Fifteen years ago, I lived in the Colorado Mountains. Naturally, I owned a Jeep. For someone who was constantly fording streams and driving through blizzards, the vehicle made perfect sense. Now that I’m living in California, I buy vehicles which make the most of the balmly weather and the pleasing plethora of paved surfaces. And yet my current employment has an agricultural element; there are times when I need a vehicle to traverse rocky trails and unpaved lanes. Workers who see me approaching to bum a ride in their truck have started to pretend they only speak Spanish. So I’ve been shopping for an SUV. I began with one of the brands I know best: BMW.
BMW has cleverly disguised the new X5 as the old X5. That said, the revised sheetmetal contains a much stronger resemblance to the more ripped mini-me X3. While neither of these SUV’s– sorry, SAV’s (Sports Activity Vehicles)– could be considered beautiful, I’m pleased to report that the X5 doesn't have a “Bangle” butt, the flame surfaces have been put on simmer and the boxy, bulldog exterior has few unnecessary adornments. The dual exhausts proudly protruding through the rear valence are the only aesthetic affectation, and they perfectly project the requisite brand ethos.
Step inside the X5 and the art of driving is immediately subsumed to the art of button pushing. The new X5 boasts Bluetooth (with a direct line to Commissioner Gordon), SIRIUS satellite radio, iPoditude, optional sat nav and head-up display, tire pressure monitors, park distance control, comfort access (remote key operation), ventilated seats and computerized garage suicide prevention (a.k.a. automatic pollution filtration)– all tweakable from somewhere deep within the eNigma wrapped in a sub-menu known as iDrive. What the ultimate RTFM machine doesn’t have is a nicely finished interior; the plastics and the Nevada leather are woefully rough to the touch.
What the new $49k X5 does have is third row seating. This $1700 option ($1200 on the $55k V8) transforms the Bubba Bimmer into the world’s most over-engineered minivan, and adds much needed storage space in the rear hatch area. Although the door mechanism is over-complicated, the cargo area is nicely finished with floor rails for just about anything you might carry. (BMW’s bound to offer plenty of very clever, extremely expensive components that tie into these rails for carrying bikes and the like.) Folding those precious third row seats flat yields an enormous storage compartment, sure to be the envy of owners of the previous gen X5.
Just in case the X5’s cabin doesn’t blind you with science, the driving experience (if that’s what you call it) will. Munich’s full-size SAV is wired to the teeth. There’s a Start-off Assistant (to stop you rolling backwards), Hill Descent Control (to stop you careening forwards), xDrive (to stop you from getting stuck), Dynamic Stability Control (to stop you from hitting things), Park Distance Control (ditto), Active Steering (to stop you from enjoying driving), Adaptive Brake Lights (to stop people from hitting you), etc. But the X5's run flat rires are the most intrusive part of its dynamic armory.
The ride quality of the previous generation of X5 could be described as firm, even dictatorial. Driving the new version, I was assaulted by the powerful beat of those huge, unforgiving tires. I forced myself to keep going and literally became ill from the motions this tall, heavy, unyielding SUV inflicted upon my normally robust constitution. It's hard to believe that the propeller people couldn't incorporate third row seating AND a full-size spare– which would have allowed normal tires– in a vehicle that's supposed designed to go [somewhat] off-road. Or has BMW forgotten how to engineer a compliant ride? Have they not heard about air suspension technology in Munich?
On the positive side, the X5’s cornering and braking capabilities are excellent; initial turn in has an eager, sporty quality to it. To trick you into thinking this newly enlarged behemoth doesn’t weigh 4982 pounds or stand nearly 70 inches tall, the [even heavier] V8 version comes complete with active roll stabilization and electronic dampening control. Yes, well, I wonder if those seated in the third row seats will appreciate the higher cornering limits.
I suppose once you get past the abysmal ride quality created by the X5’s run flat tires, the heavy feeling of the chassis and the tall tippy seating position endemic to SUV’s, there is a highly capable vehicle beneath. I tested the version with the delicious inline six with its 260 horsepower and 225 pound feet of torque. It made wonderful noises and sounded much faster than it drove. But I don’t get it. I reckon SUV’s should be simple, comfortable and tough– not sadistically sporting. Until I can find a truck that doesn’t punish me for leaving my car behind, I’ll simply learn more Spanish.
interesting; the few reviews i’ve seen so far have been of the 4.8 version, and they’ve commented on the IMPROVED ride quality. i assume th 4.8 has different wheels/tires/suspension than the six cyclinder version. did you get a chance to pilot the V8?
