Rumors G74 "Off Road" BMW SUV / G-Class Competitor?

[Merc1]

My criticism of G EV was not about it being bespoke or not. But about not being built on a dedicated EV platform (without the inherent compromises of a borrowed ICE platform). Example, if they had borrowed Rivian's platform and build a G EV on it, I would have none, despite not being bespoke.

Here, I am not talking about an EV, but an ICE competitor to G built on Toyota's TNGA-F. If they are going to do an EV version, yes, I maintain, they should do it properly on an EV platform, not some bastardized TNGA-F.



Yes. But the point I was making was the market (for a G class vehicle) was not large like Klier was implying.

So you’re saying it’s ok to build a bastardized ICE but not use your own platform for an EV? I honestly don’t get it, but ok. I don’t see what compromises the EV G has that the ICE version doesn’t already have. Basing an EV G on a Rivian would have clearly made it not a G.

M

 

[hoffmeister_fan]

Didn't realize there was already a thread for this, I'll just repost what I posted in the "Random Thought" thread here.

Oh, BMW. Always late and dragging their feet. For all their daring design, they are the most risk-averse of the Big 3. And somewhat understandably since they are also the smallest.

The G-wagen has history and built upon a proven track record. Same thing with anything from Land Rover. Heck, even the Ineos Grenadier, while a new brand, is piggy-backing on the appeal of previous-gen Defenders. The fact they are building upon what sounds like an updated though thoroughly modified unibody CLAR platform gives me great pause for a competitor for G-wagen. Granted, most folks who own cars like a G rarely if ever exploit their car's capabilities, but they like to know that there are locking diffs there.

Like many here, color me very, very skeptical.

 

[Merc1]

BMW can definitely build an off roader but will it be accepted at the G level, if they price it as such. I wouldn’t. It probably wont be as capable off road in its first generation either.

M

 

[Swissbob]

I am curious If it’ll be more successful than the XM.

There’s already a hardcore Off-Roader with BMW, the Ineos Grenadier.

 

[Giannis]

The G class is no rocket science. BMW can do that too.

You do remember that the last time BMW wanted to build a halo SUV we ended up with the XM, right? New models are judged by the outcome, and the outcome hasn't been good for our favourite brand lately.

 

[klier]

You do remember that the last time BMW wanted to build a halo SUV we ended up with the XM, right?

The XM is a souped up X5. Or souped down actually.
Anyways, I think I clearly stated they will have to build a proper platform for it, and not borrow something from Toyota. That was the whole premise.

And what Mercedes can build, BMW can do that better in every possible way.

 

[leylandi]

BMW isn't as prestigious as Mercedes. That's why it can't make bold decisions. It doesn't want to make expensive, long-term products. Even the 7 Series, after all these years, is still overshadowed by the S Class.

 

[SCOTT27]

It will be interesting to see what will come against the Octa, The Tremor….and the Roll-Over.

 

[Gor134]

And what Mercedes can build, BMW can do that better in every possible way.

Yesn't.. for regular sports coupes and SUVs yeah.

But I can't see BMW outdoing Mercedes with the G-Class (something Mercedes has been building for decades with a lot of brand cachet) or a front-mid engine 2-seater sports car.

BMW does great in the mid-range (m2, m3, m5, x5m) but they're always scared to touch the higher end market.. and when they do try to enter that market they ruin it somehow (i8 being an economical supercar instead of performance focused, xm not high end enough, etc)

 

[Swissbob]

The bean counters are too powerful in Munich.

The i8 was ridiculous.

 

[Matski]

The bean counters are too powerful in Munich.

The i8 was ridiculous.

The i8 and it's small engine was certainly not a product of bean counter over reach though... aside from the dedicated platform, there was also all the other associated costs of Project-i. They might not have gone far enough with the model, but they certainly didn't cheap out trying.

The XM gets a twin turbo hybrid V8 with 750hp... but it's a set-up shared with other models, and the car shares much with the X7 underneath... it'll doubtlessly be making them more profit than the i8 did, with much less expense.

Don't confuse small engines with tight accountants.

 

[Swissbob]

You’re partially right.

As far as I remember they had 2 groups, both had the task to build a car based on the Carbon technology. i3 and i8 were the results.



There was a plan to develop a M version with a high performance 2L engine, which would be much more successful than the basic i8. Alpina also wanted to something similar.

This was cancelled from the bean counters.

There was a plan of the mid engined SportsCar with the M4 and M8 engines, which was canceled for the XM.

BMW has excellent engineers, but far to powerful bean counters.

 

[Matski]

You’re partially right.

As far as I remember they had 2 groups, both had the task to build a car based on the Carbon technology. i3 and i8 were the results.

Given the gap between the development codes of the i3 and iX I suspect there was probably a lot of projects on the drawing board, however the fact remains that developing two bespoke carbon fibre bodies for single series production is not the decision of a bean counter.

