BMW iX - anybody able to tell me what it's like in the wild?

[SWoll]

raspy said:

It seems to work well whether going through narrow city streets or cruising on the motorway.

Its 5m long and 2.2m wide, just how narrow are the city streets you drive on as our etron (whch is slightly smaller) feels huge.

raspy said:

Why is the charge port on the right hand side though? No frunk despite a massive bonnet is also not very impressive, and yes, for such a big vehicle, the boot is a tad on the small size, but one can't have everything.

It's a BMW thing, our i3 was the same. Makes more sense than half way down the wing behind the front wheel though

The lack of frunk is inexcusable in a ground up EV really. So handy for keeping charging cables etc. out of the way and easily accessible if travelling with a full boot. Very odd on an EV with such a long bonnet, god know what they keep under there.

[DMZ]

That grille needs a lot of support to not collapse so that's taking up all the frunk space

[greggy50]

Unless you have kids that are huge I do struggle to see what the IX offers over the IX3 for an extra £20k?

It appears to have the same size boot, is slower, less efficent and is not as good looking either. On the IX3 you also have physical buttons for the climate etc.

Edited by greggy50 on Thursday 4th August 17:25

[SWoll]

greggy50 said:

Unless you have kids that are huge I do struggle to see what the IX offers over the IX3 for an extra £20k?

It appears to have the same size boot, is slower, less efficent and is not as good looking either. On the IX3 you also have physical buttons for the climate etc.

Edited by greggy50 on Thursday 4th August 17:25

It's a far plusher car inside and a significant step up in refinement apparently. Think 3 series v 7 series.

Styling wise, neither are lookers to my eyes but find the ix3 very bland in comparison.

[DaveH23]

Wills2 said:

I've seen a few out and about I like them, they look much better in the metal.

Then Silvanus said:

Just looked them up, no wonder they are rare!

And there we have it.

Whilst it's most likely very capable, it's not a looker, i'm with Silvanus on this one.

[raspy]

greggy50 said:

Unless you have kids that are huge I do struggle to see what the IX offers over the IX3 for an extra £20k?

It appears to have the same size boot, is slower, less efficent and is not as good looking either. On the IX3 you also have physical buttons for the climate etc.

Edited by greggy50 on Thursday 4th August 17:25

One word. Luxury.

It's why some people pay more for first class on the plane even though business class is superb.

I was also considering a Mercedes EQS/EQE but the dealer was really slow to respond, only offered me 1 hour test drive next week and the lease rates are way higher than the iX.

Contrast with the BMW dealer who gave me a test drive the next day, told me to bring the car back whenever I want the same day, and gave me lots of tips about how to get the best price on a lease.

I appreciate the looks of the iX and even the EQE/EQS are largely perceived as ugly cars, but I'm more concerned with how it looks on the inside as a driver.

[raspy]

SWoll said:

It's a BMW thing, our i3 was the same. Makes more sense than half way down the wing behind the front wheel though

The lack of frunk is inexcusable in a ground up EV really. So handy for keeping charging cables etc. out of the way and easily accessible if travelling with a full boot. Very odd on an EV with such a long bonnet, god know what they keep under there.

I've had the e-tron and that also felt very easy to drive in many of the narrow streets of central london, but the iX feels even easier to pilot (the standard fit 360/surround cameras are bloody amazing) and a lot more settled (in terms of ride) - easily the best riding EV I've driven (and I've driven all of the big EVs apart from the Mercedes EQ range)

[gangzoom]

raspy said:

One word. Luxury.

It's why some people pay more for first class on the plane even though business class is superb.

Or just simply more personal space. Bigger houses cost more than small ones, a bigger cabin/seat on a plane/train/aero plane costs more, a bigger bed costs more than a small one etc etc.

Having owned a 'big' SUV now for 6 years I honestly wouldn't want to go back to a smaller car unless forced to financially. Having more personal space is just nice, let's face it driving in congested traffic filled UK roads is hardly 'fun' 95% of the time. If am stuck in traffic I far rather be stuck in traffic somewhere comfy and spacious.