Wow, i never realized that the I6 was such an underachiever. Wish you could order the X5 with the GM Vortec I-6 (291HP/277ft-lb) (or have BMW engineer the chassis of the Trailblazer….) It also makes you wonder why BMW didn't apply their excellent capability for mass reduction to this vehicle. It's 500 lbs over the 4523 lb. Trailblazer. Without having done any research, I would have assumed the X5 would be more powerful and much lighter than the TB. I hope to god the driving experience is better, else why spend the extra 20K? I've spent some time behind the wheel of a TB, and though the power is on the fun side of adequate, you would never mistake it for anything but a full frame truck based vehicle.
Oh for Pete's sake. Heavyweight in may be, rough riding it certainly is, but the X5 is in another class in terms of build quality, safety, handling, engine refinement, resale value, available equipment and snob value. As well it should be.
Robert,
So you’re saying the X5 is NOT a Trailblazer with ‘comfort access’ ignition?
I’d still take the 530xi Touring. If it wasn’t for people’s confused sensibilities (combined with BMW’s drive to sustain its phenomenal profitability through brand dilution), the X5 should have hi-pro tires, a full-sized external spare tire, and real off-road aspirations to differentiate from a road-going wagon on stilts.
the ultimate RTFM machine
Hahahaha. Took me a sec.
Try buying run flat snow tires for this truck. Not much choice, if any. Now what to do? Run regular tires without a spare? This “feature” received about as much thought as the “user friendly” iDrive system.
Snob value. Yup.
As the insult in Germany goes: Bin Mir Wichtig.
I tested the version with the delicious inline six with its 260 horsepower and 225 pound feet of torque.
It always gives me the creeps when the word “delicious” is used in a context other than food. Some sort of Rocky Horror Picture Show kind of creeps.
But the “ultimate RTFM machine” comment makes up for it. Well, almost. The “delicious” thing really freaks me out.
What about the upcoming XC90 Sport or the new MDX? I’d love to read reviews about those here.
The X5 looks good but it costs more than I would feel comfortable paying for a vehicle (for the V8 at least).
It’s extremely heavy and so so uncomfortable that it literally makes you ill.
I’m not sure you needed to proceed with the review beyond that point. No amount of other attributes could make up for that, even at a “thrifty” $50k+.
pb35:
MDX review tomorrow.
“Wow, i never realized that the I6 was such an underachiever.”
While the X5 inline 6 makes less power than the GM inline 6, the BMW engine is smaller.
The horsepower per liter number tells the real story:
BMW: 260HP / 3L = 86.7 HP/L
GM: 291HP / 4.2L = 69.3 HP/L
The new inline 6 is a great engine – I sampled it recently in the new Z4 – that’s a car I could love, even with the bangled styling and rather cheap feeling plastic interiors.
And yet my current employment has an agricultural element; there are times when I need a vehicle to traverse rocky trails and unpaved lanes.
X5: 21.9 cubic feet of trunk, 8.3 in of ground clearance.
Subaru Forester: 28.9 cubic feet of trunk, 8,1 in of ground clearance. Both have AWD.
Unless that 0.2 inches is going to hold you back, you could buy a pair of Foresters and keep one as a spare for the cost of the X5 and get along your gravel roads just fine.
the X5 i always thought was too much in many different ways. I like the X3 more, seems easier to take. The reviews of that have not been glowing either, lots of compliants about the hard suspension.
Luckily I have no need for a SUV or a SAV. I can choose from zippy little hatchbacks, whick i prefer anyway.
bfg9k:
But the Forrester has a profile like that of Chunk’s head from The Goonies.
If I want an SUV, I’ll get a Jeep.
If I want a sporting wagon with all weather capabilities, I’ll get a Subaru or if I’m feeling a little frisky, a BMW 530xi.
