

The power-to-weight figure is the most important figure — more horsepower and lower weight equals more agility.

Will we see alternative engine technologies in the future, such as diesel?
When a diesel is able to achieve high revs, why not use it? But for now it’s not possible. We need that special, high-revving character in an M engine. It’s not enough just to increase the boost pressure [of the turbo]. We need to change the character of the car.

What about a hybrid?
We already have a brake-energy regeneration system in the new M3, but it’s not our target to put 100 kilograms [220 pounds] of batteries in our car. We need much smarter hybrid technology.

Or turbocharging?
Maybe in the future. In 2011, the F1 racing regulations could change to introduce turbocharging. If we were able to bring our character together with a turbo engine, then why not? Formula 1 is very important for us; BMW M’s heritage is in motorsport. Changes in the F1 regulations might be good for us. If the change fits with the M character, it could be a solution. The most important thing for the customer is to have this special character.

Or hydrogen?
Maybe in 15 years time. It’s important to remember that the car is only 100 years old and technology moves very fast. The new M3 engine has 17 percent more horsepower than the old, but it has 7 percent less weight and 8 percent lower fuel consumption. This is one of the most efficient V8s on the market.

What do you see as the key rivals for the M cars?
The characters of our rivals’ cars are so different that customers can find the right car for them. The Porsche is a Porsche — very successful and fun to drive. And when people think of Porsche they think of the 911 — a modern-day Beetle.

(laughs)

Audi Quattro Gmbh uses front- or four-wheel drive, and so the handling is quite different. It’s a good solution if you live in the mountains. Mercedes AMG uses a relatively low-revving big-block engine and an automatic gearbox. Every car is different.

AMG has recently started to offer a limited run of tuned cars called Black Series. Can we expect a similar range from BMW?
This is not our philosophy. The Black Series is a way of trying to change the character of the cars, but we wouldn’t do this because we have a clear idea of what our cars need to be. We have a personalization program — Individual — which caters to owners with special tastes, but these changes would never affect the driving characteristics of an M car.

Audi recently introduced the R8 to much acclaim. Will BMW build a supercar?
That’s a very difficult question to answer. A car like the Porsche Carrera GT could reflect our character, but the Carrera GT was not a commercial success. Below this supercar level, anything we could offer would just be on a level with the M3 or M6.

We could build a car that used the technical aspects of the M3 or M6 but clothe it in a new body, but such a car would be more expensive and no more fun to drive. That is the reason why we’re hesitant to build such a car, although as an engineer I’d love to do it.

If you build a €1 million supercar, no one will ever have the chance to see it. For us it’s better to make an M3 or M6, where the price is OK.

Source: Inside Line