Good morning. My name is Denise, and I'll be your conference facilitator. At this time, I'd like to welcome, everyone, to the BorgWarner 2016 fourth quarter and full-year results conference call. I would now like to turn the call over to Patrick Nolan, Vice President of Investor Relations. Mr. Nolan, you may begin your conference.

Thank you, Denise. Good morning, everyone, and thank you for joining us. We issued our earnings release at 6:30 AM Eastern. It's posted on our website, borgwarner.com, and on our Investor Relations home page. A replay of today's call will be available through February 23. The dial-in number for that replay is 855-859-2056. You'll need the conference ID, which is 48637947. Or you can listen to the replay on our website. With regard to our Investor Relations calendar between now and our next earnings release, we will be attending the Bank of America Automotive Summit in New York on April 12. Before we begin the call, I need to inform you that during this call we may make forward-looking statements which will involve risks and uncertainties as detailed in our 10-K. Our actual results may differ significantly from the matters discussed today. Now, on to the today's call. First, James Verrier, our President and CEO, will comment on the industry as well as provide a high-level overview of our results, in addition will also discuss some of our recent product wins. Then Ron Hundzinski, our CFO, will discuss in detail of our results as well as our 2017 guidance. Please note that we posted an earnings call presentation to the IR page of our website. You'll find a link in the Events and Presentation section beneath the notice for this call. We encourage you to follow along during our discussion. With that, I'll turn it over to James.

Thanks, Pat, and good morning, good afternoon to everybody. We appreciate you all joining us for our call here today. As Pat said, Ron and I are really pleased actually to share our results both from Q4 2016, but also some commentary about 2017. I thought where would be good to start off is just share a few thoughts around the macro environment and some of the general industry trends, and talk a little bit how some of those play out specifically for us at BorgWarner. So I think the headline for us, and I think all of us on the call here, we're operating, we continue to operate in a sense of uncertain times globally, both I think from a political perspective and on an economic perspective. Whether it's the transitions in Europe and Brexit, China economic stability and growth, and obviously here in the U.S. with the new administration, it's somewhat of an uncertain time. If I take the areas that I think are most relevant to us from a BorgWarner perspective and I'll talk about, I think the two most meaningful things that are on people's mind. And I would say, it's the border adjustment or the NAFTA agreement here in the U.S. and also CAFE. So I just want to spend a couple of minutes proactively sharing some of our thoughts on those two topics with you. So let me start off with border tax or NAFTA. First thing is to calibrate us all, obviously about 25% of BorgWarner's revenue is in North America, so now puts it a little bit into context to you. The second thing when you looked, when you break down that revenue, it's really critical that we all kind of understand that we produced most of our products, the vast majority…

Thank you, James, and good day, everyone. Before I review the financials, I'd like to provide you some of the highlights as I see them for the quarter and the full-year. First, we had a solid growth in the quarter and we were slightly above our guidance for the quarter. We saw great operating performance with the 17% incremental margins. And our 2016 free cash flow improved by nearly $245 million or almost doubled from 2015. And we exceeded our 2016 guidance by about $100 million at the midpoint. So I think we had a very great year. Now as Pat mentioned, I will be referring to the supplemental financial slide deck that is posted on our IR website and I do encourage you to follow along. First, I'd like to focus your attention on slide 9. Throughout the presentation I will highlight certain non-U.S. GAAP measures to provide a clear picture of how the core business performed and for comparisons with prior periods. Specifically, we will be excluding the impact of FX, net M&A and Remy acquisition and divestiture of the light-duty aftermarket business and other non-comparable items from certain U.S. GAAP measures. So when you hear me say on a comparable basis, that means excluding all those impacts. When you hear me say on a reported basis that means U.S. GAAP. So let's turn to slide 10. On a reported basis, sales were up 6.4%, but on a comparable basis, our sales were up 6.6% or nearly 7%, again solid growth. On a reported basis, gross profit as a percentage of sales was 22.2% in the quarter, up 110 basis points from last year. On a reported basis, SG&A was 9.6% of sales. R&D spending, which is included in SG&A was 3.8% of sales in the quarter. On…

Thanks, Ron. Denise, we're open for questions.

Your first question comes from Ryan Brinkman with JPMorgan. Your line is open.