I have no need for this, but then again, I’m sane of mind when it comes to the car buying, or at least I like to think I am.
gakoenig
I think you mean Sloth. But I’m sure it’s great on rocky…roads?
I hope you get a chance to test the new mini-ute Acura RDX as it would be very interesting to see a no holds barred take on it.
As for the X5, I think I would rather have a Saab 9-7 :). At least when the Saab breaks down I will be able to get it fixed at the local Chevy shop for less than six months mortgage payments.
The RDX was already tested here. Check the reviews section for it. Mr. Montgomery tested it.
Jay-
Are the third seats as dinky as they appear?
@ philbailey
For your snow tire spare, I guess we’ll have to mount it on the tailgate…a la Ford Bronco! How’s that for snob appeal?
So, let’s just recap, shall we: The BMW X5
– is an “all-terrain” truck (sorry, SUV) whose ride will beat you up on anything but a kitchen worktop surface
– is a “sport” utility vehicle that weighs three tons, has all the aerodynamic grace of Buckingham palace, and a centre of gravity about three feet higher than a proper sports car
– is a seven-seater that allows each passenger to carry a wallet (and maybe a paper handkerchief) because the luggage capacity is zip if you actually use all the seven seats
– has all-time four-wheel drive because naturally, picking the kids up from school requires Rubicon traction and to hell with fuel economy
– has iDrive because changing the radio station IS a task worthy enough to demand your complete and undivided attention for thirty seconds (mind you, that’s AFTER you’ve found out how to)
– has a smallish six-cylinder engine because revving the damn thing into the upper nine thousands is JUST what SUV driving is all about – after all, torque is for grandpa in his Buick, right?
– absolutely MUST have all the corner carving abilities of a Lotus Elise because your kids are gonna love being thrown about the back seat on a twisty road (maybe BMW put the dreadful leather in on purpose so you can hose it down when your offspring has thrown up all over the place)
– has automotive journalists all over the world ecstatic because it is ugly alright, but not quite as embolism-inducingly hideous as the outgoing model
Is it just me, or is that whale on stilts quite simply a massive affront to human intelligence?
One thing I’ve always wondered about the adaptive taillights….they supposedly get brighter the harder you press on the pedal, correct?
How is this supposed to help? People barely noticed your brake lights as it is, why should they notice if they’re brighter than they should be? Frivilous technology? I think so.
Maybe if they were executed better(not sure how, so don’t ask) it’d be a better idea, but right now it just seems silly.
If you need ground clearance and luxury without the sky-high seating position, a used Audi Allroad would work.
Back in the day, BMW’s DOHC six-cylinder was considered the smoothest, most powerful in its class: better than Jaguar’s, but maybe not as good as Maserati’s. Last summer, I drove a BMW X5 equipped with a six-cylinder and marveled at the power, throttle response and smoothness. Admittedly, the big thing – not quite a “truck” to my mind – let you know full well when you ran over an expansion joint on the freeway; and I never had the time to take it off road. But it impressed me with the build quality and even the exterior design; as noted, this one doesn’t look like a Bangle cartoon car. I don’t think anyone should buy this rig who wants a truck. But if you want something to get you to where you can ski or snowboard, with comfort and style, the X5 will do that job.
The Cory
Good question re:brakelights. I’m not a fan of stratifying the seriousness of braking. Widespread use might even lead to people taking brakes less seriously (“Officer, the brightness indicated he was just casually braking, so I didn’t think he was really stopping!”). I prefer braking to be considered a discrete event, not subtly continuous, from a defensive driving perspective.
I hacked my Passat’s taillights so that it runs the dual rear foglights along with the brakelights (5 total brakelights). 4 bulbs and an LED strip tell you I’m stopping. While others may have HIDs to see ahead, I prefer to light up the cabin of the car behind me in a red hue.
So – definitely no option for “airing down” the tires on rough terrain or for better traction? ;-)
I’ve kept my Cherokee from ’96. As someone said above: Jeep for SUV; something niftier for tooling about when you’re not hauling or plowing mud.
I find I agree with many/most of discoholics comments – except that what he points out applies not just to the X5 but a whole slew of “posing pouches” for the driving populace. Some folk really do need the extra room but most use their SUVs and even now CUVs (which I expect to grow by a few inches when facelifted every year) are statement vehicles.
