Hyundai Veloster Recall For Shattering Sunroofs Expands
In an expansion of an earlier recall of the 2012 Hyundai Veloster for the potential of panoramic sunroofs to shatter without warning during vehicle use, the Korean automaker is now recalling an additional 6100 2012 model year Velosters over the same issue.
A notice on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website said that the build dates for the expanded recall population are from July 4, 2011 through October 31, 2011.
In Hyundai documentation (PDF) submitted to the NHTSA, Hyundai said that 5,835 2012 Hyundai Velosters equipped with panoramic sunroofs in the U.S. and 236 units in Puerto Rico have been added to the original recall population, bringing the total number recalled to date to approximately 19,600 vehicles.
The problem
As in the earlier recall, the issue is that panoramic sunroofs may have been weakened during factory installation into the vehicles.
Weakened sunroofs can potentially crack and injure the driver and passengers with shards of glass. At least five people have received minor injuries after Veloster sunroofs shattered, although no vehicles crashed as a result.
The NHTSA launched an investigation into the problem last October after the agency received 11 owner complaints of shattering panoramic sunroofs.
What Hyundai will do
Hyundai will notify owners and dealers will inspect the sunroof vehicle for integrity, replacing the glass assembly, as necessary, at no charge. The Hyundai safety recall campaign, #108, is expected to begin in March 2013.
In the meantime, owners of 2013 Hyundai Velosters with any questions or concerns may contact Hyundai at 1-800-633-5151.
Alternatively, owners of vehicles involved in the campaign may contact NHTSA’s Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 or go to http://www.safercar.gov. Reference the NHTSA campaign ID No. 13V051000.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Can You Really Afford That Car? Not If You Live In 24 Of America’s 25 Biggest Cities
It's no secret: money is tight.
America is still recovering from the trauma of the Great Recession, and although economic indicators seem to be moving in the right direction, the fragility of other economies (looking at you, Europe) means we're not out of the woods yet. Not even close.
Given that uncertainty, is now the right time for you to buy a new car? Can you really afford it?
If you live in 24 of America's 25 biggest cities, the folks at Interest.com say "nope".
Analysts at that website looked at the median gross income for families in each of those areas -- from Washington, D.C. to Tampa, Florida. They then applied what's know as the "20/4/10" rule, which says that the smartest way to purchase a vehicle is to (a) put down at least 20%, (b) finance the car for no longer than four years, and (c) pay no more for the loan and insurance than 10% of your gross monthly income.
They then determined the average price of a new car -- $30,550 in 2012 -- and the cost of financing 80% of that sum over 48 months. That works out to $601 per month, plus insurance, at current interest rates.
Based on that rationale, the site's analysts say that only residents of Washington, D.C. can really afford to purchase new cars. The average D.C. family could manage to spend $628 per month for a ride, plus insurance. Folks in the other 24 top cities? Not so much.
Interest.com's Mike Sante says, "Car costs are one of the most controllable parts of a household's budget. For example, if you live in New York City or San Francisco, you're probably going to have to pay a lot for housing, but you don't have to pay a lot for a car. You're better off driving something more affordable and saving or investing the difference."
OUR TAKE
Interest.com has an interest (pun intended) in guiding people to car loans, mortgages, and credit cards. It might seem counterintuitive that such a site would advise consumers against taking out big loans, but Interest.com doesn't provide those loans directly. It earns revenue by convincing banks and other loan providers to advertise on its site based on traffic, which studies like this are sure to generate.
None of which is to say that we doubt Interest.com's findings, per se. However, we want to keep its assumptions at arm's length.
Our biggest beef with this study is that the 20/4/10 rule doesn't take into account the widely varied cost of housing in America's large cities. For example, there's another rule of thumb that says your mortgage or your rent shouldn't total more than about 30% of your monthly income. Anyone living in a city like New York or San Francisco knows that's nearly impossible unless you're in a very high-paying job.
