Last post on Nov 18, 2013 at 9:02 PM
You are in the BMW X3 & X5
What is this discussion about?
BMW X5, Auto Body, Engine, Suspension, SUV
#30 of 685 X5 pricing
Jun 26, 2000 (4:04 am)
If it seems that X5's are over priced it's because they are. BMW markets its vehicles with about twice the margin of MB. Of course this extra "negotiating" doesn't pass on on a popular vehicle like the X5.
I have been told by a supposedly reliable source that BMW will change its margins to more closely equal MB next year (2002?) They will keep the price equal to or greater than the current price by including more standard features. But, to me that means that a 2002 model will be less expensive than a loaded 2001 model. Something to think about.
Jun 27, 2000 (5:29 am)
for the price of the X5 4.4, has anyone seriously looked at the Landcruiser or LX470- it seems to be a better deal, much bigger size, better space utilization, superior offroad ability,better ride and heavier discounts. it doesnt have the BMW handling but it is a true sport utility. i know both get lousy gas mileage, but that's a given.
Jun 27, 2000 (6:04 am)
If you really know anything about Ferarris (sic) you would understand why we shopped for LX's, ML's, and all the other high end SUV"s and then chose the X5. It is not as big, thank heavens, does not go off road as well and doesn't get discounted. How does it drive, ferarri11? Not like a Toyota.
Jun 27, 2000 (1:05 pm)
Re: # 24
drive was way, WAY better than my JGC Limited"
Okay, I may be biased, having just bought a '00 JGC Ltd, but comparing it to the X5? For a minimum of $5k more based on the "TMV" (for a stripped '01 3.0), plus the sacrifice of off-road capability, I would expect a WAY better ride. The "SAV" is basically the manufacturer's way of saying, "Okay, we know your never going off-road, so we'll give you a fabulous ride with the added benefit of a high seating position and extra cargo space (relative to a sedan)."
I compare the JGC's ride to my last car: an 88 Suzuki Samurai. It is WAY better, but what wouldn't be? For a truck, the JCG is great. IMHO, the X5 and RX300 are not trucks. They are not marketed to people who want trucks. Did you buy a JGC solely for its comfort and handling (i.e. you had no need or desire for off-road or towing ability)? Then you probably didn't really want a Jeep, and the X5 better meets your needs.
I guess the point of my rant is; you can compare the JGC and the X5, but they are not comparable.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong.
#34 of 685 please help!!!
Jun 27, 2000 (7:31 pm)
I'm planning to buy a BMW X5 4.4i. However, it seems a little too much overpriced. Also, I'm wondering if its dependability is a thing to consider buying. Though with lots of questions and wonderings on my mind, I still LOVE it so much. Please give me some suggestions. Thanks
Jun 27, 2000 (9:49 pm)
Go with your gut. You won't be sorry.
#36 of 685 X5 Value? Don't ask...
Jun 28, 2000 (2:06 am)
Hey, the X5 is a poor value, that's all there is to it. Anyone who buys an X5 buys it purely based on emotion, because the only practical reason for buying an X5 is safety (it's the safest BMW, or so the company says). It's got a puny cargo area, can't go off-road, needs snow tires to get through the winter, and on hard a hard rear seat. The ML and Land Cruiser might be more common, but they are far more practical. I wouldn't even try to tow with an X5, seeing that that engine (and the MLs also) are lifted straight out of passenger cars. Bottom line: if you want an X5, just get it. Your emotions won't regret it. Great handling, sonorous engine, great build quality and high-quality materials.
#37 of 685 Don't miss the point of the X5
Jun 28, 2000 (3:21 pm)
It is not to tow. It is not to haul. It is not to dig through the dirt or climb over rocks. The X5 is not a sport utility vehicle.
Here's what it is: a butt-kicking, great handling four door sedan that sits high off the ground with a high tech four wheel drive system built for the ROAD. BMW originally marketed the X5 under the slogan "anytime, anywhere", and this is exactly accurate. It is well built and powerful, and it drives better than (and unlike) anything else out there.
My X5 has just rolled over on 8000 miles (had it since 12/99) and I am happier with it than any other car I've ever had (included the other 5 BMWs). No problems except AM engine whine. Love it, love it.
Let's be honest: the only thing that truly compares to the X5 in purpose is the RX300. They are both on the road vehicles by design, but I won't even address why the BMW beats the hell out of the Lexus. (But it should, given its much higher price).
As for reliability, if you're worried, but an extended warranty (I did). As for cargo capacity, I bought a roof rack and cargo box.
If you like to drive fine cars, and are willing to pay the price, I am fully convinced you will no go wrong with the purchase of the X5.
#38 of 685 High-tech four-wheel drive system?
Jun 28, 2000 (5:40 pm)
Oinick1: can you explain little bit more on this "high-tech 4-wheel drive system", maybe comparing it to other market leaders such as Audi's quattro or Suburu's AWD? I thought X5 just has a regular (with fixed-ratio torque split) 4-wheel drive system.
PS: pick up my X5 this Friday.
Jun 29, 2000 (2:59 am)
The X5's AWD system closely follows that of the M-class. As I understand it, torque is split 38 front and 62 rear. In the event of slippage, the system brakes the spinning wheel and reapports torque to the axle that can grip the best (however, I don't know if it can send 100% of power to one wheel like the ML). There is no low range, however.
Oinick, we're saying the same thing. The X5 wasn't designed to do the things that SUVs do, even though (technically) it is an SUV. Because it can't do the things that other SUVs can, it's a purely emotional purchase (especially at $60,000+ for a fully loaded model). Speaking of that, there's no way that I'd pay $45,000 for a 3.0i. It's a nice car, but hey, for that cash, I think that an Audi S4 oir A6 2.7T would be right nice indeed.