X3 production to shift to US and Germany from Austria
 

BMW to shift X3 model production to Germany and US from Austria by 2010
FRANKFURT (AFX) 07.23.2006, 11:31 AM- Bayerische Motoren Werke AG plans to shift production of its X3 model to Germany and the US from Austria by 2010, Automotive News Europe reported, citing an unnamed company manager.

A BMW spokesman contacted by DPA News Agency said such a move was a possibility.

'Naturally that could happen, but things could also turn out differently,' the spokesman said without providing further details.

Automotive News Europe reported that Austria's Magna Steyr will lose the production contract once BMW begins production of the next generation of the X3.

The unnamed BMW manager said that by 2010 his company plans to produce 50,000 X3s at its Spartanburg, US plant and another 100,000 in Regensburg, Germany.

The vehicles are currently built at Magna Steyr's Graz, Austria facility.

Source: Forbes.com

I thought it was already switched from austria to gremany like last year

Hmm,

why would BMW be doing this?

The original reason for using Magna Setyr was because BMW factories were already running at 100% and there was no room to spare to factor in X3 production. Apparently it was deemed that building a new factory would take too long, and be too expensive.

Perhaps they will move the X3 production to the new Leipzig plant. The new X3 will be based on the E90, so I guess it wouldn't be that hard to build X3's alongside E90 3's as both would share the same parts.

It appears Spartenburg will have to grow in the short term future. Not only is the RFK going to be built at Spartenburg, but the next gen X5, Z4, X6 and now X3.

Perhaps, with the popularity of the X3 in the United States, it appears BMW has suffered with the bad exchange rate, and feels it could make better money by building the X3's here and selling them here as well.

My guess would be that the move would be primarily due to economics in the long run. Since the U.S. dollar has tanked, it would make sense to produce the vehicle here, provided the quality was good (Magna Steyr is renowned as being tops in technology and quality control). I'd hate to see quality go down.

The timing for a move would be perfectly appropriate, as it would be the end of the seven year first gen. X3 run and Magna Steyr's contract would be up.

I really don't want the X3 produced in the US. It's the reason that prevented my dad from buying an X5 in the first place. X3 owners occasionally get hit with the "BMW doesnt even make the X3" line, but I'd rather have a sub-contractor build it in Austria than BMW build it in the US.

Does that mean you wouldn't buy a Z4, also?

The Z4 was a poorly built car thou, I owned one and kept it 4 mos, I was not impressed

Sorry if this is strong, but that really is idiotic thinking at best.

My brother and I had that debate and what we finally agreed on was that whoever manufacturers (or assembles) the vehicle itself, it is done so per BMW specifications. Try and find a single car company that produces each and every single piece of a vehicle themselves - you can't because they don't. Pieces, parts and assemblies are outsourced to other manufacturers. BMW even has Daimler-Chrysler supplying the motor for the MINIs. Why is Bavarian Motor Werkes buying engines? Probably to keep the two companies as distinct as possible and even produce an engine in a timely fashion that would allow production to start A.S.A.P. and what with all the troubles Rover caused BMW I'm sure they were in a hurry to see it start producing a positive return. My 2005 325i was assembled in South Africa and both of my X3's (past and current) were made in Austria. They still handle and perform as they were designed to do and I don't necessarily care where they are built so long as BMW designs (yes, even Bangle and Hoydonk) and specs them and they still perform as BMW should, I'm sold.:thumbup:

Sorry if you have seen this before but, after reading the article below, I felt glad that the X3 is assembled by Magna Steyr...



Magna Steyr's Graz Facility Honored With J.D. Power Gold Plant Quality Award - an Industry First for a Supplier

AURORA, Ontario, June 9 -- Magna International Inc. today announced that its Magna Steyr unit has won a J.D. Power Gold Plant Quality Award in Europe for its vehicle assembly facility in Graz, Austria. It is the first time this award has been given to a supplier.

The Gold Plant Quality Award, announced June 7 with the release of the J.D. Power and Associates 2006 Initial Quality Study, recognizes that Magna Steyr's Graz facility produces vehicles with the fewest number of defects as compared to other European vehicle assembly facilities.

The Graz facility has a long-standing tradition in vehicle production starting in 1906 as Steyr-Daimler-Puch AG, which Magna acquired in 1998. Today, eight different vehicles are built by Magna Steyr in Graz: the BMW X3, Chrysler Voyager/Grand Voyager, 300C sedan and Touring; Jeep Grand Cherokee and Commander; Mercedes-Benz E class 4MATIC and G class; and Saab 9-3 convertible. In 2005, the Graz facility built more than 230,000 vehicles.