All of which goes to show that one-size-fits-all formulas like this are at best rough guidelines, and at worst complete rubbish. The only way to know for sure whether you can afford a car loan -- or a mortgage, for that matter -- is to (a) be aware of your own household expenses, (b) speak to a range of lenders to get a sense of your loan options, and (c) be brutally honest with yourself about what you can reasonably afford.
====
Visit our redesigned used cars section today -- over 2 million live classified listings for sale: Used Trucks, Used SUVs, Used Toyotas, Used Fords and more.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
2009-2011 Ford Escape, Fusion & Mercury Mariner, Milan Probed For ‘Stalling’
After receiving over 180 complaints about engines stalling and surging in the Ford Escape, Ford Fusion, Mercury Mariner, and Mercury Milan, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration has launched an investigation into those vehicles built for the 2009, 2010, and 2011 model years.*
The investigation includes both conventional and hybrid versions of the Escape and Mariner. According to the Department of Transportation, the probe affects some 724,982 cars and SUVs.
A notice posted to NHTSA's website reveals a fairly complicated investigation. The probe appears to have gathered steam after the North Carolina Consumers Council petitioned NHTSA to investigate two reports of stalling and surging in the 2009 Ford Escape. Those incidents may have stemmed from contaminated circuit boards, which caused problems with the vehicles' throttles. The circuit boards in question were phased out after October 2009.
Using that data, the Office of Defects Investigation identified another 123 complaints that could be linked to the same problem. Fifty-nine additional incidents were identified among 2010 and 2011 Ford vehicles, after the dodgy circuit boards were discontinued.
Three crashes/fires and one injury have been linked to the throttle issue, but no fatalities have been reported.
NHTSA is quick to note that the complaints of stalling and surging aren't exactly what they seem. In fact, they're symptoms of vehicles that have been switched into "limp home mode":
Allegations of stall appear to be related to the limited limp home mode. Vehicles are not likely to unexpectedly stall as a result of this condition, but drivers may characterize the reduced functionality as a stall, even though their vehicle may still has [sic] motive capability.
Allegations of vehicle surge appear to be related to limp home mode operation. Complaints alleging surge are most likely related to engine RPM fluctuations at low vehicle speeds or idle as the control system engages to prevent engine stall. In limited limp mode, rough-idle conditions may exist while the control system attempts to modulate engine RPMs once the vehicle reaches a reduced speed to maintain approximately 900 RPM.
[Emphasis ours]
NHTSA's investigation, of course, is not the same as a recall, though it does move the affected vehicles one step closer to that end. We'll keep you posted as the agency's probe progresses.
*Note: 2009 model-year versions of the conventional Fusion and Milan are not included in the investigation.
====
Visit our redesigned used cars section today -- over 2 million live classified listings for sale: Used Trucks, Used SUVs, Used Toyotas, Used Fords and more.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Vehicles Under $50k That Hold Their Value The Worst
Affluent status-seekers pay quite the premium to get into exclusive luxury cars—like the $119,975 Jaguar XJL Supersport or $216,205 Mercedes-Benz CL 65 AMG.
You'd think that the image and prestige of such models would be sought-after on the used-car market, too. But the moment these models are driven away from the dealership, their values go off their own fiscal cliff. A Jaguar XJL Supersport, for instance, will lose $50,485 of its $119,975 MSRP in the first year; while the CL 65 AMG will typically shed $95k of its $216,205 MSRP in the first year—or a whopping total of $160k of it in the first three years.
The reason? By the time they're three to five years old, they're just used cars. And on the used-car market they're subject to an entirely different set of shopper priorities.
“There’s a lot of blue sky in the value of vehicles and the prestige and the image, and that’s much more true of them when they’re new,” said Eric Lyman, vice president for editorial at ALG, a leading authority for vehicle value information. “Part of the prestige is owning the latest and greatest, and there’s a premium you’re paying for that.”