I recon 50%+ of new full fat RRs I see are driven by more 'mature' owners with clearly no need for the extra space/sized offered. But if you can afford it, I can 100% see why you would want a full fat RR as your main mode of personal transportation versus a Fiat 500.

Infact apart from the iX there is a lack of larger SUVs. Tesla don't even sell the X anymore in Europe, and everything else are just smaller saloon based cars on silts. A lack for full sized EV SUVs.......we need more choice .

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 5th August 05:22

[raspy]

gangzoom said:

Am sure you will enjoy it, as I've said loads of them in Norway already, and on the road I personally think they look pretty decent for a larger SUV. All the reviews also suggest the iX is right up there with efficiency for a car its size.

Thanks! Even if it had the worst efficiency for its segment, I would still get it. It drives brilliantly.

[FarmyardPants]

SWoll said:

Silvanus said:

SWoll said:

That, ladies and gentlemen, is the BMW XM Concept.

If you think the back is bad wait until you see the front.

https://www.bmw.co.uk/en/topics/discover/concept-c...

Let's see the front then

What do you think the link is for?

I'd post a pic but wouldn't want to give unprepared and sensitive posters nightmares.

Edited by SWoll on Wednesday 3rd August 21:55

>click<

Holy crap, it’s the pig from Toy Story!

[greggy50]

raspy said:

greggy50 said:

Unless you have kids that are huge I do struggle to see what the IX offers over the IX3 for an extra £20k?

It appears to have the same size boot, is slower, less efficent and is not as good looking either. On the IX3 you also have physical buttons for the climate etc.

Edited by greggy50 on Thursday 4th August 17:25

One word. Luxury.

It's why some people pay more for first class on the plane even though business class is superb.

I was also considering a Mercedes EQS/EQE but the dealer was really slow to respond, only offered me 1 hour test drive next week and the lease rates are way higher than the iX.

Contrast with the BMW dealer who gave me a test drive the next day, told me to bring the car back whenever I want the same day, and gave me lots of tips about how to get the best price on a lease.

I appreciate the looks of the iX and even the EQE/EQS are largely perceived as ugly cars, but I'm more concerned with how it looks on the inside as a driver.

I sat in one at the dealer whilst I was looking at an M4 the other day and whilst the materials are very nice I didn't think the interior was particularly special compared to something like a RR. The basic design with the dash and floating centre console actually reminded me of a Kia EV6 albeit without the HVAC buttons and an added Allegro steering wheel.

I think real luxury is being lost nowadays with everything switching to primarily screens as you are physically touching controls less and less but I am going off topic now and they are many happy owners of these it appears so I will shut up!

As an aside the EQE/EQS material does look bloody special to me however, I agree on the dealers being useless however as I went to look at a C63 and they were shocking.

[SWoll]

greggy50 said:

raspy said:

greggy50 said:

Unless you have kids that are huge I do struggle to see what the IX offers over the IX3 for an extra £20k?

It appears to have the same size boot, is slower, less efficent and is not as good looking either. On the IX3 you also have physical buttons for the climate etc.

Edited by greggy50 on Thursday 4th August 17:25

One word. Luxury.

It's why some people pay more for first class on the plane even though business class is superb.

I was also considering a Mercedes EQS/EQE but the dealer was really slow to respond, only offered me 1 hour test drive next week and the lease rates are way higher than the iX.

Contrast with the BMW dealer who gave me a test drive the next day, told me to bring the car back whenever I want the same day, and gave me lots of tips about how to get the best price on a lease.

I appreciate the looks of the iX and even the EQE/EQS are largely perceived as ugly cars, but I'm more concerned with how it looks on the inside as a driver.

I sat in one at the dealer whilst I was looking at an M4 the other day and whilst the materials are very nice I didn't think the interior was particularly special compared to something like a RR. The basic design with the dash and floating centre console actually reminded me of a Kia EV6 albeit without the HVAC buttons and an added Allegro steering wheel.

I think real luxury is being lost nowadays with everything switching to primarily screens as you are physically touching controls less and less but I am going off topic now and they are many happy owners of these it appears so I will shut up!

As an aside the EQE/EQS material does look bloody special to me however, I agree on the dealers being useless however as I went to look at a C63 and they were shocking.