"We are extremely proud to win such a distinguished award," said Siegfried Wolf, co-chief executive officer of Magna International. "This award is the result of the efforts of Magna Steyr's hard-working employees, who make a commitment to quality every day, as well as the unique partnerships that Magna Steyr has forged with its customers."

Magna Steyr is the premier global supplier of complete vehicle engineering and assembly services for original equipment manufacturer (OEM) customers. Magna International Inc., which ranks among the world's largest suppliers to the automotive industry, employs over 84,000 people at 224 manufacturing divisions and 60 engineering centers in 22 countries.

(http://www.theautochannel.com/news/2...09/010689.html)

It's not my first choice. If I had to buy a convertible, it'd be the 330cic or a 325cic. If I had to buy a roadster, first choice would be the pre-facelifted Honda S2000.

I guess the basis of my question is, is that because it's made in SC, or just because you don't want it?

:withstupi I kept 6 mos.

I realize it is only a sample of one, and therefore statistically insignificant, but my Z4 has been better built than my X5. Nothing major with the X5, but the Z4 has had zero problems.

Given a choice, I would have taken both the X5 and the Z4 from a plant other than SC, preferably one in Germany, even for a small price premium. That is no slam at all on the SC workers, but it is a comment on the difficulties in managing supplier coordination when most of your engineering and planning staff are on another continent.

Where its assembled plays a factor into whether I'd buy a car, but its not the determining factor. But yea I guess I'd just prefer something that's imported. The s2000 is more fun to toss around though, and I usually prefer convertibles for open-top medium speed cruising, not hard driving (thus the 330cic)

The S2000 might handle well, but $32k for a Honda? Maybe i'd let it slide at $26. But $32 ?! That gets you a bare bones 3 series for that price !

Honestly, given $32k I'd rather get a e46 3-series coupe or sedan. I just brought up the s2k since it's my preferred roadster. Nothin wrong with Honda either.....I love the s2k's exhaust note when someone redlines it!

The X5 is probably built fine, but the problem is probably because the X5 isn't really a BMW design. It was essentially designed by Range Rover for BMW, thus somewhat flawed compared to other BMWs and the X3 (which is really BMW's first true SAV design). Once BMW had the chance to design their own SAV (the X3) they vastly improved its handling compared to the X5, improved its ground clearance and made it larger on the interior despite having a smaller wheelbase and lower roofline.

Couldn't be farther from the truth... The Range Rover is based off of the X5 platform - which itself is based on a raised E39 platform. It is true that BMW used RR engineers to counsel the X5 team (various things came from this counseling two of which are - the two piece tailgate as well as HDC), however its not like the X5 is a re-branded Range Rover, its the other way around.

The reason why the X3 handles so much better is that it is based on the E46 platform, is much lighter, lower and a much much much tighter suspension. Simple physics. If you really want an honest opinion, it is the X3 (and the Z4 to a lesser extent) is the one in the BMW family that is the least BMW. I love my X3, but it cannot hide the penny pinching its experienced as well as the obvious cuts made here and there in order to rush it to market in the most profitable way possible.

What you're saying is contrary to every article I've ever read on the subject. You're confusing the 2003+ post-X5 version of the Range Rover (which does use some x5 components such as engine and transmission and was largely designed by BMW) with the original genesis of the X5. The X5 originally grew from Range Rover, and subsequently some components and design flowed back to Range Rover in the 2003 MY and later models, but BMW's stamp has ended as of the 2006 MY. The X5 is definitely not built on the E39 platform (it was an all-new platform), which one article I read stated is the main reason why the interior space is the X5 is small relative to its size. It's certainly not a rebranded Range Rover, but much of it's heritage and many aspects of its engineering are Range Rover based.

I'm not sure I totally agree with that. BMW's aren't necessarily "luxurious" and I would never want them that way. They are a driver's car first and all the other stuff comes later. Going back to the 2002 and even the first 3 and 5 series - I don't know that they could ever have been called luxurious. Certainly the amenities have improved but it's far more about the drive. I had a guy at work argue with me about that and tell me how disappointed he was that the BMW's he test drove weren't very luxurious . . . right, because you're missing the point. The "3 point" and the expensive Toyota and even an overpriced Honda (Mercedes, Lexus, Acura) may have more "luxury" but they don't deliver in the performance department - not nearly as well. BMWs are more refined now than they were but to me that's not their primary intent. That's just what I think about that . . .:D

I think BMWs are about the overall package: the combination of fun to drive, sport, and luxury in a practical day-to-day package. If I wanted all sport and nothing else (in other words a track car) I'd get a Mitsu Evo.

I'd like to see these articles, if you could provide the links it would be appreciated...