Resale values a harsh reality
On the used-car market, that premium pretty much vanishes. So does most of any premium you've paid for cutting-edge advanced-technology features like a heads-up display, active cruise control, or parking assistants—or even that fancy touch-screen infotainment system that pulled you in for thousands more.
Back in the real world—for those who don’t have their own personal detailing crew—depreciation matters. The residual values from ALG, which predict value as a percentage of the vehicle's original MSRP, usually at three years, have become the industry standard for the vehicle finance industry—meaning that altogether you can get a pretty good picture of what you'll be able to get for your vehicle at trade-in time.
Residual values are also important if you plan to lease a vehicle, as they determine the amount of your monthly payment. “So if you get a vehicle that has a high residual value, your payments will be lower,” emphasizes Eric Ibara, director of residual consulting at Kelley Blue Book. And at the same time, you'll be driving a more in-demand vehicle, so it's a win-win.
Perhaps most importantly, resale value is the ‘hidden’ cost that can make certain models much more expensive to own over the long run than others--even if their prices on the lot might suggest that you’re getting a bargain.
What's going to be valued (or not) in several years?
Put aside, if you will, the gloss and glamor of those sybaritic money pits. Pragmatic factors rule most residual-value forecasting—like the reputation of the brand and the model; the vehicle's fuel economy ratings; and how competitive it remains in the market in terms of performance, styling, and comfort.
Think you're better off going with a recently redesigned model, as it may still look more contemporary and thus worth more years from now? That's not always true. “When the 2012 Civic was redesigned, it received a lot of criticism by the press,” said Ibara. “It continued to sell really well on a retail basis, but we did track the fact that the 2012 Civic was not doing as well in value as the 2011.”
Contrast that with the last redesign for the Hyundai Sonata, in 2011. Five-year residuals on that model rose by up to 12 percent in a model year—and retail values on the used-car market are showing far higher values than the preceding model.
That said, product cycles are another thing that can negatively affect resale value, and whether vehicles either haven't seen a full redesign in many years, are on the cusp of one, or are no longer being seen by consumers as fresh in the market. Examples of that—and some of the lowest performers on the residual scale—include GM's full-size SUVs, or the Volvo S80.
ALG's Lyman says that the S80's low residual isn't because of the Volvo brand as much as it is how old that particular model is. “And for the Chevy Impala it’s the last year of the current model,” he said. “That's an old vehicle; it’s just long in the tooth.”
Even though the gasoline price shock of 2008 is already a distant memory, recent price swings have kept fuel economy a high priority for used-car shoppers, so it's no surprise that some of the vehicles with the worst residual values are those with some of the lowest mileage ratings (like the Nissan Armada and Nissan Titan) in their respective classes.
If you're torn between types of vehicles, it pays to consider that crossovers currently have something of a halo over them, and they may save you money on the depreciation portion of what it costs to own a vehicle. In general, crossovers are commanding higher resale values than sedans, while minivans are the vehicle segment that's doing worst in residuals.
It's really supply and demand
Supply and demand are also an integral part of the predicted value for vehicles. And a new vehicle that's pushed out the dealership floor, deeply discounted, is likely to do poorly on the used market several years from now.
“If you see a vehicle that's not performing well in residuals, it's usually because of the volume,” said Ibara. “If the manufacturer chooses to sell a large volume of vehicles to Avis or Hertz, then those vehicles come back to the market when they're taken out of service—and that can depress values.”
A couple of years ago Chrysler changed the name of its mid-size model line, from Sebring to 200. And while the name change might have provided the basis for some new marketing, it didn't raise values in the end. Instead, Chrysler continued with what KBB's Ibara called a “classic example of behavior that's going to hurt resale values”—the combination of putting a large number into rental fleets plus using large incentives for retail sales at the dealership.
Luckily, it's not that much of a gamble. Valuation sites like KBB provide easy-to-browse projected resale values. Combine multiple sources and you may end up with a surprisingly good picture of how much money you may be plunking down over three to five years.