The RR and EQS range from £100-160k, the iX £77-£110k. Expecting similar levels of luxury would seem rather unfair?

[greggy50]

SWoll said:

greggy50 said:

raspy said:

greggy50 said:

Unless you have kids that are huge I do struggle to see what the IX offers over the IX3 for an extra £20k?

It appears to have the same size boot, is slower, less efficent and is not as good looking either. On the IX3 you also have physical buttons for the climate etc.

Edited by greggy50 on Thursday 4th August 17:25

One word. Luxury.

It's why some people pay more for first class on the plane even though business class is superb.

I was also considering a Mercedes EQS/EQE but the dealer was really slow to respond, only offered me 1 hour test drive next week and the lease rates are way higher than the iX.

Contrast with the BMW dealer who gave me a test drive the next day, told me to bring the car back whenever I want the same day, and gave me lots of tips about how to get the best price on a lease.

I appreciate the looks of the iX and even the EQE/EQS are largely perceived as ugly cars, but I'm more concerned with how it looks on the inside as a driver.

I sat in one at the dealer whilst I was looking at an M4 the other day and whilst the materials are very nice I didn't think the interior was particularly special compared to something like a RR. The basic design with the dash and floating centre console actually reminded me of a Kia EV6 albeit without the HVAC buttons and an added Allegro steering wheel.

I think real luxury is being lost nowadays with everything switching to primarily screens as you are physically touching controls less and less but I am going off topic now and they are many happy owners of these it appears so I will shut up!

As an aside the EQE/EQS material does look bloody special to me however, I agree on the dealers being useless however as I went to look at a C63 and they were shocking.

The RR and EQS range from £100-160k, the iX £77-£110k. Expecting similar levels of luxury would seem rather unfair?

I probably should have said RRS, the interior of which is basically the same as the RR. A P440E is inbetween a X40 and X50 power wise and is around £90k with a half decent spec so closer price wise to the 40.

The same goes for the EQE vs EQS where again to me as a product they look remarkably similar inside & out. Its obviously less of a direct rival I just think the inside is a lot nicer which is why many people are saying they went for the IX.

Edited by greggy50 on Friday 5th August 09:31

[SWoll]

greggy50 said:

I probably should have said RRS, the interior of which is basically the same as the RR. A P440E is inbetween a X40 and X50 power wise and is around £90k with a half decent spec so closer price wise to the 40.

The same goes for the EQE vs EQS where again to me as a product they look remarkably similar inside & out. Its obviously less of a direct rival I just think the inside is a lot nicer which is why many people are saying they went for the IX.

Edited by greggy50 on Friday 5th August 09:31

The EQE and S aren't SUV's, if they were they'd be even more expensive. The RR and RRS aren't EV's, if they were the same would apply.

I'd guess at a staring price £50k higher than the iX? Buys a lot of leather that.

[greggy50]

SWoll said:

greggy50 said:

I probably should have said RRS, the interior of which is basically the same as the RR. A P440E is inbetween a X40 and X50 power wise and is around £90k with a half decent spec so closer price wise to the 40.

The same goes for the EQE vs EQS where again to me as a product they look remarkably similar inside & out. Its obviously less of a direct rival I just think the inside is a lot nicer which is why many people are saying they went for the IX.

Edited by greggy50 on Friday 5th August 09:31

The EQE and S aren't SUV's, if they were they'd be even more expensive. The RR and RRS aren't EV's, if they were the same would apply.

I'd guess at a staring price £50k higher than the iX? Buys a lot of leather that.

The battery on the RRS is almost 50% the size of that on the iX40 in its defence!

One assumed an electric RRS would be priced quite close to a decent spec iX50 if they did make one and performance wise it will be more that sort of power as well (if not more)

I would assume an EQE 4x4 will be sub £100k (starting) as well and a decent rival given the EQC starts at £65k and the EQE £75k.

The only reason the IX has a low starting price is it has a small battery and a winter range of about 170-80 miles which is a huge compromise at £80k ish. Its really a £110k+ car if you want proper range and a good spec.

The new Audi Q6 E Tron is going to be £65k-£70k with a 100kwh battery and a claimed 400 miles of range nice interior or not the 40 just isn't competitive on paper.

Edit - Going to stop posting after this, I feel bad moaning about a car in a thread where people own them... I am sure the owners are happy and thats all that matters

Edited by greggy50 on Friday 5th August 10:08

[gangzoom]

greggy50 said:

The only reason the IX has a low starting price is it has a small battery and a winter range of about 170-80 miles which is a huge compromise at £80k ish.

Yes and no. Our 5 year 75D X has that range, and we've just one a 2800 mile tour of Europe in it with zero issue at all, and next summer will be going to the Italian lakes. We use ours all year round, been to Scotland in middle of Jan, Easter school holidays in Devon/Cornwall.

With the number of DC rapid chargers appearing, Tesla opening up the SC network (I suspect next summer all Tesla SC will be open to all) long distance travel is actually easier all the time, though not cheaper, I suspect soon/already using DC charging is coming close to combustion cars for fuel cost parity. A range of 170 miles equate to 3hrs+ driving pretty much everywhere. There aren't many families who buy these SUVs whom don't want to stop after than amount of time in any car.

You can ofcourse go for the big battery, but unless you that extra range everyday you are essentially paying £££ for no reason. I would actually be quite happy with a 60kWh version of our X.

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 5th August 10:40

[SWoll]

gangzoom said:

greggy50 said:

The only reason the IX has a low starting price is it has a small battery and a winter range of about 170-80 miles which is a huge compromise at £80k ish.

Yes and no. Our 5 year 75D X has that range, and we've just one a 2800 mile tour of Europe in it with zero issue at all, and next summer will be going to the Italian lakes. We use ours all year round, been to Scotland in middle of Jan, Easter school holidays in Devon/Cornwall.

With the number of DC rapid chargers appearing, Tesla opening up the SC network (I suspect next summer all Tesla SC will be open to all) long distance travel is actually easier all the time, though not cheaper, I suspect soon/already using DC charging is coming close to combustion cars for fuel cost parity. A range of 170 miles equate to 3hrs+ driving pretty much everywhere. There aren't many families who buy these SUVs whom don't want to stop after than amount of time in any car.

You can ofcourse go for the big battery, but unless you that extra range everyday you are essentially paying £££ for no reason. I would actually be quite happy with a 60kWh version of our X.

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 5th August 10:40

Completely agree with this. A lighter, better packaged car with a smller pack and 150-200 miles of range is going to cover 99.9% of most peoples journeys and would also cost less to build.

Manufacturers love the obsession with range as allows them to justify fitting massive batteries and drive up prices.

[greggy50]

SWoll said:

gangzoom said:

greggy50 said:

The only reason the IX has a low starting price is it has a small battery and a winter range of about 170-80 miles which is a huge compromise at £80k ish.

Yes and no. Our 5 year 75D X has that range, and we've just one a 2800 mile tour of Europe in it with zero issue at all, and next summer will be going to the Italian lakes. We use ours all year round, been to Scotland in middle of Jan, Easter school holidays in Devon/Cornwall.

With the number of DC rapid chargers appearing, Tesla opening up the SC network (I suspect next summer all Tesla SC will be open to all) long distance travel is actually easier all the time, though not cheaper, I suspect soon/already using DC charging is coming close to combustion cars for fuel cost parity. A range of 170 miles equate to 3hrs+ driving pretty much everywhere. There aren't many families who buy these SUVs whom don't want to stop after than amount of time in any car.

You can ofcourse go for the big battery, but unless you that extra range everyday you are essentially paying £££ for no reason. I would actually be quite happy with a 60kWh version of our X.

Edited by gangzoom on Friday 5th August 10:40

Completely agree with this. A lighter, better packaged car with a smaller pack and 150-200 miles of range is going to cover 99.9% of most peoples journeys and would also cost less to build.

Manufacturers love the obsession with range as allows them to justify fitting massive batteries and drive up prices.

I would 100% agree in a cheaper car but not for close to £100k.

I do about 20k p.a. but not too many long trips and find the 210 winter and 250 summer range of my Polestar mearly acceptable for £50k. The network is improving but most "fast" chargers are only 50kwh so you are still going to be sat for 30 minutes to get 80 miles of range in something thirsty like an iX so as soon as you do the big family holiday it immediately becomes a pain in the arse.