Great, thanks for taking my question. Can you talk a little bit about your sales performance in China in the quarter? How it tracked relative to your own expectations versus the industry? Maybe remind us of any disproportionate over- or under-exposures you have there to certain automakers or segments that maybe performed better or worse than the industry overall?

Yeah. Let me take a shot at that Ryan. So I would characterize it this way, I think where we landed in the fourth quarter versus where we thought we would at the beginning, if that makes sense to you is we got, it was a stronger quarter than what we had anticipated going into the quarter. And I think that's pretty consistent to what others have said. We did go in and expecting to outperform and grow at a double-digit number in China and we did a little better than that. So we grew well above the market, I don't have an exact percent for you Ryan, but Pat can get that to you offline, but we went in, expecting very strong growth and it came in even better than that and our market outperformance held even in that stronger environment, if that helps you. And again, Pat can get you.

Ryan, I actually have that number, James.

Okay.

It grew about nearly 30%.

Okay. Thanks, Ron.

Wow – it's impressive.

In China.

Very good, thank you. And then last question from me: you've been pretty clear about your desire to expand your engine electronics capabilities, maybe via inorganic. I mean can you just talk about what the acquisition environment in general looks like out there right now? Has it been affected much by the increase in the equity markets since your last earnings call? Then, is it also maybe your capital allocation decisions, could they be impacted by any sort of holiday on taxation of repatriation of cash overseas, et cetera?

Let me say a couple things, Ryan. First and foremost, in terms of adding and expanding our capabilities around electronics and power electronics, it's important actually to know it's both organic and an M&A play, so we've been continuing to build and add capability and capacity organically, fundamentally through hiring the folks and we continue to do that, but specifically we were also looking to add through M&A. We do have a number of targets that were – we see and we're engaged in various levels of dialogue. I would say there's nothing externally in the marketplace that would be holding us back, if that makes sense, Ryan. So it's just purely a function of identifying the right technology capability within the company and then convincing them to sell, I mean that's the fundamental issue. So there is nothing – there is no overhang in terms of regulatory environment, in terms of as Ron alluded to, in terms of that capital deployment. We're ready to go do what we need to do. And the team is doing a great job of pursuing a number of targets. And it'll just be a case of getting one or more of those over the line as we can, Ryan.

Okay. Great. Thank you.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from Brian Johnson with Barclays. Your line is open.

Yeah. Now I have a couple of questions. First, can you – this is more housekeeping. You mentioned in Detroit about the – couple things related to what may happen with taxes. First, you did say, you could repatriate some cash this year. That's behind your higher-tax rate guidance. Yet the prospects for tax reform are certainly out there. Do you have flexibility to wait to get clarity on the new administrations tax fund?

All right. This is Ron, Brian, okay. First, let's talk about the current environment that we operate for BorgWarner. We've worked very hard over the last couple of years to put in place what I would say is a very liquid repatriation strategy. And as I said, we bring cash back from Asia and we are bringing cash back from Europe, and we are comfortable where we sit right now to be able to bring cash back, if nothing were to change now. We all noticed something is going to change here. Going forward, there is two bills that everybody knows is the blueprint and then there is the Trump. We've analyzed it very carefully. There are some friction costs, as you get into this tax structure. It's going to be very complicated and create a lot of friction issues. Our perspective is in the long run, I think it's net-net benefit for BorgWarner, but it would take some time to get to that benefit. Now James has also said that in his opening remarks that we are very flexible in North America and we can compensate for that tax cover to change very quickly. We could start taking some flexibility actions that would put us in a more neutral position.

Okay. But is that just looking at the border tax part of it and not the 20%...

Right.

...offset, because I thought you said in Detroit that he might pay more on imports but could be offset by a 20% tax rate.

Right. So I was referring to a just a border tax rate...

Right.

...that we would have to adjust our potential manufacturing footprints in North America, that's one aspect to it, but we have that flexibility. And then as you get into the absolute corporate tax rate, whatever you picked the 15% or 20%, once we get there to the friction transaction part of it, that I think coupled with the repatriation would basically be free to come back in the future. In the long run, it's very beneficial for us.

Okay. So two quick follow-up questions. First that, I have seen a number, I think from Detroit, around $200 million of U.S. net imports. Is that the right starting point to think about?

That's correct.

Second, I guess my question back, and thank you for all the detail on border adjustment tax, was simply: if you start seeing bills in Congress that would lower the corporate tax rate and provide a repatriation holiday, could you defer that tax repatriation, the cash repatriation plan for this year, and hence not get the cash this year but not suffer a higher effective tax rate?