In order to compile a list of vehicles that hold their value the worst, we first looked to ALG's updated list of 1-star vehicles—those in the lowest ten percent of the market for three-year residual ratings (holding just 34 to 44 percent of their value after three years). Within that group, we looked specifically at KBB five-year depreciation numbers, subtracted that from the market price, then expressed that value (as ALG does their residuals) as a simplified percentage of the original MSRP. The following list, then (all base models and 2013 model-year unless otherwise indicated), are the ten vehicles likely to be worth the lowest percentage of their original MSRP at trade-in time.
Click through to see these ten vehicles under $50,000 that may cost more than their sticker price suggests:
(more...)Car Recall Alert: 2013 Chrysler 200, Dodge Avenger Have Possible Fuel Tank Issue
Chrysler is conducting a voluntary safety recall of certain 2013 Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger mid-size cars over concerns that a broken fuel tank control valve could lead to engine stall and/or possible fire.
A notice on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) website puts the number of vehicles potentially affected in the United States at 1,785. Affected vehicles were built over a five-day period from October 30, 2012 through November 2, 2012.
The problem
In documentation from Chrysler (PDF) submitted to the NHTSA, the automaker describes the problem as a broken control valve installed into the fuel tank assembly. The issue came to light when the fuel tank supplier found 17 pieces of broken control valves on the floor at the time of a routine maintenance operation.
An investigation revealed that 90 percent of the damaged valves will fail to prevent liquid fuel from entering the canister and could then lead to engine stall or fuel leakage.
Chrysler said that it is not aware of any complaints alleging engine stall or fuel leakage resulting from a broken valve. Furthermore, the automaker said that it is also not aware of any accidents or injuries related to this issue.
What Chrysler will do
Chrysler will notify owners of affected 2013 Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger mid-size sedans and dealers will inspect the vehicles’ fuel tank assemblies and replace any affected control valves. The service work will be performed at no charge.
The Chrysler safety recall campaign, identified as N02, is expected to begin during March 2013. In the meantime, owners of 2013 Chrysler 200 and Dodge Avenger sedans with any questions or concerns may contact Chrysler at 1-800-247-9753.
Alternatively, owners of vehicles involved in the campaign may contact NHTSA’s Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 or go to http://www.safercar.gov. Reference the NHTSA campaign ID No. 13V043000.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Jeep Cherokee Returns For 2014
Jeep has revived its lauded Cherokee nameplate after more than a decade, with the new generation of the popular mid-size SUV set to be launched on the market in the third quarter of the year following a debut in New York late next month.In line with the times, the new Jeep Cherokee adopts the Compact U.S. Wide (CUSW) platform already used in a number of Fiat and Chrysler vehicles including the Dodge Dart and Alfa Romeo Giulietta hatchback sold overseas.
Despite this switch to a car-based platform, Jeep promises its latest Cherokee, which arrives as a 2014 model, will offer best-in-class capability (expect it to be Trail-Rated) along with many other improvements inherent to riding on such a platform.
For starters, the new Cherokee is said to deliver fuel economy improvements of more than 45 percent versus the model it replaces, the Liberty, which in its final model year returned 16/22 mpg city/highway and 18 mpg combined.
In addition to improved economy, the new Cherokee should also offer improved road dynamics.
Power is expected to come from a V-6 engine, which could be mated to a nine-speed (yes, nine-speed) automatic transmission and send drive to either the front or all four wheels.
Jeep plans to release more information closer to the vehicle’s debut at the 2013 New York Auto Show at the end of next month, so stay tuned for an update.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
Misers’ Models: The Ten Cheapest Cars To Own
Back in the 1980s, the Yugo GV sold for a base price of just $3,990.
Even adjusted for inflation, from 1986 to 2013 (about $8,400 in today's money), that's a steal—and one that did indeed prove irresistible for more than 140,000 thrifty Americans.
