BMW AGREES DEAL WITH BENZ - to share bits

homer90

O Dear ..........
Credit crunch starting to bite perhaps ?

"Arch showroom rivals BMW and Mercedes have reportedly shaken hands on an agreement that will see shared components used in the manufacturer of both brands – and the move could extend to shared engines in the future.........

http://www.pistonheads.com/news/default.asp?storyId=18857

Good Idea ?

qz

M5-63 A///MG

Sweet.

Owen

Old news, Jalopnik reported on this a few months back. It was bound to happen, nearly every other manufacturer shares parts and platforms, so it was inevitable that the larger manufacturers would do it too.

Not going to call it as being good or bad, but time will tell more than speculation on a forum can. Finger's crossed they share only the good bits

L1011

BMW already have a platform share, but I suspect this is for the entire opposite end of the scale...

Zube

MYOB wrote: »

BMW already have a platform share, but I suspect this is for the entire opposite end of the scale...

I've read car magazine rumours that the next-generation Mini and next A and B class Mercs would share a platform. And of course the current Mini shares oily bits with the 207, and the last one had a Toyota diesel.

Owen

The next gen MINI will be sharing bits with the next Fiat 500. It's only BMW and Mercedes that will be sharing parts. Also, in the US, MINIs and Alfas will be sold side by side in the next few years.

L1011

Unless they've changed their plans, it wasn't the Mini - it was a smaller model, likely to be called the Isetta - that was to be built on an even smaller than the 500 Fiat (e.g. a shunted shunted Panda chassis), to be called the Topolino.

The 500 hasn't got a replacement plan at all yet!

Ferris

Between the two companies they should really improve the efficiency of their engines. BMW already have the most efficient petrol and diesel (actually made by Steyr) engines out there but Merc are developing their new DiesOtto technology that is effectively a petrol powered diesel! Mix all this in with both companies getting into hybrid and Hydrogen technologies.

Its kinda hard to see where they will find common ground on what to make together.

Zube

MYOB wrote: »

Unless they've changed their plans, it wasn't the Mini - it was a smaller model, likely to be called the Isetta - that was to be built on an even smaller than the 500 Fiat (e.g. a shunted shunted Panda chassis), to be called the Topolino.

According to this Auto Express article, the next Mini will be twinned with the next MiTo, which makes more sense. The Mini is a beefier car than the Panda/500, it's only so tiny inside because of all that big-car suspension BMW stuff into it.

There are a couple of guesses about what the Isetta/Topolino cars might look like, too, and a suggestion that they'll be 3+1 seaters, like the iQ.

Zube

Ferris wrote: »

Merc are developing their new DiesOtto technology that is effectively a petrol powered diesel!

diesOtto engines are a long way off...

rebel.ranter

Zube wrote: »

According to this Auto Express article, the next Mini will be twinned with the next MiTo, which makes more sense. The Mini is a beefier car than the Panda/500, it's only so tiny inside because of all that big-car suspension BMW stuff into it.

Speaking of Minis, I was reading US magazine Motor Trends on the plnae home a few weeks ago & they mentioned this as something that is actually going to be available over there. Is this really taking the Mini brand too far offering an off-road version?

Owen

MYOB wrote: »

The 500 hasn't got a replacement plan at all yet!

Of course it does. All cars have a lifecycle, the 500 too, it will be due to be refreshed approx 2012, around the same time as the MINI hatchback. Hence the parts sharing.

Most of what I've written has been confirmed by MINI USA, rather than the usual autocar 'sources' which are about as reliable as Bus Eireann's timetable.

Owen

rebel.ranter wrote: »

Speaking of Minis, I was reading US magazine Motor Trends on the plnae home a few weeks ago & they mentioned this as something that is actually going to be available over there. Is this really taking the Mini brand too far offering an off-road version?

Did you know when the original Mini was designed by Sir Alec Issigonis, he designed, at the same time, a 4x4 Mini based on a concept from the Mini Moke? There were prototypes designed, and given to the British Forces for testing. It's fair to say there have always been plans for a 4x4 Mini since 1959.