I had hoped that most would remain in the US but I find an ever increasing number of the darn things in Europe too – and there they take up two parking spaces or the entire view from a bijou hotel!
P. (a properly proportioned 3-series owner in which an I6 engine performs)
Back in the day, BMW’s DOHC six-cylinder was considered the smoothest, most powerful in its class
Exactly. And it still is, too. BMW and Honda still make the greatest engines of all manufacturers.
Besides, apart from the fact that SUV’s aren’t the most clever type of vehicles from a day-to-day point of view, there still is a market for them. And in that respect, compare this to its direct competitors (ML, RX, Q7, Touareg). Would you seriously have one of those over the X5?
I wouldn’t. The class might not be the benchmark, but the X5 is definitely the benchmark in its class.
I would take the Touareg V10 Turbodiesel in a heartbeat over the X5.
Another possibility is to buy the X5 and replace the run flat tires, which is what I am doing with my 335.
I agree with Jay. Touareg V10 over this. I’d get real offroadability along with a comfortable and relatively frugal highway ride.
Adaptive brake lights: I don’t know about the X5s system. But the ones I’ve seen in action usually flash rapidly when the person infront of you is “panic braking”. I wish more cars would have this. It was a godsend when I drove an 18-wheeler. It was nice knowing if I needed brake or stand on the brakes.
And in that respect, compare this to its direct competitors (ML, RX, Q7, Touareg). Would you seriously have one of those over the X5?
Yes
Me too.
If I had to, I’d take the Q7. But I’m biased.
In general, I think this vehicle segment is a waste of metal and petroleum.
confused1096
The flashing brakelights seemed pretty common a couple years ago, but I only ever saw them on Hondas and Mazdas. And they flashed EVERY time, not just the panic braking. Never knew where that feature came from or where it went.
And another vote for the Toe-Rag V10. Honestly, I hope they bring it out with the V6 tdi in the future. Reasonable performance AND frugality…because what good is that big V10 diesel when the chassis can’t handle the towing that the engine wants to do?
Re. active brake lights:
I know this was the case for Merc, dunno about BMW, but they have the flashing-in-a-panic-stop system mentioned by confused1096 in Europe, but American regulations require that brake lights be lit continuously while the brakes are applied, so they had to use this silly brighter/dimmer idea. I think the rule must be different for commercial vehicles, hence it being used on 18 wheelers.
I actually manually flash my brake lights to get the attention of those behind me if im in a panic stop situation on a crowded freeway and the like, and I think having the system built in would be an improvement. When it’s dark and rainy, it can be difficult (especially for the kind of people that dont leave enough stopping room in dark and rainy conditions) to tell how quickly the person in front is stopping.
Great review. Much appreciated.
RF:
You underestimate the Vortec I-6.
But the main point i’m making is that I hear presentations from BMW engineers talking about their wonderful body engineering capability. And they back it up with great products like their 5er’s and 7er’s. But they appear to have just phoned this one in, and are counting on riding their “snob appeal” to sales success (and big time profits). Or, maybe it just isn’t that easy to engineer an SUV to meet the needs of it’s customer base, and maybe BMW should just leave that to the companies that have been doing it a while. The Chevy is more powerful and lighter than the equivalent BMW….geez, Louise, you’d think i’d been smokin’ those funny cigarettes again.
I realize that in your mind it’s the height of hubris to favorably compare the TB to the X5, and it pretty much was in mine too until I read this review. Now, unless I decide I need all the electronic gizmos, i’m not so sure…..
Confused1096 and Nonemoreblack: I’ve seen those flashing brake lights on various cars where I live as well; so, I don’t think American regulations require constantly lit brake lights. Personally, I find them annoying and just another example of wasted money in the name of safety. I’ve never bothered to note which cars they appeared on, as I thought it was something new that would eventually find its way into all cars via government safety regulations like the third brake light.
I generally agree with the feelings expressed in the article and in the comments. If I want an SUV it had better be rugged. I had better be able to forde streams and climb steep roads covered in loose gravel, cause that’s what I would use it for. As it is, I do have a truck that gets me most places I want to go. It’s only two wheel drive, but has high clearance and low gearing. I just stay out of the slop. :-)
Not that this is a Used Car site or anything, but instead of Learning Spanish, i think I’d learn Axiom and VehiCROSS before i learned German. Oh wait, Ich kann deutsch Sprechen. But yeah i still don’t think an X5 is something that should be roaming construction sites, muddy carpet interior. There are plenty other options out there, like a wrangler and a Miata, with possibly a Yaris tossed in for the same price of that X5.
There is no doubt that the X5 is a fine ride on-pavement. It is superb for a TALL station wagon.
That said, I am biased. I just picked up a 2007 Range Rover Sport. It may not be the sports tourer or have the reliability (debatable) of the X5 but it serves my needs. It has low range, locking differentials, real 4X4 hardware and I can tow up to 7,700 pounds. I am going to use it to tow my restored 1971 Toyota Fj40 LandCruiser.
Different strokes for different folks. In my circle of friends and family, I expect most will trade up for this newer X5. Next year, BMW is set to announce the X6.
I agree with Scottie. But then again, what percentage of people who buy this are even thinking about using is as a mudhound. I can tell you. None. I’d bet my left nut that 99.7% of these luxury “SUVs”(Land Rovers excluded) see no more off road action than accidently backing into their yard or over a shopping mall curb.
For the $50,000 this puppy starts at, I’d buy myself a Wrangler Unlimited for cargo and off roading and an MX-5 or used Z4/Boxster for the fun driving. And guess what, they’re both convertibles.
This car doesn’t look half bad in photos but my god is it awful looking in person!
As I recall, the first generation X5 was the most recalled vehicle in US history.
Ford Escape aside?
I thought the Focus still had that dubious honor.
I can just imagine the amount / weight of sidewall rubber needed to keep that fully loaded 3-tonner running for 150 miles on bumpy, rocky offroad trails without air in the tires. This thing takes Beverly Hillbillies sensibilities to a new level of idiocy. Touareg V10 is so front heavy it will handstand on the brakes in down any slope at all, and use up all available ground clearance by sinking into anything softer than concrete. Its a towtruck, pure and simple. I’d say X3 if You need more ground clearance than a proper car and ‘need’ more social presence than a Subaru. I’d still fire any engineer that bought 3 inches of ground clearance with 10 of vehicle height, though.
BTW Jay, does active steering remove all driving enjoyment from the 335 as well, or is it just on the tractor?
If you can’t get it german delivered, its not a real BMW in my book…
BMW should consider only the bi-turbo for the X5 and save the little 3.0 for the X3.
If I remember my factoids right, the Focus (2000/01) had the honour of being the most recalled vehicle with the BMW X5 coming in as the runner-up.
Quality control for the Focus was brutal but for some reason the X5 seems even less excusable.
Just thinking that BMW owners are a bit pickier than Focus owners.
I could’ve sworn that the Escape had more recalls than the Focus. I remember reading an article about Ford winning the most recalled car ever award two years in a row with the Escape surpassing the Focus. I could be wrong though.
And in that respect, compare this to its direct competitors (ML, RX, Q7, Touareg). Would you seriously have one of those over the X5?
No, no, no, maybe. Being the best of a bad bunch isn’t exactly impressive. But let’s throw the XC90 V8 and the MDX in this stew too. The XC90 is awesome, and the new MDX looks seriously impressive on paper. I’m eagerly awaiting the review tomorrow.
Sure, the MDX looks impressive on paper but the thing is hideous. It looks like a chromed out Aztek from the from and the back looks like an RDX(not a good starting point) that’s on a McDonald’s diet.
I didn’t like the MDX when I saw it in pictures but it looks good in person (in black). I’ll save further comments for the review tomorrow.
I found the opposite affect regarding the Acura MDX and RDX. The RDX looks great in photos, but really alien to me in person. The MDX is blah to me in pictures, but quite influential when I pass one on the road.
The new MDX is selling very well. Honda certainly took a risk with the styling, but it seems to be paying off.
The BMW SUVs have been doing less well, as have the copies (Acura RDX, Mazda CX-7). It seems that the market for sport-oriented SUVs that trade space and ride quality for handling isn’t terribly large.
I’ve had prices for the new X5 up for some time. If anyone’s interested:
http://www.truedelta.com/prices.php
The MDX should be the brass ring for what a CUV should be. Well-built, well-equipped, well-powered, well-suspended and ultimately, well-engineered.
I don’t mind the looks of the current or previous models.
Of course, I own an `03 Rendezvous and don’t mind the looks of it either!
On another note, I’ve heard on anecdotal evidence that the new Honda CR-V is not selling all that well. Anyone out there have hard data or at least something more than hearsay?
I wouldn’t be surprised about the CR-V. Our city has a lot of “early adopters” and I’ve only seen a single new CR-V thus far. I’m sure I saw half a dozen within the first few weeks of the last generation’s intro.
On that note, I’ve only seen a single GMT900 SUV, a single GMT900 truck, and one Dodge Nitro. Either no one likes new cars anymore (not likely) or no one is buying new SUVs and trucks (more likely).
Dean,
I haven’t seen a single Nitro on the streets either (although one DCX dealer I know says he’ll be lucky to get a half-dozen in before Spring so the product volume may not be there).
I live in “Truckville” and I haven’t seen one GMT900 truck on the road but dealers only started getting them in mid-November.
As for the big SUV’s. I didn’t see one for ages and now the streets are rotten with Avalanches, Tahoes, Denalis and Tahoes. Interestingly, most of the ones I see are high enders, not a whole bunch of entry-level models.
I guess if you’ve got the means to buy one, you go big.
CJ
I’ve heard on anecdotal evidence that the new Honda CR-V is not selling all that well. Anyone out there have hard data or at least something more than hearsay?
Honda sold 16,242 CR-Vs in November.
As a comparison, Toyota sold 11,425 RAV4s in November.
Both represent significant increases over last November, and both are WAY up YTD.
I’d be quite happy with CR-V numbers if I were Honda.
BTW: Dodge sold 5,489 Nitros in November, probably supply limited
The X5 represents……
A) A pointless exercise in mating a great company with a mediocre market segment.
B) Next decade’s response to the analogy…”The M-class is to Mercedes as the X-Class is to BMW.”
C) The SUV that GM should have built for Saab and marketed to Hummer as a ‘non-utilitarian all-terrain wankerocket” (a.k.a. the UAW edition)
Eric Miller
Thanks. Compact SUV’s (regardless of manufacturer) don’t sit on the lot that long so I was quite surprised at the CR-V comment when I heard it.
With the CR-V even more than the MDX, Honda is learning that risky styling isn’t all that risky in its case. As the numbers posted above suggest, new CR-V sales are VERY strong.
Going in a more car-like direction, improving the interior, and cutting noise levels also didn’t hurt.
The Jeep Compass, on the other hand…
A side note for those who think the SUV/CUV is dead:
Nov sales of Honda CR-V and Toyota RAV4 = 27,667
Nov sales of ALL Mazda and Mercedes-Benz CARS = 27,525
BMW has sold more X5s and X3s YTD than they have 5 series.
Wow…that’s pretty amazing stat. I think the small SUV/CUV is a great market to target. They still have a lot of potential for more power and/or more fuel efficiency. The hybrid Toyota Highlander is pretty peppy!
The Compact SUV segment is growing as fast as the mid-size and large SUV segments are dying off.
There’s a reason that everyone is jumping into the pool!
They still have a lot of potential for more power and/or more fuel efficiency.
The new RAV4 is a good example.
Last gen’s 161hp 4 cyl auto FWD was rated 29mpg freeway.
This gen’s 269hp V6 auto FWD is rated the same!
The 06/07 V6 RAV4 has more horsepower and torque than the 3.0L X5 reviewed here, yet weighs almost 1500 pounds less. It’s easy to see the appeal of the cute-ute.
Jay,
Porsche Cayenne Turbo (S)
Thank me later.
Porsche Cayenne Turbo (S)
Fun to drive, horrible to own
Thats a good looking SUV.One question is that full frame body on chassis?
I believe the X5 comes with 18’s standard. Those wheels look like the optional 19’s or 20’s, which have a very low profile tire, that could explain some of the harsh ride.
Check out the plates in the [file] photos.