Yet for the most part, the GV—for 'great value,' ironically—didn't save its buyers any money in the long run. Costly premature engine and clutch failure were surprisingly common (and expensive); gas mileage was disappointing for what it was; resale values plummeted; and insurers charged more in premiums because they didn't trust the Yugo's occupant protection (or its bumpers).
Most of those Yugos have long ago been retired to the scrap heap; but it underlines an important distinction: The cheapest cars to buy aren't necessarily the cheapest cars to own, and the Yugo is a lesson for what can go wrong if you shop for a vehicle (or anything else) only by its sticker price.
That advice holds true today, yet thanks in part to tighter federal regulations, more of the cheapest models are now safe, dependable, and truly penny-pinching picks over the long term.
Lower-priced cars typically cheaper in the long run
“The smaller, lower-priced cars have the lowest cost of ownership,” said David Wurster, the president of Vincentric, a data analysis firm providing cost-of-ownership information. When you look at today's new cars there aren't any albatrosses like the Yugo, and considering all of the categories (depreciation, insurance, maintenance, etc), some of the cheapest models stand out: The Nissan Versa, Chevrolet Spark, Kia Rio, Toyota Yaris, and Ford Fiesta all have sticker prices under $15,000 and five-year ownership totals under $30,000.
To put it into perspective, that five-year Vincentric ownership number, which includes depreciation, insurance, fuel expenses, maintenance and repair costs, and even an 'opportunity cost'—for what you maybe have earned on your money elsewhere—totals more than $100,000 for many luxury models, or more than $200,000 for the Mercedes-Benz S 65 AMG or CL 65 AMG, for instance.
Among these cheapest-to-own vehicles, Wurster points out, they’re all strong sellers (indicating high demand); they all have supply that doesn’t exceed demand by an extreme amount (like many larger SUVs and trucks several years ago); and they’re powered by smaller, highly efficient engines. Altogether, those factors keep fuel costs down and resale value relatively strong.
Soothing depreciation's sting
Looking at all the components that add up to what a car costs to own, it's the sting of depreciation that hurts most. According to Kelley Blue Book, the average new car will be worth just 35 percent of its original value after five years; and with a current average around the $30k mark, you’ll essentially lose nearly $20,000 for the privilege of driving a new car. Late-model used cars are often the better deal for that reason, as they dodge the steepest part of the depreciation curve, but if you want a new car, along with many of the things that come with new-vehicle ownership—like a strong warranty, the relatively low chances of a breakdown, and modern safety features—you don't need to spend a lot.
Considering these other factors, like insurance costs, anticipated reliability, and projected resale value, if you can find something at the lower end of the market that you like (and if you’re okay doing without the glamor of a more upscale new car), you’ll also take the smallest hit to your wallet in the long run.
That said, unless you’re obsessed with being a die-hard miser, you can’t get too caught up in the bottom-line cost projections. The totals are best viewed when comparing vehicles within the same class against each other, Wurster emphasizes. In other words, choose the kind of vehicle you need first (minivan, crossover, etc.) and then compare the costs.
Mike Calkins manager of the AAA's Approved Auto Repair program, notes that depreciation, fuel costs, insurance, and finance charges are the four most significant ownership/driving costs.
Don't forget about insurance
“Get a quote from your insurance agent before you buy a car to avoid any nasty surprises,” Calkins recommends. He also argues that paying cash for a new car, or getting a loan with the lowest possible interest rate, helps cut finance fees that will cost you in the long run.
The AAA, as part of its most recent annual Your Driving Costs study, found that small sedans have the lowest driving costs'—of about 45 cents a mile, considering all those factors, versus nearly 76 cents for a large sedan.
Thinking about hybrids or special fuel-stingy models? They may come with higher sticker prices, but in general their improved fuel economy (and in some cases better resale value) mostly offset the premium. For instance a modest Chevrolet Cruze 2LS has a five-year ownership cost of $32,678, while the mile-per-gallon-minded Cruse Eco, at $33,492 over five years, can't quite make up for its $2,550 sticker-price premium, despite lower fuel costs.
So remember the Yugo. While many of the cheapest cars on the market are also the cheapest to own, don't assume so; run the numbers for yourself.
For the following list, we ran the numbers with the most recent Vincentric Cost of Ownership data, as of February 2013. And because there can be a lot of variance even within models, we've listed the specific trim and bodystyle whenever needed. All are for model year 2013.
Read on to see our ten cars for which being thrifty pays off.
(more...)The Ten Worst U.S. Cities For Traffic Congestion
The grass, it seems, is always greener on the other side of the highway median. Ask any U.S. driver about his commute, and you’ll likely get a lengthy tirade about the abysmal traffic conditions on his daily drive.Whether you live in Atlanta, Los Angeles, Spokane, New York or even Orlando, chances are that you dread the daily commute and believe that traffic is better anywhere else in the United States than in your city.
Thanks to the most recent Annual Urban Mobility Report from the Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), we now know who’s got bragging rights for the latest year studied, 2011.
According to the TTI, traffic in Washington D.C. is the worst, with each commuter losing an average of 67 hours per year in traffic. Los Angeles and San Francisco are tied for second place, with each municipality taking 61 hours annually from its commuters.
In fourth place is Newark, New Jersey, lumped into one miserable bundle with New York, New York. Drivers here can expect to waste 59 hours sucking down exhaust fumes each year, which is quite a bit worse than fifth-place Boston (with a mere 53 hours annually).
To the surprise of no one living in Houston, the Texas city is next on the list, with 52 hours of wasted time yearly (which is also the national average for very large cities). Atlanta and Chicago tie for seventh place (with 51 hours each), while Philadelphia and Seattle split the final spot, taking only 48 hours from commuters annually.
To put the worst U.S. cities in perspective, the average American commuter wastes 38 hours per year in traffic, and needs to allow a full hour for a trip that, under ideal circumstances, would take just 20 minutes. Is it any wonder the vast majority of us are sleep-deprived and stressed to the breaking point, or that fatal accidents are again on the rise?
If there’s good news to be found in the latest survey, it’s this: traffic in 2012 still wasn’t as bad as traffic in the pre-recession days of 2007, but we suppose that’s because many Americans are still out of work. The relief on the roads is expected to be short-lived, however, as the TTI expects congestion to grow significantly in the coming years.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
U.S. Traffic Fatalities Rise For First Time Since 2005
Traffic fatalities have been on the decline for a number of years, thanks in part to safer cars, increased use of safety belts, and a reduction in the number of drunk drivers. But the National Safety Council predicts that fatalities increased in 2012. If so, it would be the first time they've done so since 2005.
NSC vs. NHTSA
NSC is a nonprofit, nongovernmental organization with a mission "to save lives by preventing injuries and deaths at work, in homes and communities, and on the road through leadership, research, education and advocacy".
Every month, NSC receives traffic data from authorities in all 50 states, as well as the District of Columbia. Partnering with the National Center for Health Statistics, NSC tracks not only fatalities, but also injuries, and considers deaths of the injured that occur within one year of an accident to be traffic-related.
That's a little different from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the government agency that provides "official" U.S. traffic fatality stats. NHTSA only considers fatalities to be traffic-related if they occur within 30 days of an accident. Also, NHTSA only tracks accidents that take place on public roads, while NSC includes those that occur on private property.
FINDINGS
Based on preliminary data, NSC estimates that there were 36,200 traffic fatalities in 2012 -- an uptick of 5% from 2011 and the first increase in U.S. traffic fatalities since 2005. The number of injuries that required medical attention also rose 5% to 3.9 million.
