09-09-2009, 12:33 AM | #1 |
Brigadier General
3645
Rep 3,244
Posts |
Evo mag hates it!
Evo gives the X6M a good test drive.
They basically hate it. 2.5 starts out of 5. Link: http://www.evo.co.uk/carreviews/evoc...4/bmw_x6m.html |
09-09-2009, 08:04 AM | #2 |
Brigadier General
458
Rep 4,822
Posts |
That magazine come out a month ago. Read what it says though instead of the star rating. Basically they are talking about the track capability of this car, which is absurd as how many are going to see regular track work? Also they hate the idea of a M SUV with auto, turbo and AWD. It's not so much that it is a bad car!
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-09-2009, 10:52 AM | #3 |
Lieutenant Colonel
89
Rep 1,882
Posts |
"The bad news is that the above stats belong to the X6M, on paper the most wrong-headed idea BMW’s Motorsport division has had in its mostly glorious 37-year history. Indeed, it appears to be a flat contradiction of the thing that, at one time, it vowed it would never do: an SUV. (In fact it’s done two – there’s an X5M as well.) From this flows the other supposed M-badge no-nos: turbocharging, automatic transmission and four-wheel drive."
Doesn't sound like these guys approached this with an unbiased mind set. Of course until now never heard of them. |
Appreciate
0
|
09-09-2009, 07:47 PM | #5 | |
Brigadier General
458
Rep 4,822
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-09-2009, 08:10 PM | #6 |
New Member
8
Rep 25
Posts |
The way I look at it, if you want a fast car, go with a traditional M. If you are 6'6" like me, don't want to pile in and out of a low ground clearance car, like sitting up high with lots of visibility, want something unique, and also appreciate handling and speed, then really, your only options are the ML63 AMG, Porsche Cayenne, a Range Rover Sport or the X M series. At that point, it just comes down to personal preference.
My .02: Mercedes is an old money car, Porsche is just ostentacious, a Range Rover is a little boring, the BMW X M series is a working man's, new money car. Not only that, but it's fairly common knowledge that BMW makes the best cars in the industry. For the 5th year in a row they won the most sustainable auto maker award. I talked to a guy in a BMW dealiership near Detroit last week who stated that his best customer is GM, they buy over 40 vehicles from him a year, and all they do is reverse engineer BMWs. I heard the phrase once, "M is dead, long live m". It appears to me that BMW is re-inventing M. It means turbochargers if they can eliminate the lag. It means an automatic that can shift faster than a stick. It means sophisticated electronics that will allow the other 99% out there to really maximize the performance of the vehicle without being on the track every day. To some, this is sacrilage. It reminds me of the way the Jeep community cried blasphemy when Jeep started building SUVs without solid axles. It's just going to happen, stop clinging to the past. In this economy or any other, anyone that sits on their behind and sticks to the same old forumula will one day wake up and realize that their own negligence and stubborness brought the house down upon them; take one look at the story of Jaguar or GM to use a more modern day example. Frankly, I'm proud to drive my X6. There's nothing else out there like it, it'll whip a Cayenne or any other SUV out there. Frankly it'll out-run most M cars out there too. It certainly doesn't hurt that I don't have to humiliate myself every time I get in or out of the vehicle. Regardless, I don't think that an opinion from someone with more track experience has more merit than my own, and if I choose to drop 100k on it and I have to pinch myself every time I see the vehicle, they can take a long walk off a short pier. M is dead, long live M. Flame suit on. Ryan |
Appreciate
0
|
09-09-2009, 09:09 PM | #7 | |
Major General
152
Rep 5,124
Posts |
Quote:
I'll have to agree with most of everything you said, except that I don't believe that the X6M should even exist. It seems like a pretty big sellout of M GmbH to me. That being said, I don't necessarily dislike the X6M, I just don't think it should have ever been built. BMW didn't need that car, and it only hurts their image IMO. Back on topic, this article is pretty absurd. Anybody who thinks that the X6M is going to behave like an M3 on the track is pretty naive. The writer failed to realize what the X6M is for: rich people who already like the X6 but want the model that has tons of power, gobs of torque, and that nobody else will have. Who the hell would ever think of tracking this thing?
__________________
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-09-2009, 11:02 PM | #8 |
Brigadier General
458
Rep 4,822
Posts |
Big Windy, if X6 exist, then X6M should exist imo. X5M certainly make sense too! Sell out? Not really. If there is a market, you build it! Even Porsche, a pure sports car company at the pinnacle of the game has a poweful, sporty SUV (and does very well with it too!). Take me for example. I already have my track toy, my sports sedan (sorry it is an AMG and not a M), a sports car, and now I want to replace my wife's SUV (X3) with a more powerful SUV. If X5M didn't exist, I would have bought a Cayenne Turbo or ML63 instead. So why not build a X5M to capture people like me?