People think of the older Minis, and they remember the 2 door, and the estate. But there were literally dozens of variants, the pickup, the cabriolet, the clubman, the moke, the innocenti, the shorty, the wolesely hornet, the riley elf, the midas, the marcos, and of course the Mini vans. There were so many, it's hard to keep track, and when the new one goes to *gasp* 4 variants, people flip out.

It's a brand now, like it or loathe it. This was bound to happen way back in 2001 when BMW built the car that Rover designed.

L1011

ned78 wrote: »

Of course it does. All cars have a lifecycle, the 500 too, it will be due to be refreshed approx 2012, around the same time as the MINI hatchback. Hence the parts sharing.

Most of what I've written has been confirmed by MINI USA, rather than the usual autocar 'sources' which are about as reliable as Bus Eireann's timetable.

It hasn't got a public replacement plan, then. Also, a 500 replacement and a Mini replacement would be different size classes.

Owen

MYOB wrote: »

Also, a 500 replacement and a Mini replacement would be different size classes.

Currently, yes. In the future, no. This has already been announced by both manufacturers, they've signed a memorandum of understanding, BMW have agreed to promote Fiat/Alfa in the states, and they will be part sharing.

Zube

ned78 wrote: »

This has already been announced by both manufacturers, they've signed a memorandum of understanding, BMW have agreed to promote Fiat/Alfa in the states, and they will be part sharing.

We understand that. Can you point to an announcement that the Mini and 500 will share a platform?

I already cited autoexpress, here's another reference which states that the next Mini will share a Fiat platform, but doesn't say which one (although the article refers to the 500, the announcement clearly doesn't).

On that memorandum, here's a link which says:

The latest automotive collaboration will involve BMW working with Alfa Romeo and Fiat on developing components and systems as well as a common platform for BMW’s third-generation Mini Cooper, Alfa Romeo’s Mi.To and Fiat’s Grande Punto. All cars are scheduled for release early on in the ’10s, according to suppliers for both brands

So as several people have said, not a Mini/500 as the 500 is a class smaller. The 500 will presumably continue to be based on the smaller Panda platform, along with the Ka.

Owen

Zube wrote: »

The 500 will presumably continue to be based on the smaller Panda platform, along with the Ka.

Sorry, my bad. It's the Punto that'll be getting the Platform, and the 500 will probably keep sharing with Ford as said, BUT, the 500 will get parts from the MINI bin too - hence the parts sharing. Apologies for the screwup on the platform comments

Zube

ned78 wrote: »

Apologies for the screwup on the platform comments

No worries

E92

Merc needs a new 4 pot petrol for the next A and B class, as the 4 pot they have is too big.

BMW have a 1.6 turbo in development at the moment.

BMW needs a new V12 for the 760i, although there is the slight chance that it will be called the 755i when it enters production, since BMW have recently filed 755 as a trademark, along with a host of other ones; petrol hybrids will end with ih and diesel hybrids will end with dh, so the 7 series hybrid concept will actually be called the 750ih or 750Lih, then there's sDrive(we can now safely say that when the X1 comes it will have the 4 pot diesels from the 1 series including the 123d twin turbo, as well as the 3.0 straight 6 petrols and diesels we're already familiar with, the company is developing a 1.6 4 pot turbo(presumably twin turbo) which will replace the existing NA N43 4 pot which only came out last March).

Merc have a new M275 V12 on the way with all the gizmos under the sun fitted.

More than likely it will continue to be badged as a 760i, because they've also filed trademarks for 555 and 655, which suggests that there is a more powerful version of the 4.4 twin turbo V8 on the cards(given that the current trend in BMW is for downsizing(the 123d's twin turbo will be rolled out with the introduction of new models effectively replacing the 325d/525d etc which I think is a pity that we're losing more 6 pot models but I suppose they've no choice with all the CO2 nonsense) and reducing cylinders I somehow don't think they're going to start putting V12s in the 5 and 6 series.

Of course they could also be doing what Merc are doing, magically adding on "half a litre" when they call it a hybrid(cue the C300 Bluetec hybrid based on the C250 CDI and the S400 hybrid based on the S350) too, but I sincerely hope not as the S400 hybrid is slower than the S350 and BMWs are suppposed to be about performance.

So there certainly is some ground there for this alliance.

Officially the companies will only be sharing bits that won't dilute either brand's appeal, so we'll wait and see what happens. Already BMW and Merc, along with GM will be using the same hybrid system, and that hasn't upset anyone.

I don't see anything wrong with this kind of thing once it doesn't dilute the appeal or quality of BMW, and Merc. I'd rather this kind of thing happen rather than see BMW be a part of a big company like VAG.

The company already has alliances with PSA for petrol engines(the new 1.6 turbo one the way is a different engine though) and diesels for the MINI, an alliance with FIAT could be very interesting indeed, especially if we see Alfas using BMW chassis and 6 pot petrol engines:D!

I think it's funny how Alfa fans despise BMW and now they could be relying on chassis from Munich for future cars, not to mention sharing a common platform with BMW for the next MiTo(which is definately going to happen):D!

E92

Zube wrote: »

diesOtto engines are a long way off...

They'll be here in 2015, and they give diesel economy and torque but all the best bits of petrol; power, noise, refinement, superior non CO2 related emissions, lightness, lower cost, higher rev limits etc.

And they run on petrol too, which means they'll cut CO2 emissions by 11% compared to a diesel that does the same mpg because petrol is a much cleaner burning fuel than diesel.

It actually is Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition to dive "DiesOtto" its correct title, and effectively it is the next generation of direct injection for petrol engines.

Zube

E92 wrote: »

I think it's funny how Alfa fans despise BMW and now they could be relying on chassis from Munich for future cars, not to mention sharing a common platform with BMW for the next MiTo(which is definately going to happen):D!

Since when do Alfa fans despise BMW? I think it's obvious that Alfas based on BMW bits would be better than Alfas based on Fiat bits. Unfortunately, they'd also be dearer.

E92

Zube wrote: »

Since when do Alfa fans despise BMW? I think it's obvious that Alfas based on BMW bits would be better than Alfas based on Fiat bits.

Of course Alfas are going to be better using BMW derived bits, that goes without saying.

I meant Alfisti(or whatever way you write it) whenever they make their (rare) appearance on this, and other forums encouraging you to be brave and go for an Alfa, and it usually ends up with remarks along the lines of BMWs are sh!te/boring etc.

cashmni1

No this is not a good idea.
It's a comprimise. It's the new economy that we all live in now. I hate the idea.
Yes yes I know all the cars that are shared, crossed and generally interbread.
They all look like it too.
Back in the 80's lets say. (just for example)
The older mercs were exactly that. A merc. No mistaking it.

The older BMW 7 series or 6 series. Truly Magnificant cars. Everyone knew what the were and they were truly individual. Even Alfa Romeo cars. The Alfasud. Everyone knew what they were. Not just those of us in the know.

now.....FFS!

Every other thing is the same, if you know what I mean. Where is the induviduality gone??

E92

cashmni1 wrote: »

Where is the induviduality gone??

I agree that all the interestingness of cars is going, they're slowly becoming more and more like white goods on wheels to me, with one platform serving a whole host of cars, just look at the Volkswagen Group, the one platform serves 2 generations of Golf, Passat, Tiguan, Golf Plus, Jetta, Eos, Scirocco, TT, A3, Leon, Octavia, Altea, Altea XL and Toledo(and I'm sure I've left out something along the way).

Certainly we won't be seeing any Citroen DS's again, or anything even remotely close to it.

All that said, there are so many legal requirements and hurdles car makers have to pass through these days to even sell a car, and it's going to get worse with Governments interfering in car makers all the more with more CO2 related nonsense, which is forcing car makers to develop enormously expensive hybrids and expensive diesels, so this kind of thing is inevitable I'm afraid.

To be honest I'd rather this kind of thing happen than BMW and Merc and Fiat all being some sort of super company with one large parent.

Zube

E92 wrote: »

I meant Alfisti(or whatever way you write it) whenever they make their (rare) appearance on this, and other forums encouraging you to be brave and go for an Alfa, and it usually ends up with remarks along the lines of BMWs are sh!te/boring etc.

I certainly wouldn't say BMWs are sh!te, but I'm unlikely to ever buy one.

Just look at a 159 parked beside a 3 series. The BMW is dynamically better, but man, I thought Bangle was supposed to be brave! The 3 series is the dullest looking yoke in it's class. It's not even ugly enough to be interesting.

Most Alfa fans (myself included) would also say BMWs are good, but too pricey beside the Alfas, providing you are willing to keep the car until depreciation isn't an issue.

E92

Zube wrote: »

I thought Bangle was supposed to be brave! The 3 series is the dullest looking yoke in it's class. It's not even ugly enough to be interesting.

The 3 series isn't the most exciting car ever made appearance wise, and an Alfa 159 does look a lot more exciting(and I even hear reliability has improved a lot too) but it is a far nicer design than some of Bangle's other creations, like the X3 and 6 series.

I'd always take something conservative over something as hideous as the X3, or E65 7 series. If it ain't broke then don't fix it, it's not like BMW were on the brink of collapse and needed something radical top survive, far from it in fact, and I think they've cost themselves a lot of buyers, Merc and Audi have increased their sales in recent years far more dramatically than BMW have i.e. Audi and Merc have been gaining market share at BMW's expense.

In fairness most BMW fans think Bangle should be shot for ruining designs that may have been predictable and a bit conservative, but they were nevertheless attractive designs that looked modern while still retaining traditional BMW design features like the kink in the rear side windows.

I wouldn't mind but Bangle can design nice looking cars, the FIAT Coupé is one such car.

Mailman

From a Technical Innovation viewpoint the mainstream manufacturers have been closing the gap on BMW and Mercedes.
There was a time when you got something more for your money that a badge.
BMW and Mercedes can't afford to innovate on production runs of maybe 100,000 units. The economies of scale are not there. With two customers for high end technology they can afford to invest in R&D to deliver the next generation of engines, transmissions, electrical buses that they just can't afford to invest in at the moment. If they go in to partnership with mainstream manufacturers they have to accept less advanced technology because hi-tech can't be justified by the other partner.

If you are a fan of advanced technologies and quality engineering you should welcome this development - it'll give you better cars which deserve to carry the BMW or Mercedes badge, not A-class, not 1 series, not ML,etc.. but rather the good stuff like S-Class and 5 series..

mumhaabu

Will it be the slippery slope to merger? BMW Will eventually dominate the European car market if VW don't get ahead.

galwaytt

E92 wrote: »

I think it's funny how Alfa fans despise BMW and now they could be relying on chassis from Munich for future cars, not to mention sharing a common platform with BMW for the next MiTo(which is definately going to happen):D!

...not half as funny that, no matter what car you drive, you are statistically more likely to be driving Fiat, than anyting else for some time into the future...:D

Fiat did invent the common rail, after all......and everybody, but everybody, has followed suit. Some have have given up on trying to compete, and just did a deal to buy from them in the first place - GM. No point in trying to re-invent the wheel. Which is a good thing, actually.

Ah, the irony of it, because no matter what twist you put on it, people will see it as a BMW with Fiat parts, not a Fiat with BMW parts........

E92

galwaytt wrote: »

...not half as funny that, no matter what car you drive, you are statistically more likely to be driving Fiat, than anyting else for some time into the future...:D

Nice try, but it's only MINI that will be sharing bits with FIATs, BMW will *not* be sharing anything with FIAT:p!

BMW may be sharing things with Alfas, something different I think you'll agree. But for the moment it's *only* MINI that will be having anything to do with FIAT. It's mere specualtion that Alfa may share things with BMW, we know FIAT wants to go back to RWD for the larger Alfas, and we know BMW has ample supply of RWD chassis, so I think we can see where that may go. Then you could have Alfa styling and BMW engines/chassis, the best of everything:D!