The cost of all those accidents went up, too. Not only did families and friends have to deal with the pain and sorrow of losing loved ones, but there were also hard costs related to medical expenses, property damage, lost wages, and lost productivity to consider. Factoring all those in, the bill for traffic accidents in 2012 was around $276.6 billion, an uptick of 5% over 2011.
Although NHTSA won't publish its own results for several more months, its preliminary findings were similar. In fact, last fall the agency estimated that fatalities on U.S. roads jumped 9% in the first half of 2012.
WHY THE INCREASE?
When NHTSA released its early estimates for 2012, the agency didn't suggest any reason for the upswing. However, in its report on 2011 fatalities, NHTSA identified several key areas of concern:
- Big rigs, where occupancy fatality rates surged 20% in 2011.
- Motorcyclists, bicyclists, and pedestrians, which all saw greater numbers of deaths.
- Distracted driving, a growing problem that was the cause of 3,331 fatalities in 2011.
AAA also suggested that America's crumbling roads might be partially to blame for the increase.
NSC identifies similar problems, and also notes that Americans are driving more. Thanks to a recovering economy (which has increased the number of commuters) and a mild 2012 winter, more motorists were on the road last year. And typically, more people on the road means more accidents -- and likely, more fatalities.
We'll keep you posted as these numbers are confirmed later in the year.
====
Visit our redesigned used cars section today -- over 2 million live classified listings for sale: Used Trucks, Used SUVs, Used Toyotas, Used Fords and more.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
BMW Recalling Nearly 505,000 Vehicles In U.S. To Fix Cables
BMW is conducting a voluntary safety recall involving nearly 505,000 vehicles in the Unites States over concerns that a battery connector cable can fail and cause engines to stall.
A notice on the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) lists the number of vehicles potentially affected in the U.S. at 504,545. A report in The Detroit News and other media outlets says that another 65,000 vehicles in Canada are also affected by the recall.
Documentation from BMW (PDF) breaks down the recall population by model, manufacture date, and number of vehicles affected as follows:
- 2008 through 2012 BMW 1-Series coupes and convertibles - built from December 2007 through July 2011; 23,155 coupes/20,790 convertibles
- 2007 through 2011 BMW 3-Series sedans, coupes and convertibles - built from March 2007 through July 2011; 297,000 sedans/76,330 coupes/68,935 convertibles
- 2007 through 2011 BMW 3-Series sports wagons - built from March 2007 through June 2011; 7,310 sports wagons
- 2009 through 2011 BMW Z4 roadsters built from March 2009 through June 2011; 10,020 roadsters
The problem
At issue is a battery cable connection with a fuse box may degrade over time. This could cause the engine to fail to start, experience a momentary (less than one second) engine shutdown, or stall during operation, thus increasing the risk of a crash.
BMW became aware of the condition in July 2010 as a result of two field reports involving a 3-Series vehicle that failed to start. After subsequent additional reports were received for a no-start condition, BMW analyzed the situation and issued a service bulletin to dealers to address the issue.
In March 2012, Transport Canada submitted a public complaint to BMW of an alleged loss of electrical power and engine stall. Subsequent complaints and a warranty claim prompted BMW to intensively investigate and analyze the matter to determine a root cause and remedy.
To-date, BMW said it has received one report of an alleged accident that was provided by Transport Canada, but no reports of any injuries related to the issue.
What BMW will do
BMW will notify owners and dealers will replace the positive battery cable connector with an improved version, as well as secure the fuse box using a vibration-safe method. The service work will be performed at no charge. The BMW safety recall campaign is expected to begin during March 2013.
In the meantime, owners of BMW vehicles affected by the recall with any questions or concerns may contact BMW at 1-800-525-7417.
Alternatively, owners of vehicles involved in the campaign may contact NHTSA’s Vehicle Safety Hotline at 1-888-327-4236 or go to http://www.safercar.gov. Reference the NHTSA campaign ID No. 13V044000.
This story originally appeared at The Car Connection
