RE: BMW exposes X3 and X4 M to the world
Discussion
Bladedancer said:
See the point is that the limit is in different places for different cars.
So while taking a roundabout at 35-ish mph (in a 60 zone) in a normal, well sorted car weighting, oh I don't know, 1.2-1.5 tonnes, is perfectly normal and won't cause any issues, any tire squeel, doing the same in a 2.5 tonne 1.6+ m high behemoth will take it to the limit, and quite possible, beyond it.
This is wrong. Its what people 'think' these cars will be like - but until you drive one, you'll always think that. Then you'll know you are wrong once you get behind the wheel and try it for yourself. The engineering is pretty amazing.....So while taking a roundabout at 35-ish mph (in a 60 zone) in a normal, well sorted car weighting, oh I don't know, 1.2-1.5 tonnes, is perfectly normal and won't cause any issues, any tire squeel, doing the same in a 2.5 tonne 1.6+ m high behemoth will take it to the limit, and quite possible, beyond it.
soupdragon1 said:
Bladedancer said:
See the point is that the limit is in different places for different cars.
So while taking a roundabout at 35-ish mph (in a 60 zone) in a normal, well sorted car weighting, oh I don't know, 1.2-1.5 tonnes, is perfectly normal and won't cause any issues, any tire squeel, doing the same in a 2.5 tonne 1.6+ m high behemoth will take it to the limit, and quite possible, beyond it.
This is wrong. Its what people 'think' these cars will be like - but until you drive one, you'll always think that. Then you'll know you are wrong once you get behind the wheel and try it for yourself. The engineering is pretty amazing.....So while taking a roundabout at 35-ish mph (in a 60 zone) in a normal, well sorted car weighting, oh I don't know, 1.2-1.5 tonnes, is perfectly normal and won't cause any issues, any tire squeel, doing the same in a 2.5 tonne 1.6+ m high behemoth will take it to the limit, and quite possible, beyond it.
Wallowy SUVs will wallow. But Wallowy cars will wallow. Buyers of wallow cars or wallow SUVs will never get even close to the limits of their chosen wallowy steed.
I can’t believe people are arguing over its weight it’s cornering ability etc etc yes you could have an m3 or m5 but you won’t be able to carry your dog and pushchairs and kids in it!
Think ppl are missing the point of what this car is! It’s a 4wd go anywhere load lugger! Get your m3 or whatever get 4ppl in it and your dog then go over the moors in it whilst it’s snowing
Shouldn’t be worrying about cornering ability in a car like this
Think ppl are missing the point of what this car is! It’s a 4wd go anywhere load lugger! Get your m3 or whatever get 4ppl in it and your dog then go over the moors in it whilst it’s snowing
Shouldn’t be worrying about cornering ability in a car like this
Bladedancer said:
E65Ross said:
Converted that they are nowhere near as bad as you seem to think, and that they're every bit as practical, more in some respects, than estate counterparts.
"Nowhere near as bad" - scraping the bottom of the barrel here aren't we? Seeing something is "nowhere near as bad" is hardly going to get me converted.Every bit as practical? Here we won't agree. I found SUV has to be huge outside to have decent space inside and the coupe-like ones are ridiculously impractical, unless you only ever ferry small children on the back seats.
And on the subject of being huge outside - how practical is that? Some of these things don't even fit in a 6-6 width restriction.
Plus they're tall, so people can't see past you - it's like you're driving a van but with a back window.
E65Ross said:
RE people saying they don't handle well, I'm going to say that, on UK roads at least, that if anyone is right at the limit of this then they're driving too fast.
See the point is that the limit is in different places for different cars.So while taking a roundabout at 35-ish mph (in a 60 zone) in a normal, well sorted car weighting, oh I don't know, 1.2-1.5 tonnes, is perfectly normal and won't cause any issues, any tire squeel, doing the same in a 2.5 tonne 1.6+ m high behemoth will take it to the limit, and quite possible, beyond it.
ghost83 said:
I can’t believe people are arguing over its weight it’s cornering ability etc etc yes you could have an m3 or m5 but you won’t be able to carry your dog and pushchairs and kids in it!
Think ppl are missing the point of what this car is! It’s a 4wd go anywhere load lugger! Get your m3 or whatever get 4ppl in it and your dog then go over the moors in it whilst it’s snowing
Shouldn’t be worrying about cornering ability in a car like this
In defence of the overly angry SUV-haters, it's not really designed as a 'go-anywhere' vehicle.Think ppl are missing the point of what this car is! It’s a 4wd go anywhere load lugger! Get your m3 or whatever get 4ppl in it and your dog then go over the moors in it whilst it’s snowing
Shouldn’t be worrying about cornering ability in a car like this
Its designed as a more practical car for those who want practicality, but also want a good slug of performance. To those ends, it's a great solution.
Ares said:
Rumblestripe said:
Estates do everything these cars do (apart from the extreme mud plugging that 99.99% of them never do anyway) and they are a hideous assault on the senses.
Hateful.
No they don't. HTH.Hateful.
crossovers are distinct in both form and function
and these BMWs are smart in design, both inside and out
a thumbs up for the interesting grid graphics on these demonstrators
Ares said:
In defence of the overly angry SUV-haters, it's not really designed as a 'go-anywhere' vehicle.
Its designed as a more practical car for those who want practicality, but also want a good slug of performance. To those ends, it's a great solution.