I don’t think Jay drove the X5 in Germany
I’m new to this site. Where are the [file] photos? All I see are the pictures above which look German to me.
In most cases, we use stock photography, provided by the manufacturer (one way or another).
These are stock shots.
As a rejoinder to what’s happened in virtually all car/truck market segments, these compact SUV’s are just about the same size as the midsized SUV’s of 8 years ago.
In my opinion it’s not a matter of the Escape, CR-V, and RAV4 offering a ‘smaller’ alternative. It’s the fact that the Explorer, Passport/Rodeo, and 4Runner simply became too generic, stodgy and long in the tooth.
I think SUV’s prescribe to the “longer, lower, wider” formula for redesign (was that a Harely Earl maxim?).
Every succeeding generation has to be “less filling and tastes great”.
If I remember one of my product lectures on the Escape in `01, the difference between the interior seating space between it and its Explorer contemporary were quite close.
As a matter of fact, when the `02 Exploder came out, many owners traded into Escapes rather than keep with the new Explorer.
Alright, how come no one mentions the well-reviewed Cadillac SRX as a competitor to the X5?
Good power from the V6, three rows of seating, by all accounts a good handling, all-weather machine, decent luxury credentials, etc.
I’ve only driven the V6 model once (I have only driven the V8 X5) but I was pleased with how it felt and drove.
The interior is redesigned, has an SRX faced the cold, hard, caustic light of a TTAC review?
The new X5 DOES have a full-sized spare.
Why so many people are bashing SUV’s, complaining about their lack of off-road capability? 99.9% of the time they’re driven on-road, making off road suspension unnecessary. If you need off road capability, get a Wrangler or Land Rover. I owned 4 BMW’s, three of them were M3’s which I found very impractical for daily use. I now drive 4.6is X5 and the reason I do is because I enjoy better visibility (which is a big plus considering the amount of tall SUV’s stuck in big city traffic jams), more convenient and comfortable seating position, better winter traction, greater sense of safey and more utility than a regular sedan. No, I don’t like the expensive gas pump visits, but alternatives are also compromises.
Said all that, I am getting ready to trade in the X5 and started looking around, so I test drove few cars very recently. I am most impressed with the new MDX. You just cannot find and beat the MDX’s features anywhere else for the price. The similarly equipped ML is close to $20k. Add to that the infamous reliability and constant bugs many ML owners are complaining on MB forums and the MDX is the clear winner.
You just cannot find and beat the MDX’s features anywhere else for the price.
GM benchmarked the previous generation MDX when they developed the Lambda large CUVs (Outlook, Acadia, Enclave). Please don’t laugh when I suggest that they come pretty close to the new one as well. Believe it or not, they also offer more features. I have driven both. The MDX is fantastic, but the Lambdas are at least 90+% as good for less than 90% the price. I was impressed, as my TTAC review (and this comment) shows.
Flame suit on.
The side view looks way too much like a Hyundai SantaFe.
Is anyone going to make use of that ground clearance with those wheels? Deliberately, I mean, not because they thought their AWD-mobile stops or turns better in the snow than a car.
How about the new MDX review? Just get one with the sports package at least. I know that the new MDX with active suspension handles better than my 03 ‘4.6is X5 (a $70+k car), but I wonder how it stacks up against the new X5.
Linus: The new X5 DOES have a full-sized spare.
Not according to the BMW web site. It states the X5 comes with “run-flat all-season tires” and a “space saver spare tire” that is “not available with optional 3rd row seat.”
“The MDX is fantastic, but the Lambdas are at least 90+% as good for less than 90% the price. I was impressed, as my TTAC review (and this comment) shows.”
Why can’t GM produce a 110% as good vehicle instead of another 90% effort?
Almost as good and a bit cheaper is not a prescription for greatness or success. Once you factor in the difference in resale values the bargain priced GM vehicle isn’t a bargain.
Perhaps we should compare apples to apples. The Buick Enclave is the appropraite unit to go against MDX and the RX’s.
Outlook and the GMC Acadia should be lined up against Pilot and Highlander.
Eric Miller wrote:“The MDX is fantastic, but the Lambdas are at least 90+% as good for less than 90% the price. I was impressed, as my TTAC review (and this comment) shows.”
jthorner wrote: Why can’t GM produce a 110% as good vehicle instead of another 90% effort?
Almost as good and a bit cheaper is not a prescription for greatness or success. Once you factor in the difference in resale values the bargain priced GM vehicle isn’t a bargain.
Outlook vs MDX
They’re much more similar than one would think
Tire size, track, and suspension set ups are similar
Outlook beats MDX on:
Useable third row seating (+4″ leg/ +3″ head/ +5″ hip)
Access to the third row is larger and easier
3 passenger third row (vs 2 pass MDX)
Available center-row buckets
More cargo space (max 116.9 vs 83.5 MDX)
Large fixed-panel rear sunroof
Factory remote start
Available in front wheel drive (MDX is AWD only)
Touch-screen use of nav/audio (both are voice)
Heated windshield washers
DOHC with continous phasing int/exh (vs SOHC VTEC MDX)
6 speed automatic (vs MDX 5spd)
2-3 mpg better fuel economy, despite its increased size
Uses regular unleaded (vs Premium MDX)
10.5″ longer wheelbase for better ride, larger door openings
Available 19″ wheels (18 only MDX)
100,000 mile powertrain warranty (vs 70K MDX)
$4400 price advantage option-for-option
MDX beats Outlook on:
25 hp / 25 lbs-ft advantage (300/275 MDX vs 275/251 OL)
250 pound weight advantage
1/2 second advantage zero-to-sixty
Available GM/Delphi magnetic ride w/ Sport (~$2000 more)
SH-AWD is more sophisticated and improves handling
Blue-Tooth interface (std) and available DVD audio
Available heated seating for second row (front only OL)
8-way power passenger’s seat (vs 4-way OL)
Power tilt and telescope steering column (non-power OL)
Real-time traffic and Zagat with optional navigation
LED taillights
Better standard warranty (4/50 vs 3/36 OL)
Every feature not discussed here is available or equal on both
That’s the list. (Micheal Karesh may do it better)
Whether the $4400 is worth it is a personal call.
The biggest difference is size. It may be important to some, a detriment to others.
Resale value is conjecture as neither have been projected by ALG. Saturn has historically done very well (#1 domestic) and so has Acura (#5 luxury).
CSJohnston brought up the Acadia and Enclave, and yes, the Enclave will fill the feature gaps including second row heated seats, better ride (maybe air or magnetic), same 4/50 basic warranty, and add features like heads-up display, double-pane ‘quiet tuned’ side windows and acoustic windshield, etc. Enclave may also be the first Lambda to feature GM’s direct injection version of the 3.6L HF reported to be 304-320hp (we’ll see it in the new CTS at Detroit IAS). Enclave, however, will be priced with MDX.
ash78:
The flashing third brake lights on hondas & mazdas around Birmingham came from some of the local dealers that sold them as “safety” options, from $50-100 per depending on how stupid you looked. You probably saw them on a number of Miatas around town also. After having numerous friends get rear-ended (while stopped) in their Miatas we came up with that as a way to make them more visible when stopped, which is an obvious problem with Miatas.
I figured out how to wire a $10 turn signal flasher to work with most cars third brake lights and sold them to everyone in the Miata club at cost. In about 4 years of 30+ Miatas running them not a single one got rear ended.
I think there are a few places on the net where you can buy a manufactured unit that will blink the third brake light, and some that will blink a few times and then go solid. I have seen some motorcycles do this. The Hoover PD uses them on the brake lights on their police cycles also, I think they realize the importance of that extra visibility.
Of course most people hate them when they see them on someone else’s car, they think they are annoying and distracting. Some have questioned the legality, which is valid except here in Alabama and other states with NO inspection it isn’t an issue.
Like all great thoughts, it hit me this morning in the shower.
Jay — MB GL450
It is good.
Will they make an AMG GL63? Sounds more Jay’s speed….
In Europe there is a GL500.
No plans yet for an AMG version. Yet.
That said, the regular Yank edition GL450 is amazingly fast/fun.
Yippee, another SUV for affluent soccer moms! I am beyond excited. More electronic junk to break.
Does it come in 13 shades of silver/gray?
So what’s it gor the my Jeep Liberty doesnt besides a 2x price tag?