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-10-2009, 02:17 AM | #9 |
Colonel
62
Rep 2,087
Posts |
Once a group of people establish a fascination with a particular idea, product, etc., they attach themselves to the idea that existed at the time, which is sort of like falling in love with a photograph. When you try changing it people cry foul because it would no longer be true to what they originally fell in love with. Some ideas or products are so fantastic or universally loved that they withstand the times and take on a global scope, transforming from niche concept to something the public at large embraces. Regardless, there is a strong resistance and even greater risk to change the original.
Porsche's core (911) is an example of this problem. The company wants to adapt and evolve their product over time, but look what happened when they have tried to make anything but superficial changes to 911 body style. IMHO, the "M" is one of these concepts, too. I don't have a problem with a different kind of "M", particularly when you think about what the X5/X6 M's offers compared to BMW's core M product, the M3. They are both very technically advanced products; to think that you could radically alter a car's behavior by pushing a button is fantastic for someone who has watched high performance automotive technology advance/develop since the 60's. What I do have a problem with is a 5400 lbs M. I'm can't fathom what BMW was thinking. You don't need 5400 lbs of stiff frame construction for people living in snow country, and certainly no one seriously considers this an off road or even a moderately smooth trail blazer. It doesn't need the weight for safety, either. Sure, it's large, but 5400 lbs? Don't get me wrong, I love the X6 M but would also love to see what a 4200 +/- version could do with the same technological package, horsepower, etc. |
Appreciate
0
|
09-10-2009, 06:27 AM | #10 |
Captain
92
Rep 885
Posts |
I get tired of reading comments about BMW "selling out" because they put an M badge on a couple of SUVs. What freakin difference does it make? Is an M3 suddenly going to turn into an SUV? M is just a marketing tool.
And to say BMW didn't need these trucks is naive. They have been lacking a competitor to the Cayenne Turbo/Turbo S and ML63. It was an appropriate move. If they hadn't I guarantee I wouldn't be buying a Bimmer now.
__________________
-2016 Macan Turbo(GF vehicle) -2017 Ford Raptor |
Appreciate
0
|
09-10-2009, 09:20 AM | #11 | |
New Member
5
Rep 13
Posts |
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-10-2009, 08:13 PM | #12 | |
Captain
41
Rep 796
Posts
Drives: '09 X6 50i AW
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Dallas, TX
|
Quote:
|
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-11-2009, 12:27 AM | #13 |
Private First Class
19
Rep 130
Posts
Drives: 2014 X5 35ix / 2013 335ix
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: White Rock, BC
|
I'm sorry guys, but I laugh when people complain about the X6M not being an "M"...so what is the current M3 or M5? the first "M" was a 2 door M1 with a straight 6? Sooo? the first M3 was a 4 banger and nothing close to today's M3. Times change, and those companies that don't, die. BMW is around still because they see openings and make good produicts that fit those openings. They need to change with the times, and they are. Would I like to see some weight out of these? Sure. I would like to have seen 500 lbs out of my M5 too, and a better transmission, and so on...
Buy one or don't, it's your money.
__________________
2014 X5 Xdrive 35i Mineral White/Mocha
2013 335i Xdrive Estoril Blue/Black Sold 2011.5 M3 E92 Mineral White/Rust Brown |
Appreciate
0
|
09-11-2009, 02:16 PM | #14 |
Colonel
62
Rep 2,087
Posts |
Don't get me wrong, I love the X6, and in particular the M version. Would I like a couple of changes, sure, less weight and a DCT. Would I buy one just the way it is, YES.
|
Appreciate
0
|
09-11-2009, 02:56 PM | #15 |
2020 Mineral White 30d MSport
524
Rep 2,146
Posts
Drives: 2020 Mineral White 30d MSport
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: San Jose
|
In countries like mine (Costa Rica), driving an M3 is just crazy, money wasted , we have no roads for such a car. I'm a former owner of 2 E46 M3's, so I know what is like.
Having an X6M is a great idea, I'm also 6'4 and my low back is not as good as it used to be......, so the M3 is out of my list........... instead there is a great choice buying any version of the current X6's ( depends more on personal budget) an X6 is a car you can drive almost anywhere not being concern about roads conditions, so I believe BMW is right making the so many versions of the X6, and the M version fits the list IMO |
Appreciate
0
|
09-11-2009, 03:03 PM | #16 | |
Captain
92
Rep 885
Posts |
Quote:
You make an excellent point that often doesn't come up when discussing the X6: its practicality. For me, I like performance but also want a practical vehicle that isn't as big and bulky as a standard sized SUV.
__________________
-2016 Macan Turbo(GF vehicle) -2017 Ford Raptor |
|
Appreciate
0
|
Post Reply |
Bookmarks |
|
|