I understand the theory behind what you're saying there, Brian, that's something we'd have to take into consideration and that there was certainty where that tax is actually going to be passed then we would probably take something. The most important part is that we can be flexible depending on what we see actually is going to happen in the tax code.

Okay. Okay. So it's not some strange required distribution.

No.

And then just final question, and I will just throw it out there, and I'm sure will you go into more detail on other questions. That 133% incremental margin over an Engine, clearly with flat revenue there's a lot of cost take-out that drove that. Is that the new base of operating costs that we ought to think about? Or is there a reason not to get too far ahead of where op margins would go when there's actually rev growth.

Brian...

Which I assume we're not going to model at a 133%?

I don't model at a 133%. I think a different perspective than focusing on the quarter is really the focus is on the full-year margin that that segment did, and the margin expansion was actually pretty impressive. So I would model a full year and then I would also model for the full year margin – some margin expansion probably in top of that. Okay. But, no, don't launch the fourth quarter, that's – I wouldn't go there with that. Okay?

Okay, thanks.

Your next question comes from David Leiker with Baird. Your line is open. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: Good morning, all.

Hey, David. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: I have one question on this asbestos charge. It would seem to me, and we've seen some other companies take a similar charge to this, that you are in a position that you can estimate this out, going out 50 years versus whatever did you before, and that, that's the majority of what the charge is for?

Correct. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: So there's no adverse experiences?

No. So okay, I see you what you're getting at, David. Let me just take a moment maybe and give a little bit more color around this instead of just answering quickly. So basically, over the last several years, management has done some strategic initiatives on the defense side of this and put some stringent litigators in place, that's resulted in a very predictable environment for us on that side of it. That coupled with a very stabilized tort system came together at the same time, so that we're able to take a look at some actuary's people come in, some other professionals and have a very predictable stable environment. We're now – we're comfortable and actually making a 50-year estimate. In the past, we didn't have that type of environment. So it's kind of a convergence of several things coming together, that's mostly predictable. That's the most important word that I'm going to say here, it's predictable now. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: Yes.

It wasn't predictable before. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: Yes, there are a couple of other companies in the same position who have done something very similar to this. So thanks on that. I was hoping that we could dig a little bit deeper into the revenue number here, a touch. Is there a way for Q4 and for 2016 to give us some sense of the geographic revenue performance, North America, Europe, Asia?

Yeah. I can – let me – I'll try and take a shot at it for Q4, David. So as I think earlier, if you caught the earlier questions, from a China perspective, let me stop there. Ron said that, we grew it about 30% in the quarter year-over-year, which was pretty amazing. Obviously, if you look at what their production numbers were in China, that represents obviously very, very significant outperformance from us. We grew just about double-digit in North America, which again represents pretty solid outperformance. Europe, I would say, we would kind of below the market – light vehicle market in Europe, but that's a little bit history, where we have commercial vehicle in aftermarket revenue, a lot in Europe. So that's kind of a quick characterization. We can – Pat and I or Ron can give you a bit more of a full year view if you want offline, David, or in a follow-up call. I just don't have a good visibility on that in front of me. But that gives you a little bit of a sense for the quarter. Strong in – strong outgrowth in North America and China, and Europe about in line slightly down, it would be a way to think of it. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: Great, thanks. And then just one last one. On slide 7, where you labeled the recent product announcements. A bit curious, six months ago now or so that we talked about at your Analyst Day and trying to put some numbers around these types of products. I'm curious as you're booking the contracts and you get deeper into this process of building the backlog in these non-internal combustion products whether your content, your market share, the size of volume, unit volumes – just some characterization there of how that's tracking relative to what you would have talked about back in September.

