# BMW X5



## m4ttc (May 6, 2002)

Any views, opinions, experiences of this vehicle??

Engines, Build quality, cost etc

Cheers

M4TTC


----------



## Carlos (May 6, 2002)

I'd love one for the family motor.

Us scavving mancs can't afford em though.

Who's nicking yours?

I think the 3.0d is the one to have. I'd definitely go for the sport pack, love the "snowflake" alloys.

Used or new?


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

Never driven one, only read the reviews. The thing that stands out for me is the predicted retained value after 36,000 miles/3 years for the 3.0d sport - 78% !!!


----------



## TwickTT (May 7, 2002)

I have a 3.0d Sport as my family motor def. the one to go for, very nice car amazing bottom end power just pulls and pulls, and is quick enough away from the lights to satisfy, and compared to the petrol ones delivers okish mpg.

I have had some very disapponting quality issues tho, mainly electrics, on mirrors, wipers etc, nothing 'serious' but disapponting.


----------



## m4ttc (May 6, 2002)

;D


> Us scavving mancs can't afford em though.
> 
> Who's nicking yours?


I never said I was buying one. A colleague is considering it tho. Told him I'd ask the views of the Forum as it is the font of all knowledge.

As for cost, If it does retain 78% of its value, it'd be far cheaper than any TT

Anyway, I am sure you have mates in Longsite queing up to provide you with a full model range ;D ;D


----------



## NickP (May 6, 2002)

I drove one on Sunday back from the Derby v Ipswich game, one of my mates has just got one as a company car- he's got the 3.0d.

After driving a 330D I was expecting it to feel a bit sluggish, but was surprised just how much 'get up and go' it had.

I was amazed how little body roll there was after driving other 4X4's, this thing just feels like a 5 series but about 3 ft higher.

His was a manual, so can't give my ratings on the auto box, but with the engine characteristics would imagine its a pretty good match. ;D

Would love to try the 4.6 8)


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

X3 is coming, and X5 is getting a facelift plus 218hp 3.0d engine from the 7 series.

A little drug dealer for my tastes though :-/


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

> Any views, opinions, experiences of this vehicle??
> 
> Engines, Build quality, cost etc
> 
> ...


we've got a Black 4.6is with sat nav, dsp, privacy glass, bluetooth, tv etc. Â it think its absolutely gorgeous to drive and really practical, like it as much as the 996 or ttr

turns a few heads too with the 20" wheels and twin chrome oval exhausts and it'll get to 60 in about 6.5 secs so it's no slouch either

think it was about Â£60k or so

build quality is top notch too and we had a 4.4i before that so it can't be that bad since we got another

the 4.4i is just as good in my opinion as the 4.6is although not quite as quick, doesn't turn as many heads and isn't quite as exclusive

just been in marbella for the weekend and saw and x5 4.6is out there. the bmw spain put M badges on them out there. couldn't work out why they didn't here until i worked out you'd end up with and M X5

you don't want to pay that amount of cash and make it sound like a mazda do you!! Â ;D Â ;D

if you need any more info let me know cos i've driven the two alot, got some pics of the 4.4 thant we had and the 4.6is so let me know if you want a look at them, although you could probably just look at the car builder on the BMW site Â ;D

cheers

James

just found a pic










ps

gary, it's a bit of a misnomer that drug dealers drive around in cars like this in my experience.....most of them have middle of the road mondeo's/406's etc so they don't get much attention drawn to themselves

not that I know many drug dealers, you understand Â


----------



## garyc (May 7, 2002)

> we've got a Black 4.6is with sat nav, dsp, privacy glass, bluetooth, tv etc. Â it think its absolutely gorgeous to drive and really practical, like it as much as the 996 or ttr
> 
> turns a few heads too with the 20" wheels and twin chrome oval exhausts and it'll get to 60 in about 6.5 secs so it's no slouch either
> 
> ...


Yeah right. Perhaps I should say drug wholesalers......


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

;D ;D thats more like it!


----------



## TwickTT (May 7, 2002)

> His was a manual, so can't give my ratings on the auto box, but with the engine characteristics would imagine its a pretty good match. ;D


Mine is the Auto box and its a dream!


----------



## teucer2000 (May 14, 2002)

The new Volvo seems to have replaced the X5 in the motoring press...can't see the x5's residuals being maintained much longer.


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

> compared to the petrol ones delivers okish mpg.


think our 4.6 gets between 15 and 20 mpg (20 at the best on mways)

this is when working for a fuel card company has it's advantages Â ;D


----------



## TwickTT (May 7, 2002)

> The new Volvo seems to have replaced the X5 in the motoring press...can't see the x5's residuals being maintained much longer.


Yeah my wife wants the Volvo next as it has extra seats in the back and better boot space (major flaw with the X5!) , from what Ive read its not as good a drive as the BMW and to my eyes uglier. But you are right it does now seem to be the journo's favourite.


----------



## Dubcat (Jun 10, 2002)

I just read about the XC90 for the first time after seeing this thread. That is a hell of a lot of car for the money. I have always lusted after an X5 and still do. Isn't this car a lot cheaper than an X5 though?

phoTToniq


----------



## teucer2000 (May 14, 2002)

Cheaper and with a huge waiting list already.


----------



## m4ttc (May 6, 2002)

Cheers Boys.

I will pass on the views.

I dont think he wil be intrested in a Vulva and as for some of you: You must be bloody loaded TTs + X5 etc....

any chance of a job??


----------



## BreTT (Oct 30, 2002)

> I just read about the XC90 for the first time after seeing this thread. Â That is a hell of a lot of car for the money. Â I have always lusted after an X5 and still do. Â Isn't this car a lot cheaper than an X5 though?
> 
> phoTToniq


Residuals projected at 48% after 3 years/36,000 miles though!


----------



## CapTT (Mar 2, 2003)

X5 good on the road.
CRAP off road.

Major design fault regarding the air intake which is bottom of engine. WHOOOPS !!!. Not clever for a 4 X 4.

I know of several X5`s which have ingested water while fording streams of a minor nature. Stanhope has had at least 2 stuck in the ford there.Large bills for new engines.

BMW are addressing this problem now I believe.


----------



## natt (May 15, 2002)

they go off road as well as do the school run ???

That's it, they're definitly now my ideal half of a 2 car house hold.


----------



## CapTT (Mar 2, 2003)

We use a demo. one for towing the rally car on its trailer to and from events. does that OK.

Speedo etc. disconnected of course as all dealers do with demo`s while they are using them.

Wink Wink !. Nudge Nudge.! Say no more.!.


----------



## jam (May 8, 2002)

> X5 good on the road.
> CRAP off road.
> 
> Major design fault regarding the air intake which is bottom of engine. WHOOOPS !!!. Not clever for a Â Â 4 X 4.
> ...


BMW never intended it to be and off-roader

It's a sports activity vehicle

They figured that most people drive 4x4's on road anyway so why not create a 4x4 style car with road going qualities. Hence fantastic cornering for a 4 wheel drive type car

you don't put 315/35/20 tyres on a car intended to be used off road do you!

cheers

James


----------



## TwickTT (May 7, 2002)

> X5 good on the road.
> CRAP off road.
> 
> Major design fault regarding the air intake which is bottom of engine. WHOOOPS !!!. Not clever for a Â Â 4 X 4.


So hows your 4 wheel drive car (TT) off road?? ;D


----------

