RE: Driven: BMW X6M

Author
Discussion

robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
XitUp said:
Nope, I think we need to do more to protect the environment but I like lots of things about capitalism too.

lol at new religion, yup, very Fox News, you nearly had me going.
Practice what you preach then!

XitUp

7,690 posts

205 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
Jimbeaux said:
XitUp said:
Nope, I think we need to do more to protect the environment but I like lots of things about capitalism too.

lol at new religion, yup, very Fox News, you nearly had me going.
Think what you like but see the reaction of the greenites if you so much as question MMGW; if you don't think it has fanatical religious qualities, then they do have you going. Very BBC of you. wink
Nope, religion doesn't have science on it's side. Of course many people place the blame on cars far too much but it's quite easy to explain the facts to them rather than just insulting them.

Jimbeaux

33,791 posts

232 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
XitUp said:
Jimbeaux said:
XitUp said:
Nope, I think we need to do more to protect the environment but I like lots of things about capitalism too.

lol at new religion, yup, very Fox News, you nearly had me going.
Think what you like but see the reaction of the greenites if you so much as question MMGW; if you don't think it has fanatical religious qualities, then they do have you going. Very BBC of you. wink
Nope, religion doesn't have science on it's side. Of course many people place the blame on cars far too much but it's quite easy to explain the facts to them rather than just insulting them.
IMO, and many others, MMGW doesn't have science on its side either.

robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe

robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!
err.. are you really saying that a lighter, hard top only Z4M with a high revving 400bhp V8 would be gay?! What's your definition of a non-gay car?! I always thought "gay" cars had to be all show and no go, like a Mitsubishi Warrior or a Peugeot 206CC.

XitUp

7,690 posts

205 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
Jimbeaux said:
XitUp said:
Jimbeaux said:
XitUp said:
Nope, I think we need to do more to protect the environment but I like lots of things about capitalism too.

lol at new religion, yup, very Fox News, you nearly had me going.
Think what you like but see the reaction of the greenites if you so much as question MMGW; if you don't think it has fanatical religious qualities, then they do have you going. Very BBC of you. wink
Nope, religion doesn't have science on it's side. Of course many people place the blame on cars far too much but it's quite easy to explain the facts to them rather than just insulting them.
IMO, and many others, MMGW doesn't have science on its side either.
And you're entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure insulting people for disagreeing with you is a good idea though.

Jimbeaux

33,791 posts

232 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
XitUp said:
Jimbeaux said:
XitUp said:
Jimbeaux said:
XitUp said:
Nope, I think we need to do more to protect the environment but I like lots of things about capitalism too.

lol at new religion, yup, very Fox News, you nearly had me going.
Think what you like but see the reaction of the greenites if you so much as question MMGW; if you don't think it has fanatical religious qualities, then they do have you going. Very BBC of you. wink
Nope, religion doesn't have science on it's side. Of course many people place the blame on cars far too much but it's quite easy to explain the facts to them rather than just insulting them.
IMO, and many others, MMGW doesn't have science on its side either.
And you're entitled to your opinion. I'm not sure insulting people for disagreeing with you is a good idea though.
How did i insult you??

XitUp

7,690 posts

205 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
You didn't. My bad, it does look like I'm implying that in that post, badly worded I guess, sorry.

Jimbeaux

33,791 posts

232 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
XitUp said:
You didn't. My bad, it does look like I'm implying that in that post, badly worded I guess, sorry.
No worries! BTW, don't use "my bad"; that is a hip hop Americanism....you are a teaching assistant man, fight the rot!! smile

XitUp

7,690 posts

205 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
Well, I'm a big hip hop ban. And I teach kids with severe learning disabilities so getting them to talk at all is often a good thing.

Jimbeaux

33,791 posts

232 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
XitUp said:
Well, I'm a big hip hop ban. And I teach kids with severe learning disabilities so getting them to talk at all is often a good thing.
Good job then; I was just joking BTW. smile

robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!
err.. are you really saying that a lighter, hard top only Z4M with a high revving 400bhp V8 would be gay?! What's your definition of a non-gay car?! I always thought "gay" cars had to be all show and no go, like a Mitsubishi Warrior or a Peugeot 206CC.
I missed the hard top only bit!

4leks

177 posts

176 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
I'd love to get one as a family car instead of mine Cayenne Turbo however the boot might be a little bit too small plus it is 4 seater I believe
Will deffo look at it in couple of years when depreciates

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!
err.. are you really saying that a lighter, hard top only Z4M with a high revving 400bhp V8 would be gay?! What's your definition of a non-gay car?! I always thought "gay" cars had to be all show and no go, like a Mitsubishi Warrior or a Peugeot 206CC.
I missed the hard top only bit!
biggrin Fair enough. I'm still somewhat perplexed why a convertible Z4M would be gay though!! It's a modern day AC Cobra; the sort of thing Steve McQueen might drive, and he's the least gay bloke in the history of our species. I can't quite see Steve in an X6 in the middle of Kensington hehe

robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!
err.. are you really saying that a lighter, hard top only Z4M with a high revving 400bhp V8 would be gay?! What's your definition of a non-gay car?! I always thought "gay" cars had to be all show and no go, like a Mitsubishi Warrior or a Peugeot 206CC.
I missed the hard top only bit!
biggrin Fair enough. I'm still somewhat perplexed why a convertible Z4M would be gay though!! It's a modern day AC Cobra; the sort of thing Steve McQueen might drive, and he's the least gay bloke in the history of our species. I can't quite see Steve in an X6 in the middle of Kensington hehe
Strange choice when the blokes name has QUEEN in it and is a gay icon!

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!
err.. are you really saying that a lighter, hard top only Z4M with a high revving 400bhp V8 would be gay?! What's your definition of a non-gay car?! I always thought "gay" cars had to be all show and no go, like a Mitsubishi Warrior or a Peugeot 206CC.
I missed the hard top only bit!
biggrin Fair enough. I'm still somewhat perplexed why a convertible Z4M would be gay though!! It's a modern day AC Cobra; the sort of thing Steve McQueen might drive, and he's the least gay bloke in the history of our species. I can't quite see Steve in an X6 in the middle of Kensington hehe
Strange choice when the blokes name has QUEEN in it and is a gay icon!
Not as strange as you saying that a 1400kg rear wheel drive V8 with a screaming 400bhp would be a gay car biggrin

robsti

12,241 posts

207 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
robsti said:
RobM77 said:
I find it perplexing how people can compare the pointlessness of the X6M to the pointlessness of a sports car. These people clearly don't understand what "pointless" means. Sports cars are quantifiably good to drive, with their low CofGs, well set up dampers, light weight and automotively atheletic abilities. In other words - they have a point, and that point is to cover ground quickly, be highly manouverable and entertain the driver. The X6M, however, is pointless because it would be more entertaining and faster if it were lighter, lower and smaller. There's nothing that the X6M does well - a 5 or 7 series is probably more comfortable, an M5 or M6 faster, and everything else in BMW's range is cheaper to run.

Think of it like a person - the reason someone would wish to deliberately train themselves to a high degree of physical fitness (like a Lotus Exige) is obvious - they're faster, stronger and generally better at moving around and playing sports; to be this way feels good. Obese people are obese by mistake - they don't intend to be fat, there's no point to it, they just decided that they preferred food to exercise. Fair enough - but it's pointless - i.e. it has no deliberate point. Same with the X6 - there's no deliberate reason why such a car should exist.

However, why shouldn't BMW produce a pointless car that sells? The answer is that they can produce what they like, provided it sells and meets legislation. What upsets and confuses me though is why they're producing an X6M but not a Z4M. If anyone can answer that, especially BMW, then I'm all ears!

Edited by RobM77 on Sunday 27th December 23:58
Obviously not enough nail technichans and hairdressers!
All of whom would welcome a 400bhp V8 hard top only coupé I'm sure! hehe
Bmw must think the current range i`s gay enough!
err.. are you really saying that a lighter, hard top only Z4M with a high revving 400bhp V8 would be gay?! What's your definition of a non-gay car?! I always thought "gay" cars had to be all show and no go, like a Mitsubishi Warrior or a Peugeot 206CC.
I missed the hard top only bit!
biggrin Fair enough. I'm still somewhat perplexed why a convertible Z4M would be gay though!! It's a modern day AC Cobra; the sort of thing Steve McQueen might drive, and he's the least gay bloke in the history of our species. I can't quite see Steve in an X6 in the middle of Kensington hehe
Strange choice when the blokes name has QUEEN in it and is a gay icon!
Not as strange as you saying that a 1400kg rear wheel drive V8 with a screaming 400bhp would be a gay car biggrin
Just looked at your garage and now I understand!

RobM77

35,349 posts

235 months

Monday 28th December 2009
quotequote all
Well, I've just got two sports cars, and you appear to have the biggest gay car collection ever! a Harley, a 2L diesel Q5, a front wheel drive Fiat and a huge pimp mobile hehe how ironic!