Yeah. I can spend a couple minutes on that David. So just a real quickly recap, obviously we talked about the three architectures combustion, hybrid and electric. What we basically said around combustion back at Investor Day was this is – the combustion is a flat market basically, it's about 88 million vehicles in 2016, and it stays about that slightly down, BorgWarner's revenue growth is about 5% over that same period 2016 through 2023, and we get that two ways, we get that through increased penetration rates, and we also ramp-up a little bit on our content per vehicle. So combustion goes from 185 to 250. So if you bear with me, and if I do that same kind of approach on hybrid, David, we have a compound annual growth rate of about 50%-something, over that period 2016 through 2023. Again that's delivered through significant penetration – vehicle penetration, where we go from about 20% up to 40%-something, and again content per vehicle climbs significantly. Similar story on electrics, where we continue to see significant growth content per vehicle evolves there as well. The upshot of all of that David, is if I was to say where are we sitting here today in February versus where we were, when we were in Investor Day. I would say we're on track, if anything slightly better or slightly ahead of where we thought we were back in September. And slightly ahead means, what I'm actually seeing as get over the line in bookings in hybrids and electrics and combustion. So we feel probably slightly more comfortable than what we even did back in September based on the evidence over the last four months or five months of booking. In all three areas David, that's the key all three. David Leiker - Robert W. Baird & Co., Inc.: Okay. Great. Thank you very much.

Thanks, David.

You're welcome.

Your next question comes from David Kelley with Jefferies. Your line is open.

Good morning. And thanks for taking my questions. Just a couple of follow-ups here. Maybe if you could provide some additional color on the Remy business, maybe how it's progressing relative to your expectations, areas of outperformance, underperformance; and what you think about the Remy opportunity for 2017 would be great.

Let me take a shot if I can, David. I would say we were about a year into this. And so real briefly, I would say fundamentally it's performed pretty much as we'd expected. Top line is pretty much there other than a little bit of end market weakness. Operating-wise, it performed pretty much as expected. I would say the technology strength and depth that we've been pleased with in terms of the breadth and the strength of the product portfolio. I think the one incremental area that I would say is a little better than what we thought from when we went in is we're seeing the opportunity to combine the Remy product with the traditional BorgWarner product to differentiate ourselves with our customers on technology solutions, and we saw that with the electric drive module would be a great example very recently. So I would say that's how I would characterize that. I think the other element that we feel very good about was the divestiture of the non-core light vehicle aftermarket business. I think that was a really important move for us in a number of fronts, so we feel good about that. So now as we go into this year, the focus, David, just to give you a number in the three-year backlog, we characterize the rotating electric portion of our backlog was about 12%, which was up significantly from a year ago. And that's coming from two aspects. One is what I alluded to earlier, which is the combining of the Remy core technology with the BorgWarner technology to offer system solutions for our customers. And then the second area is finding ways to gain share with the more legacy product set of Remy, so basically selling more starters and alternators. Now we've got to leverage with BorgWarner than Remy did in its former life. So net-net all around, David, we're feeling very good about it. It's contributing from a top line perspective in a good way. And we're starting to get some traction on the margin improvements. Remember, when we started this business, it was about a 4% operating margin business. We'll get some incremental uplift this year without having the non-core aftermarket business, and we're comfortable we can expand margins on the core Remy business. So hopefully that gives you a little bit of color, David, to help.

Great, I appreciate the color there, just a quick follow-up on turbochargers and then I will pass it along. Regionally, how do you view the category opportunity heading into 2017? What could be markets of outperformance or underperformance? And along that note, if we're thinking about the eBooster technology ramp, how is that progressing? Where are we over the next two to three years with eBoosters? That would be great.

So just from a turbo perspective in its general sense, the core story there really is we're seeing obviously significant penetration uplifts in North America and China. That's where the growth story is playing out. Europe is obviously pretty much a saturated space in terms of turbocharger penetration. And I would say to you that's playing out as we expected. We're seeing rapid adoption rates in China and in North America. And Pat could give you some detail numbers offline if it's helpful, David. So we're seeing that play out. From our BorgWarner perspective, our market share expectations are playing out exactly as we thought. So we're winning where we thought we would win and we're doing well from a share perspective. So I would say that's encouraging too. And eBooster, we continue to get more and more traction there. We have a couple of production awards – or in production I should say in 2017 with a couple of key customer programs, and we see continued pull and demand for eBooster programs that we're quoting on and doing very well with. So we see that trend continuing from a technology point of view, and we're getting our share and doing quite well in winning that business. So hopefully that gives you some sense, David.

All right, perfect. Thanks again.

Thank you.

Your next question comes from Brett Hoselton with KeyBanc. Your line is open.

Good morning.

Good morning, Brett.

Hi, Brett.

A 30,000-foot question, and it's just this. Combustion, hybrid, electric, it seems like regionally we're seeing them grow at different pace, and China seems to be focused heavily on electric. So can you talk about the combustion, hybrid, and electric growth rates in the different regions?

I can take a shot at that, Brett, at least start on that for you. I would say first, your assumption is right where the lead space, if I can call it that, for electric is in China. So we are seeing more focus, more drive around pure electrics in China regionally than other parts of the world, but we are obviously seeing electric production rates in Europe and North America also. I would say all three regions somewhat equally are looking to optimize combustion technologies, so we're seeing that. And I would say that's pretty uniform around the world in terms of refinement optimization on combustion. Hybrid, also I would say regionally there's a pull, probably an equal pull for hybrids in the different regions of the world. Brett, what I would say to you on hybrids, where there's not a lot of difference regionally, you are getting different customer strategies around hybrids, and that's where Borg is playing a really key role because they're looking at different hybrid architectures, different ways of getting there, and that's where we're playing a strong role in helping them. So a little bit of regional variation, but I think ultimately I would say, Brett, the critical 30,000th point for us is, we've seen all the OEMs needing a balance of the three architectures and we're there to help them with that balance of the three. That's the really critical part.

Thank you very much, James.

Thanks, Brett.

Your next question comes from Rich Kwas with Wells Fargo. Your line is open.

Hi. Good morning, everyone.

Good morning, Rich.

Just two quick ones. On the regional split of these new wins, James, just as a follow-up, any difference? Is that pretty spread evenly? And then the second one would be for Ron on the buyback. The $100 million-plus, what moves that up meaningfully from there? What would you have to see? What's the scenario?

I'll go to buyback quickly.

Yeah, sure.

As I said on the buyback, it's all going to depend on our M&A activity, Rich. We have some things that we're looking at right now. And if they look like they're not going to materialize till end of the year or next year, we would move it up.

Okay.

In terms, Rich, of the new wins, so to speak, it is pretty balanced regionally. I put those four examples up, Rich. I see that's a good characterization or a good representation of actually how it's playing out. So you've got a really advanced electric vehicle system that's in – at a China. You've got the latest and greatest turbocharger technology that's in Asia and China. Suzuki, as you see Alfa Romeo is a European, but I wouldn't be surprised when I show you the – in the next call, another four. They could be North American or whatever, see. I'm – it is pretty balanced. Both regionally, Rich, but also across the combustion, hybrid and electric propulsion space. It's pretty balanced.

Okay, thank you.

Thanks, Rich.

Your next question comes from Adam Jonas with Morgan Stanley. Your line is open. Adam Michael Jonas - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Thanks, everybody, just a high-level question. Your OEM customers have recently been fairly outspoken in putting real money behind the propulsion changes, and obviously you're seeing that in your order and quoting activity. But sometimes when we have conversations with them, they suggest that, that could create some volatility in their results as they make the pivot from internal combustion to EVs. If I'm not mistaken, the message you've been giving pretty consistently now is that, while not easy, you're confident that you can make that pivot while maintaining the incremental margins kind of like phase-in, phase-out, without really any blip. I'm not holding you to like exact science here, but it seems like your current level of this 17%, 18% with an engine, for example, that we're not going to be in a position a year or so from now where, due to that pivot and some of the internal investments, expenses, you don't think that, that's – you don't see that, have visibility of that creating a near term and necessary blip to capture this great revenue opportunity going forward. Is that accurate from a perspective?

Adam, it's James. So I would say, that's a pretty – a pretty good description you gave, and I would give you a little bit color of – kind of why I think that is, because I think it's a – if I can say it this way, it's an incremental evolution to the end game. They're not – and I think, you've seen this yourself, that it's not a light switch, where we're turning off from – turning off combustion and turning on the light, it's a – it's a – it's kind of a journey and it's an evolution. And the reason that's important, that does a couple of things, that allows us to be thoughtful and balanced in terms of making our investments, and evolving the portfolio as opposed to throw all of it away and bring a brand-new third on that we've never done before. And that's why we have the comfort and the confidence in the kind of evolution, because it's not a light switch type event. The other quick comment I would make Adam, that gives us incremental confidence is, as I've alluded to sort of last year, we are in production with hybrid technology, we're in production with electric vehicle technology. And we've been doing that over the last three years to four years, and still delivering the incrementals over that period of time. And what we're also seeing is the financial performance of those electric and hybrid vehicles is very good. So I don't want to characterize Adam, that this is easy, I don't want to tell you that, but I would tell you, we feel comfortable that this is more of an evolution than an event and we're comfortable, we can manage through it and deliver what we're saying we're going to do. Adam Michael Jonas - Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC: Thanks, James. Thanks, team.

