Discussion
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
i guess you cant have your cake and eat it - great economy versus not a six cylinder.From memory has more BHP than the original x5 3.0d so it should go ok.
It was the reason i sold my e70 x5 - fantastic car but horrifying fuel consumption so i could see the appeal.
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
Looks great on paper, but then you never drive on paper.Quite hateful in real life, you want the six pot.
Helicopter123 said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
Looks great on paper, but then you never drive on paper.Quite hateful in real life, you want the six pot.
You driven one?
daemon said:
Helicopter123 said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
Looks great on paper, but then you never drive on paper.Quite hateful in real life, you want the six pot.
You driven one?
Helicopter123 said:
daemon said:
Helicopter123 said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
Looks great on paper, but then you never drive on paper.Quite hateful in real life, you want the six pot.
You driven one?
Looks like the way it's going, il you're right about tax, I'm in n Ireland but the tax in the South is extortionate on SUVs with 3.0 engines. Hate the sound of a four cyclinder diesel but then again if it makes it affordable to run then it'll sell in numbers. It's just boring that nearly every car on the road is a four cylinder tdi!!
daemon said:
Interesting. I see Merc have a similar small engine in their ML too. I wonder how many they're selling or will people side step it and go for the 3.0?
I think Merc played it quite cleverly as they launched the ML/CLS/E with the 4 cylinder as a cornerstone of the range and as such was 'accepted' as the norm with few demos with V6s, whereas BMW in delaying the 4 cyl are kind of accepting that noone reallllllly wants the 4 cyl unless they have to due to tax situations and make it look like an afterthought. The 4 cyl X5 might still take off though, stranger things have happened at BMW I guess... who on earth buys the sDrive25d though - now that's probably the worst excuse of a fake premium SUV if I ever saw oneFezzaman said:
who on earth buys the sDrive25d though - now that's probably the worst excuse of a fake premium SUV if I ever saw one
Someone who wants to save £2300 over the 25d Xdrive or £5300 over the 30d.No point lugging around excess weight carrying hardware that will never be used.
LeoSayer said:
Fezzaman said:
who on earth buys the sDrive25d though - now that's probably the worst excuse of a fake premium SUV if I ever saw one
Someone who wants to save £2300 over the 25d Xdrive or £5300 over the 30d.No point lugging around excess weight carrying hardware that will never be used.
I don't get the fuel saving thing though, unless you are cruising it will do no better, plus most people only do around 12-15k miles a year or less, and so the difference between a RWD 2 litre and awd 3 litre will probably be about a £6-10 a week.
On a car that is going to cost you between £600-1000 a month in depreciation and general running costs trying to save £10 a week in fuel makes you look a bit of a chump.
But then there is only 4-5mpg between the 30d and the 4.8i yet 999 out of every 1000 are diesel.
daemon said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
i guess you cant have your cake and eat it - great economy versus not a six cylinder.From memory has more BHP than the original x5 3.0d so it should go ok.
It was the reason i sold my e70 x5 - fantastic car but horrifying fuel consumption so i could see the appeal.
Lost soul said:
daemon said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
i guess you cant have your cake and eat it - great economy versus not a six cylinder.From memory has more BHP than the original x5 3.0d so it should go ok.
It was the reason i sold my e70 x5 - fantastic car but horrifying fuel consumption so i could see the appeal.
The new car is much better.
Cheib said:
Lost soul said:
daemon said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
i guess you cant have your cake and eat it - great economy versus not a six cylinder.From memory has more BHP than the original x5 3.0d so it should go ok.
It was the reason i sold my e70 x5 - fantastic car but horrifying fuel consumption so i could see the appeal.
The new car is much better.
I had a change of job role just after i got it and ended up putting £500 a month of diesel through it, which, no matter how much you're on, starts to grate after a while.
Cheib said:
None of them are that good compared to the stated claims....the pre LCI cars with the 6 speed box (like mine) are really not that good. My 3.0SD gets 26 or 27 mpg at "motorway speeds". It will get over 30mpg if you drive like Miss Daisy but in town you'll get close to 20 mpg.
The new car is much better.
The LCI is much better. This is my experience from my old 30d, based on brim to brim calculations:The new car is much better.
26mpg mainly suburban crawls
32mpg mainly motorway journeys
35mpg touring around Scotland A roads
gizlaroc said:
And I bet in 4 years time the gap between the 25d sDrive and the 30d will be about a grand, making it a far cheaper option over all.
I don't get the fuel saving thing though, unless you are cruising it will do no better, plus most people only do around 12-15k miles a year or less, and so the difference between a RWD 2 litre and awd 3 litre will probably be about a £6-10 a week.
On a car that is going to cost you between £600-1000 a month in depreciation and general running costs trying to save £10 a week in fuel makes you look a bit of a chump.
But then there is only 4-5mpg between the 30d and the 4.8i yet 999 out of every 1000 are diesel.
this is my point I think, why pay for a nice big luxury SUV then skimp on the underpinnings? As for fuel we recently moved on our '08 3.0sd E70 and that was showing 27.6mpg. Ran it for 4.5 years and 30k ish miles and aside from odd trim issues and headlight washers/taillight claims and joys of dealing with BMW dealers it was a seriously impressive piece of kit. Now that it's gone, while it wasn't the most refined lump, it certainly shifted like a stabbed rat especially in sport considering the sheer size and weight of it. I bet the latest lumps are even better so maybe you can get away with the performance credentials of the 4 cylinder?I don't get the fuel saving thing though, unless you are cruising it will do no better, plus most people only do around 12-15k miles a year or less, and so the difference between a RWD 2 litre and awd 3 litre will probably be about a £6-10 a week.
On a car that is going to cost you between £600-1000 a month in depreciation and general running costs trying to save £10 a week in fuel makes you look a bit of a chump.
But then there is only 4-5mpg between the 30d and the 4.8i yet 999 out of every 1000 are diesel.
Totally agree with this too -
Really annoying to see such great cars with crap engine.
The likes of the e classes for the last 5 years are just filled with pathetic 2.1 derv engines makes me sick. The E350 is more like it.
In BMW's defence their 2 litre derv engine is great and acceptable in the 5 series but they went too far with the 518d. and in the likes of the X5 is just wrong.
They done this with the Mercedes ML and its just horrible horrible all round
Really annoying to see such great cars with crap engine.
The likes of the e classes for the last 5 years are just filled with pathetic 2.1 derv engines makes me sick. The E350 is more like it.
In BMW's defence their 2 litre derv engine is great and acceptable in the 5 series but they went too far with the 518d. and in the likes of the X5 is just wrong.
They done this with the Mercedes ML and its just horrible horrible all round
cfarrell said:
Find it a bit depressing the trade off for not having a powerful petrol was having a big Diesel engine with torque and good mpg, what's next a ford Eco boost 1.0 in a range rover!!
You wouldn't be saying that if you were averaging high 50+mpg on a run and 39mpg around the doors, I run a 25d S Drive and its cheaper to run that my partners Merc C200 D, and i have all the comfort and the driving height.cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
Fab Cars and astonishing fuel economy.I got rid of my 40d for a 25d S Drive and the running costs are vastly different and they move for what they are.
p3blo said:
cfarrell said:
Been sifting through the new car reviews and saw a review for the new X5 with a 2.0 engine. Great economy but it sounded like a qashqai? Has anyone actually had a run in one?
Fab Cars and astonishing fuel economy.I got rid of my 40d for a 25d S Drive and the running costs are vastly different and they move for what they are.
Gassing Station | BMW General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff