Discussion in 'X6 SAC' started by Potential, Jul 7, 2009.
Geeeeeez! With those performance figures I - the SAV guy are looking down on many sport cars right now!
And who questioned BMW's thinking of building a SAV ///M?
X6 M is a monster. I like how this comes right back in the faces of people like Just_Me who have been doing nothing but complaining about this car.
X6 M is as fast on the Nurburgring Nordsleife as the E46 M3 coupé. Just crazy.
being fast as M3 E46 is nothing to brag about.
and this is hardly a hit in the face. Just wait for a head to head comparison with Caynne Turbo, ML63. And X6M being fast in straightline is no surprise but after 160km/h those sportscar is going to be quicker. X6M is still not worthy a M badge.
I would have regarded it as something comming right back in the face if the X6"M" would have been a better and more involving drive than the E46 M3.
^ Please, it is something to brag about if you're a 2400 kg truck. 'More involving' is not possible for such a car, so if you expect things like that, you're bound to be disappointed...
And I mentioned the Nordsleife because it's not exactly a straight line track...
I too can't wait for the reviews with ML and Cayenne, btw. X6 will kill them.
Neither is it a slow circuit, contrary to what people believe. It doesn't surprise me one bit the X6 M is quicker than the E46 M3 round it.
With such fat tyres alone it ought to have grip in abundance. Nothing surprising here, just a word to owners in SA - get your tyres insured.
Excuse me, Andreas, but you're so full of s. Period.
HAHAAAAAAAAAAAA! :t-applaus Good one Martin
AND every South-African citizen would know what your talking about..:t-banghea
With all respect - Just-Me, I am the BMW - SAV guy and why not an ///M for guys Like - Me? BMW did a excellent job with the X6 ///M WORTHY of the ///M - Badge! :bangin:
No offense JM, do you read before posting? The thing not only accelerates, it turns and brakes better than lot of sports cars. It is faster than M3 convertible in every which way acceleration, braking, skidpad and slalom. And somehow latter is worthy of the M badge, but latter is not?
Yea, Einstein, a 5200lb truck is not going to be as involving as 3500lb sports car. . And a M3 is not going to be as involving as a Lotus. Maybe every one should just make Lotuses and Caterhams.
The sports package equipped X5 and X6 has tires of the exact same size (275/40R20, 315/35R20). I somehow doubt it is going to brake or turn as well as the M. And you know what car has even fatter rear tires? GT3 RS (325/30 ZR 19), but I don't see anyone disparaging it's performance by attributing it to just "fat tyres".
To sum it up: Amazing as a sporty SUV(/SAC), disappointing as an M.
M3 Convertible is just as useless as X6M.
And X6M being fast in straightline is predicted but so is Cayenne Turbo, like I said above 160km/h the X6M wont be as effective anymore. And around a track X6M is too heavy to be entertaining and soon enough those brakes are gone. If you are a redlight racer Im sure the X6M will fullfill your demands.
Again you fail at reading, thing is not just fast in a straight line, it turns and brakes better than a lot of sports cars. But I guess whatever...
I seen that and like I said those brakes arent going to last long and the tires will be worn out soon. Both you and me know that X6M isnt exactly a good tracktool, the car will go down before a M3 does. Those numbers are good for the moment but in the long run, X6M is just a big No no. Also Im pretty sure we can find numbers for C63 thats better than a X6M.
So let me get this straight, you think a 2.5 ton truck is crap cause it's brakes is not ideal for track work? Me think, X6M has more brakes than you have perspective.
ps. M3 brakes are not going to last too long at a track either. If you are serious about tracking, you will want at least some racing compound pads. And unlike you, I would nick more points from a sports car like M3 for having inadequate brakes for track work than from a 2.5 Ton truck.
But the M3 is going to last longer than X6M, thats for sure. And if you are serious about tracking then X6M is not the car to have. Anyway, Its fine by me that you are impressed with X6M. Its a disgrace even comparing X6M to a M3.
Ps The new Audi S4 did better than M3 Convertible in slalom and on the skidpad. Braking rating also better than M3 Convertible. M3 E90 also did better than both M3 convertible and X6M.
And lotus exige brakes will last longer than M3. I don't see you dissing M3 cause of it.
Here is what Edmunds got for S4:
0 - 30 (sec.) 1.9 (2.2 with stability control on)
0 - 45 (sec.) 3.3 (3.6 with stability control on)
0 - 60 (sec.) 4.9 (5.2 with stability control on)
0 - 75 (sec.) 7.2 (7.5 with stability control on)
1/4 mile (sec. @ mph) 13.2 @ 106.1 (13.4 @ 106.0 with stability control on)
0-60 with 1-ft rollout (sec.) 4.6 (4.8 with stability control on)
30 - 0 (sec.) 27
60 - 0 (sec.) 109
Braking rating Excellent
Slalom, 6 x 100 ft (mph) 68.8 (67.2 with stability control on)
Skid pad, 200 ft diameter (lateral g) 0.90 (0.92 with stability control on)
X6M did as well on slalom and skidpad and better on acceleration and brakes. But since it is cool to hate on a truck, let us ignore it and diss it.