There was a plan to develop a M version with a high performance 2L engine, which would be much more successful than the basic i8. Alpina also wanted to something similar.

This was cancelled from the bean counters.

Unless there's any specific evidence to the contrary, I'd say the Alpina was the only 'high performance' i8 as the information revealed about the Alpina i8 was basically the same as the rumoured higher performance one, and the rumours specifically around that version (or i8s) resolved to nothing more than the Formula E Safety car.

I suppose you can say it's the bean counters decision, but at some point someone has to check there'll be a sensible return on investment, and I'm prepared to trust Andreas Bovensiepen if he thought the amount of re-engineering required on the i8 was too high. Something that was still barely more powerful than a base M4 (and only some of the time), that would be costing quite a bit more than an R8, would probably have only attracted the similar criticisms as the standard i8 got.

There was a plan of the mid engined SportsCar with the M4 and M8 engines, which was canceled for the XM.

I don't recall that, but if you're thinking of the i16, which was the production M NEXT based on the i8 chassis, that car was destined to get the B48 4 cylinder like the Alpina i8 had used... and it's that car that was "cancelled" before the XM publically became a thing. I know it got pitched as though they dropped one and did the other instead, but a variant on the X7 platform had been on the cards since it launched, Ian Robertson spoke about it at the time (low-volume, not a 7-seater). Early design sketches for what became the XM were from 2016 - about 4 years before the i16 was green-lit.

The way I see it, the production M NEXT (i16), and the X8 were both on track for production - initially just the X model, and the i16 after the reaction to the Vision M NEXT. Covid happened, profits cliff-jumped and panic ensued, the i16 was cancelled and they changed the direction of the X8, to try and cover both bases - hence it ended up being such an odd proposition for what it was. Essentially, we were always getting a big SUV, we just didn't get the i16 as well.

 

[bmwblog]

You’re partially right.

As far as I remember they had 2 groups, both had the task to build a car based on the Carbon technology. i3 and i8 were the results.



There was a plan to develop a M version with a high performance 2L engine, which would be much more successful than the basic i8. Alpina also wanted to something similar.

This was cancelled from the bean counters.

There was a plan of the mid engined SportsCar with the M4 and M8 engines, which was canceled for the XM.

BMW has excellent engineers, but far to powerful bean counters.

ALPINA did a four cylinder i8. I'm going to film it soon

 

[bmwblog]

Given the gap between the development codes of the i3 and iX I suspect there was probably a lot of projects on the drawing board, however the fact remains that developing two bespoke carbon fibre bodies for single series production is not the decision of a bean counter.



Unless there's any specific evidence to the contrary, I'd say the Alpina was the only 'high performance' i8 as the information revealed about the Alpina i8 was basically the same as the rumoured higher performance one, and the rumours specifically around that version (or i8s) resolved to nothing more than the Formula E Safety car.

I suppose you can say it's the bean counters decision, but at some point someone has to check there'll be a sensible return on investment, and I'm prepared to trust Andreas Bovensiepen if he thought the amount of re-engineering required on the i8 was too high. Something that was still barely more powerful than a base M4 (and only some of the time), that would be costing quite a bit more than an R8, would probably have only attracted the similar criticisms as the standard i8 got.



I don't recall that, but if you're thinking of the i16, which was the production M NEXT based on the i8 chassis, that car was destined to get the B48 4 cylinder like the Alpina i8 had used... and it's that car that was "cancelled" before the XM publically became a thing. I know it got pitched as though they dropped one and did the other instead, but a variant on the X7 platform had been on the cards since it launched, Ian Robertson spoke about it at the time (low-volume, not a 7-seater). Early design sketches for what became the XM were from 2016 - about 4 years before the i16 was green-lit.

The way I see it, the production M NEXT (i16), and the X8 were both on track for production - initially just the X model, and the i16 after the reaction to the Vision M NEXT. Covid happened, profits cliff-jumped and panic ensued, the i16 was cancelled and they changed the direction of the X8, to try and cover both bases - hence it ended up being such an odd proposition for what it was. Essentially, we were always getting a big SUV, we just didn't get the i16 as well.

We will learn the story of the ALPINA i8 soon. But likely after Jan 1, 2026. Stay tuned. It's interesting for sure

 

[Swissbob]

ALPINA did a four cylinder i8. I'm going to film it soon

I looking forward to watch this video.

Unfortunately it wasn’t put in to production.

 

[bmwblog]

I looking forward to watch this video.

Unfortunately it wasn’t put in to production.

Alpina couldn't always do what they wanted to do. Clearly they couldn't step on BMW's toes. The project is definitely interesting. I saw photos of it.

 

[Swissbob]

We will learn the story of the ALPINA i8 soon. But likely after Jan 1, 2026. Stay tuned. It's interesting for sure

Ah there’s an embargo until Alpina is part of BMW.

I am really curious what other Alpina Project has been cancelled from BMW.