I'm actually talking about both the pre-BMW influenced Range Rover of 95' as well as the 03' BMW influenced model. Neither significantly influenced the X5. And the X5 was BMW's first SAV, Range Rover didn't design it - simply counseled.

But let me ask this. If the X5 really did grow from the Range Rover (say the 95' RR), how come the X5 did not end up with the RR's offroading pedigree? The Cayenne/Toureg/(perahps Q7) all show clearly that a very clear balance can be made between offroading ability as well on-road handling. The first some argue handling better than the X5.

I never said that it was built on the E39 platform, simply that the E53 platform is derived from the E39 platform. Both shared very similar electronics, parts, etc. Just like the E83 (X3) shares many parts with the E46 (3 Series) [e.g. X3's rear suspension assembly = 330xi's rear suspension assembly).

The only reason why the X5 has small interior space for its size is because BMW decided to give it a sporty shape (as a design decision). Both previous Range Rover's and the new 'BMW designed' model both have very large cargo spaces. Saying that the X5 has small interior space because it was designed by Range Rover (before BMW was able to do their own in-house X3, as you said) is simply foolish. It was a design choice BMW made, and has now realized the faultiness of this decision, and has rectified its stance in the E70.

Not true. BMW's stamp will not end until the current model is phased out. Most of the BMW parts were changed over for MY 2005. The BMW 4.4i was replaced that year, as well as the entire navigation system. MY 2007 will see the eradication of the majority of BMW's electronics from the Range Rover. However, BMW's stamp will remain, as the design of the model (not only the exterior but major parts) carries forward until its replacement.

Again I doubt this. Other than HDC and the two piece tailgate, Range Rover has not had a considerable influence on the X5. Sure you can argue that both are four wheel drive, and that both ride higher from the ground. But the BMW did not get 4 wheel drive technology from Range Rover (instead used DSC), used a monocoque body (versus older welding techniques Range Rover's previously employed), engines, electronics or any major part or technology from Range Rover other then again HDC and the two piece tailgate.

And all of this has nothing to do with the topic. The X5 production some may argue is not up to par (I beg to differ, both our X5's have been flawless), is not because Range Rover designed it (as you claim) - but due to other reasons. Mainly budget cuts that ensued during the Rover debacle (testing funding was hit very hard during the testing phase of the E53). Other argue that the fact that it is produced in America has an effect on quality. All reasons nothing to do with Range Rover.

-------

I agree completely. BMW's were never known for stunner design either. However you have to concede that the X3's interior is pretty low, even for BMW standards. The E46, E39 and even the E53 have much nicer interiors...

I agree completely. BMW's were never known for stunner design either. However you have to concede that the X3's interior is pretty low, even for BMW standards. The E46, E39 and even the E53 have much nicer interiors...[/QUOTE]

To that point I will concede but I do think it's because they did that intentionally. It seems it is supposed to be more activity than anything else . . . leave the luxury to the X5 and the sedans, this bad boy is more about function . . . but yes it really isn't as nice as the sedans or the X5 (which explains many of the interior changes for '07). Although I will add that I sat in a new 6 at the dealership some time ago and was not blown away with the luxury either . . . I certainly thought the new 5's were better as are the new 3's . . . perhaps my expectations were just different.

This is true to an extent too. The X3 was designed with a very 'active' lifestyle in mind as you state. However, there are several things that BMW did at the last minute to cut costs.

For example, there are press pictures with the chrome handles (which means they were taken 03'), which were curiously absent from the launch (04') but returned after much criticism about the quality of the interior (for MY 05').

The same occurred with the two tone dash. Plastics in the dash (changed from press pics, to 04' and again in 05') and the carpeting (not matching in 04', matching in 05'). BMW I guess felt it could get away with extra cost cutting at the last minute.

Its good that BMW has realized its mistake, and 07 will feature many improvements. As well as Adrian von Hyoodonk saying that future BMW models will have exceptional interiors (laughed at audi interiors if i recall correctly).

So hopefully the future is bright, and BMW will spend a little more $$ on its future interiors. As long as the driving experience is still there, I will be satisfied.

Same goes for the window switches. They were mounted on a piece of plastic that was not matching in the '04s (basically black plastic) which looks out of place with a gray interior like mine. In '05 they mounted the switch on gray plastic. However, BMW has yet to solve the problem with unlit rear-window switches. In fact, nothing is lit back there! Not the switches or the cig-lighter......and the back seat is crap too.

(The back seat isn't the place to be in a BMW.........but when you carry passengers its nice to not have them accidently push the window switch)

Very true about the window switches. The lack of form in the rear seats is another.

I don't think BMW mistakingly forgot to light the back switches - it just the extensive penny pinching stage that the X3 went through...