And btw, the common rail has been around since the 1940s(albeit not asadvanced as what we have today), just because FIAT popularised it(and fair play to them for revolutionising the diesel engine in passenger cars) does not for a second mean they invented it, because they didn't;).

Cosmo K

errrrrhh Sorry E92, like it or not, but...


Alfa Romeo=Fiat
BMW=MINI

unkel

E92 wrote: »

just because FIAT popularised it does not for a second mean they invented it, because they didn't;).

Semantics. They mightn't have outright invented it, but they do own the patents to the common rail diesel technology for cars. Every other major manufacturer in the world pays FIAT royalties. BMW was the first to recognise the superiority of common rail and cough up for it, VAG was the last to do so.

unkel

E92 wrote: »

BMW needs a new V12 for the 760i

E92 wrote: »

Merc have a new M275 V12 on the way with all the gizmos under the sun fitted.

You aren't seriously suggesting that BMW will stick a Merc engine in their flagships? :eek:

This is simply not going to happen. It'd say the Quandts rather go bankrupt

Mr.David

unkel wrote: »

BMW was the first to recognise the superiority of common rail and cough up for it

Hmm.....I thought the Merc C220 cdi was the first but could be wrong. But your point is correct in that FIAT pioneered the technology and have indeed pioneered many innovative powertrain solutions.:cool:

Mr.David

I think that this is merely the start of it and is a sign of things to come. Component/platform sharing will increase hugely over the next ten years between compatible manufacturers.

Also, dont be surprised to see Merc/BMW powertrains in the next generation Aston Martins/Jags/Land Rovers. These companies simply do not produce enough units to justify developing their own powertrains.:)

unkel

Mr.David wrote: »

Hmm.....I thought the Merc C220 cdi was the first but could be wrong.

You're right! I knew FIAT was first in late '97 and BMW was early '98, but I just looked it up and the C220 CDI was still in '97 too.

E92

BMW were first car maker with a 6 pot common rail diesel(the 530d). They were the first ever car maker to bring High Precision Injection, Valvetronic and second generation common rail technology to market(not saying they invented all of them for the pedantic around here).

Oh and we can expect to see BMW engines in other cars in the future as they're now selling their engines to rival manufacturers.

@unkel - I don't think we're going to see a Merc V12 in a BMW somehow, it's mere speculation on my part based on what I've read in BMW enthusiasts sites!

All I know is both companies do need a V12; these engines are still a pre requisite for big saloons like the 7 series in other parts of the world, for example the Middle East even in these era of environmental awareness and higher oil prices.

Guy:Incognito

E92 wrote: »

Certainly we won't be seeing any Citroen DS's again, or anything even remotely close to it.
.

Hopefully some of the madder folk at PSA keep bringing this up at meetings.

http://www.citroenet.org.uk/miscellaneous/d5/d5.html

unkel

E92 wrote: »

@unkel - I don't think we're going to see a Merc V12 in a BMW somehow, it's mere speculation on my part based on what I've read in BMW enthusiasts sites!

Surely no BMW enthusiast would ever suggest to use a merc V12? Especially not on an enthusiast site - that would by cyber-suicide

galwaytt

E92 wrote: »

BMW were first car maker with a 6 pot common rail diesel(the 530d).

tut tut, grasping......

They were the first ever car maker to bring High Precision Injection

incorrect - pioneered in the '90's by Mitsubishi under the GDI badge.....

Oh and we can expect to see BMW engines in other cars in the future as they're now selling their engines to rival manufacturers..

so long as it's not the 4-pot petrols like the 318, that's fine by me !!

galwaytt

Stekelly wrote: »

Hopefully some of the madder folk at PSA keep bringing this up at meetings.

http://www.citroenet.org.uk/miscellaneous/d5/d5.html

yum yum - a few messy bits, but I like it !!

E92

galwaytt wrote: »

incorrect - pioneered in the '90's by Mitsubishi under the GDI badge....