Thanks.

Your next question comes from Joe Spak with RBC Capital Markets. Your line is open.

Good morning. Thanks for fitting me in here.

Thank you.

James, just I guess very high level: there was a smaller turbo competitor out there that's up for sale. I think it confirms a lot about what you have been saying about this market over the years. I was curious, is that helping you at all on the margin in bidding, given uncertain future ownership there? And does that have any – does that asset have any strategic value to BorgWarner?

Thanks for bringing that up, Joe. I think your note characterized it actually pretty well, frankly. So Bosch Mahle rough numbers is about 4% to 5% market share. And I think what it really, really confirmed is the barriers to entry in that turbo space a pretty hard, it's pretty tough and I think you alluded to that and we would confirm that. So lot of technology, lot of IP, lot of manufacturing capabilities et cetera, et cetera, et cetera, investment business. And yeah we defend that very, very strongly. And I think you see there is some, it's a tough space for them to do. In terms of how it plays out, I think we'll have to see candidly. We will see what plays out in terms of what happens with that asset. We do feel extremely positive about our position frankly speaking in turbo and we have about a third share. We talked about that, win rates are good, our booking rates are good, our technology leadership we feel really, really good about. And, yeah, so we're feeling good about it is the quick answer, Joe, but in terms of the specifics about deal plays out, we'll have to give that a little bit of time.

Okay, thanks a lot.

Thanks.

Thanks, Joe.

Your next question comes from Brian Sponheimer with Gabelli. Your line is open.

Hi, thanks for sneaking me in here. Just one confirmation, Ron, on the asbestos charge. Looking back to your 2015 10-K there was some discussion about insurance recovery. This is in no way any sort of comment about your ability to recover from insurance companies what you expect to receive, correct?

Correct. All we really did is, we – that there are two types of liabilities out there, one of them when people file claims, we had to do an estimate of what we expected those settlements to be, which we've always had out there, and we had an asset and liability. What we did is we true that up, but then more importantly, we took a look at the universe of what we call IBNR incurred, but not reported yet. What we did is, we took a look at that as well, and what we did is we took a look at for 50 years, put that on that balance sheet and then our insurance receivables are still out there. I'd encourage you, really to take a look at the 10-K that we filed today, it gives more clarity around it, and also it gives you more of what the asset values and liabilities are on the balance sheet, okay. I don't want to spend a lot of time on the call going through all those details, but there's there is a lot of clarity, I think in the K that we're going to put out today, around this issue.

Great. Thank you very much. Much appreciated and I'll look at 10-K.

Okay.

Thanks, Chris (sic) [Brian].

We have time for one final question, and that question comes from Chris McNally with Evercore ISI. Your line is open.

Thanks very much, guys.

Good morning.

I just wanted to get a little divisional detail. Obviously, the strength in Drivetrain. Could you talk a little bit how we should think about growth split, maybe between the divisions in 2017; and as the follow-on, how to think about incremental margins by division over the next couple of quarters?

I would say, Chris, if you think of what we did in the three-year backlog, where we broke out, the products actually by discrete products, but then also you can clearly see what's Engine and what is Drivetrain. My sense is, I would think that's probably a pretty good barometer for – on an annual basis, is a good way to think of it. So we provided the detailed breakdown there by product and by segment for you in the three-year view. I don't think you'll go too far wrong if you view the one-year view somewhat similar to the three-year view, if that's helpful for you.

Okay. So there shouldn't be any weird comps in terms of the growth as we think about over 2017.

No, I don't think this – no, it would be my quick answer.

Okay.

And in terms of the margins on the – quick answer, from an Engine point of view, we're pretty high up there, right? So there's we're kind of keeping pace at an incremental bases and absolute are pretty much there. We've talked on the Drivetrain side. We've always said there's a little bit of room for incremental uplift there and we continue to drive that for sure.

Okay. Perfect. Thanks so much, guys.

Thank you.

Thank you.

With that, we're going to end our call. I'd like to thank you all for participating today and thank you for your helpful questions. Denise, you can close the call.

That does conclude the BorgWarner 2016 fourth quarter and full-year results conference call. You may now disconnect.