Yeah but you get my point! Its designed as a more practical car for those who want practicality, but also want a good slug of performance. To those ends, it's a great solution.
Ppl sound like they expect it to handle like a gt3rs it’s a fast load lugger
ghost83 said:
Ares said:
In defence of the overly angry SUV-haters, it's not really designed as a 'go-anywhere' vehicle.
Its designed as a more practical car for those who want practicality, but also want a good slug of performance. To those ends, it's a great solution.
Yeah but you get my point! Its designed as a more practical car for those who want practicality, but also want a good slug of performance. To those ends, it's a great solution.
Ppl sound like they expect it to handle like a gt3rs it’s a fast load lugger
Hoofy said:
Excellent.With all the potholes round SW London, I sometimes feel like I'm doing the Paris-Dakar just to get to Tesco.
Bladedancer said:
....So while taking a roundabout at 35-ish mph (in a 60 zone) in a normal, well sorted car weighting, oh I don't know, 1.2-1.5 tonnes, is perfectly normal and won't cause any issues, any tyre squeal, doing the same in a 2.5 tonne 1.6+ m high behemoth will take it to the limit, and quite possible, beyond it.
Yes, you could be right when talking about weighty behemoths, but this thread is about the X3/4 and they're not much heavier than an M3/4 and lighter than an M5 
so I think you wouldn't notice much difference.....E65Ross said:
I agree, it starts off even with the subtitle "X2 M35i not concerning enough? Welcome the full fat M cars..."
I mean.....concerning enough? Concerning enough for what? That a manufacturer is making a faster version of a car which people clearly want? The next line wondering if it was all a horrible dream? It doesn't stop there, the next paragraph stating that the X5/X6M were a big success "Heaven help us"....I mean, FFS, I stopped reading there.
Utter crap journalism, and completely bias. Rather than talking about the product with an open mind, and potentially viewing it from the cars point of view (ie from its USP, and what it offers to potential buyers) they (Matt Bird it seems) rambles on stating their own prejudices and distastes for these sorts of cars. Pathetic really.
Totally agree.I mean.....concerning enough? Concerning enough for what? That a manufacturer is making a faster version of a car which people clearly want? The next line wondering if it was all a horrible dream? It doesn't stop there, the next paragraph stating that the X5/X6M were a big success "Heaven help us"....I mean, FFS, I stopped reading there.
Utter crap journalism, and completely bias. Rather than talking about the product with an open mind, and potentially viewing it from the cars point of view (ie from its USP, and what it offers to potential buyers) they (Matt Bird it seems) rambles on stating their own prejudices and distastes for these sorts of cars. Pathetic really.
I want the facts and a professional journalistic opinion - help me understand the design brief and give me your opinions from there. Then I’ll draw my own conclusions.
Giving the PH angle is fine, good in fact. Finding that a shopping hatchback has surprisingly delightful steering feel could be an example. Or that an SUV has a rather unexpectedly punchy engine. But if PH has already decided it doesn’t like the concept of a car, then don’t even bother reviewing the execution because it’ll be a predictable foregone conclusion.
Unless the material is actually forum click bait masquerading as an article... naughty me for even thinking that let alone saying it...
Hands up I'm not brave enough for one of these. High Command has a 35d X3 and that is already a bit too quick if I'm being honest - way too much kinetic energy and physics-stuff in a less than stable state of heightened tension for my liking. I'll leave the even quicker kit for those with a less fevered imagination.
One more point I actually don't enjoy driving something with a H Point about 12 inches higher than it should be. Said it.
One more point I actually don't enjoy driving something with a H Point about 12 inches higher than it should be. Said it.
E65Ross said:
MrGTI6 said:
Genuine question: What is the point of the X4? Isn't it just an X3 but worse (and more expensive)?
The same reason why the M4 exists over the M3. DP33 said:
Hands up I'm not brave enough for one of these. High Command has a 35d X3 and that is already a bit too quick if I'm being honest - way too much kinetic energy and physics-stuff in a less than stable state of heightened tension for my liking. I'll leave the even quicker kit for those with a less fevered imagination.
Have you swallowed PH's bulls
t thesaurus?DP33 said:
One more point I actually don't enjoy driving something with a H Point about 12 inches higher than it should be. Said it.
Why? And where 'should' it be?And the difference is more like 10cm.
Nanook said:
Ares said:
Why? And where 'should' it be?
And the difference is more like 10cm.
Is it?And the difference is more like 10cm.
All this chat about a higher seating position being beneficial, and the seat is only 10cm higher than the saloon/estate version?
DoubleD said:
These are road cars, not track cars. I would imagine that they will corner more than quickly enough...and they probably wont even fall over.
But this is PH...... We always drive at 100%, always extracting maximum performance....unless it's manual gearbox, in which case being slower but 'purer' is the man's choice
E65Ross said:
My point being that I suspect something like this X3/X4M will go round corners an awful lot faster than you give them credit for. The new Stelvio is quicker around the 'Ring than a B7 RS4....
Quite... also the same ring lap time as the F10 M5 and I imagine the X3M will easily be on par, if not quicker.
Nanook said:
Ares said:
Nanook said:
Ares said:
Why? And where 'should' it be?
And the difference is more like 10cm.
Is it?And the difference is more like 10cm.
All this chat about a higher seating position being beneficial, and the seat is only 10cm higher than the saloon/estate version?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff