X6M - why so unpopular?
Discussion
irfan1712 said:
one thing I cant work out 'what for' is the X5 M50D. My boss has a brand new one, triple turbo diesel V6, 386bhp and 500lbft of torque. he said its absolutely crap on diesel which just makes me think...whats the point of an outrageous diesel engine like that ( as magnificent as It may be) and why not go for the whole hog X5m seeing as fuel costs probably aren't that different in the real world? Why would someone buy the M50D over the petrol alternative?
Agreed, I test drove the X5 M50D at best it gave 25 MPG, not worth buying for economy or performance may as well go for the "M".Just to offer an alternate perspective, we have an X6 M50d, and I totally see the point.
The M50d has more torque than the X6M (c.45lbft?) and gets us 25mpg which is largely town driving. Am pretty sure it must be 35+ mpg if used for some longer/motorway journeys.
By contrast, the F10 M5 we had generally returned c.13-15mpg and the X6 actually feels quicker. The wall of torque will put most sports cars to shame, in-gear acceleration is simply brutal and running costs pretty low.
Just my 2p, not a fan boy but we've been hugely impressed by the car and wouldn't hesitate to buy another tri-turbo again.
The M50d has more torque than the X6M (c.45lbft?) and gets us 25mpg which is largely town driving. Am pretty sure it must be 35+ mpg if used for some longer/motorway journeys.
By contrast, the F10 M5 we had generally returned c.13-15mpg and the X6 actually feels quicker. The wall of torque will put most sports cars to shame, in-gear acceleration is simply brutal and running costs pretty low.
Just my 2p, not a fan boy but we've been hugely impressed by the car and wouldn't hesitate to buy another tri-turbo again.
Kananga said:
Just to offer an alternate perspective, we have an X6 M50d
By contrast, to the F10 M5 .......the X6 actually feels quicker. The wall of torque will put most sports cars to shame, in-gear acceleration is simply brutal .
Interesting. I am seriously fancying a quick 4x4 to replace by RR tdv8 and have been considering petrol monsters on the assumption these are likely to be way quicker. However sounds like I need to test drive a m50d......By contrast, to the F10 M5 .......the X6 actually feels quicker. The wall of torque will put most sports cars to shame, in-gear acceleration is simply brutal .
djohnson said:
Interesting. I am seriously fancying a quick 4x4 to replace by RR tdv8 and have been considering petrol monsters on the assumption these are likely to be way quicker. However sounds like I need to test drive a m50d......
I would definitely try one before you commit elsewhere. We're about to swap the current one for a new shape x6 with the same engine. Only dilemma is spec, as we were lucky to have bought an über spec car (c.£35k of extras!) so the next car is going to feel budget spec regardless of how many options we add!! 
JMBMWM5 said:
greed, I test drove the X5 M50D at best it gave 25 MPG, not worth buying for economy or performance may as well go for the "M".
My experience was very different. Overall over a 5 week period i averaged 34mpg & could see that climb to nearly 40 on a run but as low as 22 when playing. Was a great motor & defo one i'd consider.Why would you opt for the X5/6M when the M50D is as quick in pretty much every area & far better on fuel. I no longer see the point of buying a petrol variant if an as good or better diesel variant exists.
W8PMC said:
My experience was very different. Overall over a 5 week period i averaged 34mpg & could see that climb to nearly 40 on a run but as low as 22 when playing. Was a great motor & defo one i'd consider.
Why would you opt for the X5/6M when the M50D is as quick in pretty much every area & far better on fuel. I no longer see the point of buying a petrol variant if an as good or better diesel variant exists.
+1Why would you opt for the X5/6M when the M50D is as quick in pretty much every area & far better on fuel. I no longer see the point of buying a petrol variant if an as good or better diesel variant exists.
The only argument for the petrol is the noise, where good diesels still don't trump petrol engines.
That said, I think the new diesels sound fine.
Guys as good as the M50d is, the petrol develops considerably greater power (circa +200bhp) which must be evident when comparing acceleration. Is it more the case that driving style in an SUV differs and you are less inclined to run them to the red line?
Interestingly just looked at the X5M configurator and third row seating isn't an option... so if you want 7 seats then it would have to be one of the diesels or the 50i
Interestingly just looked at the X5M configurator and third row seating isn't an option... so if you want 7 seats then it would have to be one of the diesels or the 50i
W8PMC said:
My experience was very different. Overall over a 5 week period i averaged 34mpg & could see that climb to nearly 40 on a run but as low as 22 when playing. Was a great motor & defo one i'd consider.
Why would you opt for the X5/6M when the M50D is as quick in pretty much every area & far better on fuel. I no longer see the point of buying a petrol variant if an as good or better diesel variant exists.
YEA I remember you saying Paul, I borrowed one from ELMS and it was not as good as I was hoping for (as i said to you at the time), could have been a thrashed dog though, did have a lot of miles for a demo.Why would you opt for the X5/6M when the M50D is as quick in pretty much every area & far better on fuel. I no longer see the point of buying a petrol variant if an as good or better diesel variant exists.
I think there's probably irritation from driving fans that BMW don't make an M version of their 'sportiest' car, the Z4, but make M versions of the least sporty, X5/X6.
But when the Munich execs see the powerpoint slides of projected sales, the M badge then gets stuck on the boot of anything showing big profits. By extension same with M-Lite and M-sport, might as well throw some M badges on anything if you can upsell more customers.
But when the Munich execs see the powerpoint slides of projected sales, the M badge then gets stuck on the boot of anything showing big profits. By extension same with M-Lite and M-sport, might as well throw some M badges on anything if you can upsell more customers.
0836whimper said:
I think there's probably irritation from driving fans that BMW don't make an M version of their 'sportiest' car, the Z4, but make M versions of the least sporty, X5/X6.
But when the Munich execs see the powerpoint slides of projected sales, the M badge then gets stuck on the boot of anything showing big profits. By extension same with M-Lite and M-sport, might as well throw some M badges on anything if you can upsell more customers.
YES it's gone like Mercedes, put a AMG badge on it and it will a loaf of bread, f***ing joke, BMW have followed suit and downgraded there product IMO.But when the Munich execs see the powerpoint slides of projected sales, the M badge then gets stuck on the boot of anything showing big profits. By extension same with M-Lite and M-sport, might as well throw some M badges on anything if you can upsell more customers.
theboss said:
Guys as good as the M50d is, the petrol develops considerably greater power (circa +200bhp) which must be evident when comparing acceleration. Is it more the case that driving style in an SUV differs and you are less inclined to run them to the red line?
Interestingly just looked at the X5M configurator and third row seating isn't an option... so if you want 7 seats then it would have to be one of the diesels or the 50i
But that's countered by the different torque outputs. I'm pretty sure the X5/6M is a touch faster off the line, but it't that whole real world scenario where mid range the M50D is likely quicker. I'm far from saying that's a good/bad thing, but head to head in the real world stakes the biggest differences are engine noise which the petrol wins & MPG which the diesel wins, other than that their's very little in it.Interestingly just looked at the X5M configurator and third row seating isn't an option... so if you want 7 seats then it would have to be one of the diesels or the 50i
It's an illogical car, but that doesn't make it a bad one. Personally i'd rather a X5M if we are talking fairly like for like bmws. However, If i was going to the dealer with my chequebook I know i'd end up walking out with a M5.
Drive all the other options you are looking at in a short space of time from each other. Which ever one puts the largest grin on your face, thats the one to have.
I'd throw the M6 grand coupe in that mix too, just to make your decision even more difficult :P
Edit: and the latest RS6
Drive all the other options you are looking at in a short space of time from each other. Which ever one puts the largest grin on your face, thats the one to have.
I'd throw the M6 grand coupe in that mix too, just to make your decision even more difficult :P
Edit: and the latest RS6
W8PMC said:
But that's countered by the different torque outputs. I'm pretty sure the X5/6M is a touch faster off the line, but it't that whole real world scenario where mid range the M50D is likely quicker. I'm far from saying that's a good/bad thing, but head to head in the real world stakes the biggest differences are engine noise which the petrol wins & MPG which the diesel wins, other than that their's very little in it.
The peak torque stats on the latest cars areX5M 750Nm 2200-5000rpm
50d 740Nm 2000-3000rpm
Essentially they are as fast as one another between 2000-3000rpm, at which point the diesel will start going backwards relative to the M. If you're going to buy one of these and never rev it out to the redline, then your needs will be met by the diesel. This may well constitute 'real world' driving in an SUV, I realise that, but I still maintain that the petrol will outperform it considerably if required (but again, whats the point in an SUV).
Come on... we're going to be doing this argument to death in a year or two when the next-gen M550d becomes the new 'remapped 335d' and we M5 owners are getting it in the neck about the dervs being 'faster in the real world'!
theboss said:
The peak torque stats on the latest cars are
X5M 750Nm 2200-5000rpm
50d 740Nm 2000-3000rpm
Essentially they are as fast as one another between 2000-3000rpm, at which point the diesel will start going backwards relative to the M. If you're going to buy one of these and never rev it out to the redline, then your needs will be met by the diesel. This may well constitute 'real world' driving in an SUV, I realise that, but I still maintain that the petrol will outperform it considerably if required (but again, whats the point in an SUV).