No, High Precision Injection is far more sophisticated than plain old direct injection, which is an excellent concept that I've championed many times as the future of petrol engines on this forum; it's like comparing the first diesels with direct injection to the latest common rail systems, they may be based on a similar concept but one is clearly superior than the other.

Warning - the rest of the post is full of nerdy stuff, if you''re normal - stop reading here

[Nerd Mode]Mitsubishi's system, and as I've previously owned a car with GDI(Volvo S40), I know the thing backwards, has 2 modes of operation; 'high performance' mode, which in spite of the name actualy is what it operates in most of the time, and 'lean burn' mode which it operates in above 35 mph under light throttle conditions, like going down hills, when you build up speed very gradually, travelling at constant speeds on the flat etc.

When it's in 'lean burn' mode it uses direct injection, when it's in high performance mode it uses traditional indirect injection. When it runs in direct injection mode it is remarkably economical; I've bettered 60 mpg in that car on several occasions going from the outskirts of Cork to Mallow and that involved driving at 60 mph but trying to use the accelerator and brakes as little as possible, it took a bit of effort but GDI will give significant improvements in mpg if you try hard enough, and I didn't bother with crap like slowing down, just more carefully.

The GDI engine is one of the coarsest 4 cylinder engines going; it makes a very harsh note above 4,000 rpm, it actually sounds like it's in pain and begs you to go below 4,000 rpm, it sounds like a diesel when cold and it is rather noisy even when warmed up(it is the only modern petrol engine I know of that gets quieter when it warms up). It's very flat above about 2,500 rpm too, but if you could put up with the appalling noise it made and battled on and forced that engine to go beyond 4,000 rpm, and persuaded it to hit 5, 6 and even the 7,000 rpm rev limiter it could get a shift on no problem.

BMW's HPI is a lot better than GDI, because it has an ultra lean burn mode(as lean burn above but as the name suggests it can run in even leaner mixtures i.e. even lower fuel consumption), a stoichiometric mode, which is used in moderate load conditions in effect it is direct injection but the mixture is less lean, and high power mode, which is as per high performance mode above in how it works, but in BMW's system it is only used when climbing steep hills and/or maximum power is required.

BMW's engines are no noisier nor any worse sounding than a conventional indirect injection system(not having driven one I don't know if they suffer from a refinement penalty like Mitsubishi's GDI engine but I have yet to see any evidence in the press that they are any less smooth or unrefined than the models they replace); early direct injection systems were a lot louder as per the GDI system Mitsubishi developed because of the physical operation of direct injection.

Oh and High Precision Injection is the only petrol engine in the world to use ultra precise Piezo injectors too.

In simple English the reason why High Precision Injection is better than any other direct injection system out there is because it can run in direct injection mode over a far wider range of operating conditions and even rev ranges than other systems.

In other words it is far more capable of achieving the stated mpg claims that you find in the brochures, and that's why BMW deliberately did not equip cars with direct injection until long after a lot of rivals, because they felt that Valvetronic would match the DI systems of the time in the mpg tests but could deliver far more in the real world than DI at the time.

I personally disagree with BMW on that one; I feel that Mitsubishi's GDI system does deliver real world mpg improvements(If I didn't have such a heavy right foot I know I'd have noticed it in my wallet because whenever I tried to drive economically with that engine the mpgs would improve very quickly; unfortunately life's too short to be worrying about frugality like that so that talent was wasted on someone like me), but there were too many other compromises in terms of reliability(though I never had a day's bother with mine, but then again I gave it plenty of revs a lot of the time and those engines gave trouble when they were driven too gently for extended periods), and it was noisier tha aconventional 4 pot, it wasn't as smooth, and it sounded like a bag of spanners in the morning, and it sounded terrible at even moderate engine speeds like 4,000 rpm, so I don't think the compromises were worth the mpg gain.

The more modern direct injection systems don't appear to have the compromises mentioned above, so there's no doubt it is a very good thing that more and more petrols now have it.[/Nerd Mode]