You shouldn't have to compromise anything for that sort of money but that is just my personal opinion. It only takes a couple of long drivers where a charger is broken or the services are busy for you to appreciate having a decent real world range. Plus being able to charge at home and not rely on the network saves you an absolute fortune as its about 1/7th of the cost.

[SWoll]

greggy50 said:

I would 100% agree in a cheaper car but not for close to £100k.

I do about 20k p.a. but not too many long trips and find the 210 winter and 250 summer range of my Polestar mearly acceptable for £50k. The network is improving but most "fast" chargers are only 50kwh so you are still going to be sat for 30 minutes to get 80 miles of range in something thirsty like an iX so as soon as you do the big family holiday it immediately becomes a pain in the arse.

You shouldn't have to compromise anything for that sort of money but that is just my personal opinion. It only takes a couple of long drivers where a charger is broken or the services are busy for you to appreciate having a decent real world range. Plus being able to charge at home and not rely on the network saves you an absolute fortune as its about 1/7th of the cost.

I never understand the range/price comparison that goes on TBH and your comment "find the 210 winter and 250 summer range of my Polestar mearly acceptable for £50k." baffles me. I get the feeling people have been conditioned to think that way and as above that suits manufacturers just fine as they can justify it to hike prices.

The Polestar 2 would be a better car for most owners with a smaller battery offering less range but more interior space and the cost saving spent on improving the interior IMHO. The number of people travelling more than 150 miles per day on a regular basis is tiny, yet range still apears to be the thing everyone is obsessed with.

[greggy50]

SWoll said:

greggy50 said:

I would 100% agree in a cheaper car but not for close to £100k.

I do about 20k p.a. but not too many long trips and find the 210 winter and 250 summer range of my Polestar mearly acceptable for £50k. The network is improving but most "fast" chargers are only 50kwh so you are still going to be sat for 30 minutes to get 80 miles of range in something thirsty like an iX so as soon as you do the big family holiday it immediately becomes a pain in the arse.

You shouldn't have to compromise anything for that sort of money but that is just my personal opinion. It only takes a couple of long drivers where a charger is broken or the services are busy for you to appreciate having a decent real world range. Plus being able to charge at home and not rely on the network saves you an absolute fortune as its about 1/7th of the cost.

I never understand the range/price comparison that goes on TBH and your comment "find the 210 winter and 250 summer range of my Polestar mearly acceptable for £50k." baffles me. I get the feeling people have been conditioned to think that way and as above that suits manufacturers just fine as they can justify it to hike prices.

The Polestar 2 would be a better car for most owners with a smaller battery offering less range but more interior space and the cost saving spent on improving the interior IMHO. The number of people travelling more than 150 miles per day on a regular basis is tiny, yet range still apears to be the thing everyone is obsessed with.

I don't do 150 miles per day on a regular basis, however a lot of company car users might be doing that at least once a week.

I have personally found its more if you go on a weekend away to visit family or friends and are driving around it can become an issue as you cant charge at home then and end up reliant upon the network or trying to plug in via an extension lead which is why I prefer a decent range.

My mums is 70 miles away so if I go home for the weekend and do some trips to the shops or whatever if the range of my car was poor I would end up sat at a service station for 30 minutes which would just be a utter pain.

Additionally, if you do a UK holiday for a couple of weeks and can't charge at the accommodation (its still rare) then being able to do 250 miles rather than 150 between charges makes a huge difference. I went to Devon for a week and had to charge up twice and that was already a pain never mind if my car did 100 less miles to a charge which would have made that three or four times.

The occasions for most users will be rare but I still think its a massive compromise if you are spending nearly £100k on on a car and I speak from my own personal experiences after doing 25k miles in my own EV over the past 18 months.

If it was a Tesla than maybe I would say a smaller battery would be fine but the public network is still frankly pretty mediocre (especially in some areas) and the fast chargers aren't fast enough i.e. most are still 50kwh.

The OP is doing low mileage and lives in London so it doesn't sound like an issue for them