Come on... we're going to be doing this argument to death in a year or two when the next-gen M550d becomes the new 'remapped 335d' and we M5 owners are getting it in the neck about the dervs being 'faster in the real world'!
I'm afraid the world is a changing. Whilst i hope to remain a petrol purist & would never buy into the 'real world' mapped oil burner vs gas guzzler performance car debate, in the SUV sector it's a total no brainer as the base vehicles are overweight with cruise ship like handling, so to put a high performance petrol engine in one is just insane when a diesel variant is by all accounts better on paper & being honest performs as well on the road. If you want to hoon around at warp speed then why in Gods name acquire an X5? Of course it's each to their own & their must be a market for them, however the diesel vs petrol debate in the 'real world' is very different when it comes to Soft Roaders & even being a petrol purist, i'd take the M50D all day long over the X5M.X5M 750Nm 2200-5000rpm
50d 740Nm 2000-3000rpm
Essentially they are as fast as one another between 2000-3000rpm, at which point the diesel will start going backwards relative to the M. If you're going to buy one of these and never rev it out to the redline, then your needs will be met by the diesel. This may well constitute 'real world' driving in an SUV, I realise that, but I still maintain that the petrol will outperform it considerably if required (but again, whats the point in an SUV).
Come on... we're going to be doing this argument to death in a year or two when the next-gen M550d becomes the new 'remapped 335d' and we M5 owners are getting it in the neck about the dervs being 'faster in the real world'!
http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/car-reviews/bmw/bmw-x...
I hadn't realised the engine had changed in the X5M recently, so granted the newer variant will be it appears quicker however the 2014 incarnation which was when i drove both is only on a par (real world)
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/bmw/x5/first-d...
http://www.autocar.co.uk/car-review/bmw/x5/first-d...
W8PMC said:
But that's countered by the different torque outputs. I'm pretty sure the X5/6M is a touch faster off the line, but it't that whole real world scenario where mid range the M50D is likely quicker. I'm far from saying that's a good/bad thing, but head to head in the real world stakes the biggest differences are engine noise which the petrol wins & MPG which the diesel wins, other than that their's very little in it.
Its massively faster off the line in fact, not a "touch", and the "real world" scenario is meaningless, because on the road, where speed limits and road conditons / traffic are the constraining factor, reality is that a 30d is just as fast across the ground as an X5M. You buy an M, simply because you want the fastest accelerating, most exciting, and best handling X5... if you want the best range or mpg, buy a 25d or 30d. Compared to the M, the 50d is not faster anywhere, mid-range or not and I see it as too much of a compromise - its neither the best for economy nor the fastest in the range, nor the one to just enjoy taking out for a drive.
If you take economy out of the equation, and I can't see why it would be in the equation for a £70-£100k SUV buyer, then I can't see any reason at all to buy a 50d over an X5M unless you want 7 seats.
It is the Rhodius of the BMW line. Unspeakably ugly, no performance advantages over the equivalent M5, and less capacity.
I am evidently not the right customer for this thing, but I cannot think of a angle reason why I would ever buy one.
-practicality: fail
-rear seat capacity: fail
-aesthetics: huge fail
-performance: no advantage over X5M.
I will admit to having a Cayenne S in my garage as a general hack, and it is distinctly ugly. At least, however, it is very practical.
I am evidently not the right customer for this thing, but I cannot think of a angle reason why I would ever buy one.
-practicality: fail
-rear seat capacity: fail
-aesthetics: huge fail
-performance: no advantage over X5M.
I will admit to having a Cayenne S in my garage as a general hack, and it is distinctly ugly. At least, however, it is very practical.
RDMcG said:
It is the Rhodius of the BMW line. Unspeakably ugly, no performance advantages over the equivalent M5, and less capacity.
I am evidently not the right customer for this thing, but I cannot think of a angle reason why I would ever buy one.
-practicality: fail
-rear seat capacity: fail
-aesthetics: huge fail
-performance: no advantage over X5M.
I will admit to having a Cayenne S in my garage as a general hack, and it is distinctly ugly. At least, however, it is very practical.
Agree on all of the above. I am evidently not the right customer for this thing, but I cannot think of a angle reason why I would ever buy one.
-practicality: fail
-rear seat capacity: fail
-aesthetics: huge fail
-performance: no advantage over X5M.
I will admit to having a Cayenne S in my garage as a general hack, and it is distinctly ugly. At least, however, it is very practical.
Gassing Station | M Power | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff