X5 M / X6 M [Official] BMW X6 M Thread

[coolraoul]

Concerning the M3 SMG (I) in the e36, it's not an auto-box it's an automated manual. Rubbish, but no slush. At least an attempt to "individuality", expressing sporty pretentions.

The e36 M3 available in the US was no M3, it was a slightly glorified 328i, without the splendid motor of the M3... To hardcore for the US it was, the M3.

Yes, M did release convertibles, M did release the heavy and not so sporty M6 Convertible. But all of them had, if not the wished rigidity and lightness, an insane mpotor and awesome driving characteristics.

You cannot mistake an M6 Conv for a 650i.
You cannot mistake an M3 for a 335i, even remapped: perfs may be similar, the M3 will give the "ultimate driving pleasure" a 335 can only dream of.

These things, however... No really bespoke motor, no bespoke gearbox, same AWD layout (only bit more rear-biased), no enlarged and hugely modified drivetrains...

Perfect as X5/6 iS or whatever, but far from M-worth. Only that it would sell less as iS than as M thanks to the power of this name, established with gorgeous cars these pigs are whoring.

It's just like the Cayenne diesel or v6... Good in short-terms, dangerous for the image in long-term. Only that, like Merc1 or BMWPower said, Porsche is not cancelling the GT3 to do the Cayenne.

In teh contrary, they recognize themself the Cayenne is merely a cash-maker allowing them to release a Carrera-GT...


BMW seems lost, just like MB was in the late 90's/2000's. They don't know what to do, and play it too safe. It's not the way to come out of the crisis stronger than the competition. They want to make money on short-term projects, reacts too much to trends (like cross-overs), and loose the plot regarding their core-values.

 

[martinbo]

Porsche are an object lesson for car fans to study in the discipline of "stick with the pure stuff but keep your options open too". Porsche never extol the virtues of a particular technology as being the only way to go. Engineered for a purpose is the overriding message, whether this applies to a Cayenne, Cayman S, 911 Turbo or GT3 RS.

Porsche are very clever. Not only do they market the brand very tidily but they also create a brand image around each of their models. A Cayenne GTS is simply marketed as the sportiest Cayenne in the range and not the total and complete embodiment of a particular brand such as in the case of BMW's M Division.

I'm afraid to say it, but Marcus is right.

BMW told us that key characteristics of the M philosophy were to be strictly adhered to in order to create cars with definitively sporty, involving driving characteristics:

- Rear wheel drive was important because the steering performance, accuracy and feel was incumbered by drive shaft forces associated with AWD cars. Remember rearwheeldrive.com? The inherent tendency of AWD cars to understeer under power was another no-no - not befitting a motorsport oriented vehicle from Munich's finest. With AWD came a weight penalty that couldn't be justified in a proper M car.

- Naturally aspirated engines were engineered to perfection giving the throttle response, linear torque delivery and top end power needed for a precision driving instrument. Forced induction, large displacement, high internal inertia, high torque - all of these characteristics were eschewed in favour of the optimal combination of engine and drivetrain in order to deliver all the precision that the discerning driver could want for.

- Similarly, such high torque engines were avoided because the transmission and drivetrain components needed to cope would have to be heavier and less responsive and without the "purity" of a mechanical connection between engine and the wheels. This would detract from the nimble agility associated with all M cars regardless of their size.

And, in reality, the above philosophy rendered real, tangible results on the road. There was truth behind the words. Drive any M car and you're left with the impression that model for model they are the most rewarding, most dynamic and the most complete performers in their respective classes. First and foremost one was left with understanding that these were cars engineered with the passionate, skilled driver in mind.

 

[Sunny]

Concerning the M3 SMG (I) in the e36, it's not an auto-box it's an automated manual. Rubbish, but no slush. At least an attempt to "individuality", expressing sporty pretentions.

The e36 M3 available in the US was no M3, it was a slightly glorified 328i, without the splendid motor of the M3... To hardcore for the US it was, the M3.

I wasn't talking about the SMG 1 but the ZF automatic transmission. Yes, the US did not get the real M3 motor, but it was still sold as an M3 anyway - and I guess that just underscores my point, M was also already about making money from back then, not something that started now.

Yes, M did release convertibles, M did release the heavy and not so sporty M6 Convertible. But all of them had, if not the wished rigidity and lightness, an insane mpotor and awesome driving characteristics.

You cannot mistake an M6 Conv for a 650i.
You cannot mistake an M3 for a 335i, even remapped: perfs may be similar, the M3 will give the "ultimate driving pleasure" a 335 can only dream of.

You do not know anything about the driving characteristics of these trucks and yet you jump to conclusions. For all you know they could be as different from normal X5/6 as 650 is from M6.

It's just like the Cayenne diesel or v6... Good in short-terms, dangerous for the image in long-term. Only that, like Merc1 or BMWPower said, Porsche is not cancelling the GT3 to do the Cayenne.

Last time I checked M was still making its core products that established it - M3 and M5.

BMW seems lost, just like MB was in the late 90's/2000's. They don't know what to do, and play it too safe. It's not the way to come out of the crisis stronger than the competition. They want to make money on short-term projects, reacts too much to trends (like cross-overs), and loose the plot regarding their core-values.

No offense, but all this arm-chair management is seriously not worth the bandwidth. BMW seems to be doing just as fine if not better than other manufacturer's in the existing climate. I frankly don't have the insight nor the expertise to forecast how BMW or for that matter any other manufacturer will do in the long term, and I seriously doubt you do either.

Anyway, like I alluded to before there seems to be a big 'gotcha' aspect to some/most arguments. And like Merc1 said it is probably from being talked down upon and I doubt any amount of reasoning would make that indignation go away. When you got to vent, you go to vent. But I would point out that any talking down did not happen in a vaccum, it was only possible cause M products generally won more tests than the competetion. No one would be chest thumping or talking down if test after test AMG proved to be better/faster than M, but historicaly that has not been the case.

 

[klier]

All nice and all, but I don't understand all this moaning much.....the car we're talking about is a freaking X5. A very big SUV. I am going to start moaning when they give the regular M models an automatic transmission and AWD, and not a minute sooner. They are not going to do that anyways, so there are no worries.
And M going turbo is not something they do freely out of themselves. They are sort of being forced to do this with the emissions and stuff in mind..... 2009 is not the same as 2000. A lot has changed sadly.

 

[Bartek S.]

 

[coolraoul]

Last time I checked M was still making its core products that established it - M3 and M5.




No offense, but all this arm-chair management is seriously not worth the bandwidth. BMW seems to be doing just as fine if not better than other manufacturer's in the existing climate. I frankly don't have the insight nor the expertise to forecast how BMW or for that matter any other manufacturer will do in the long term, and I seriously doubt you do either.

Last time I checked, BMW had cancelled both Z4M and 1-Series M (for the current gen), as well as the CS. But not the X5M. And is playing with the idea of fitting a V6 to the M3.


As far as the arm-chair management is concerned... I of course don't pretend to be in the know, or anything like that. But the past proved the geniuses at the head of some companies to overlook some very basic principles that could be understood by everybody else.

20 years of GM, the whole Schrempp/Hubbert-era at Mercedes...

Schrempp for instance thought you could sell expensive cars with average quality and engineering, and sub-par reliability , all that while maintaining the image of the world's best carmaker. Any moron could've said him he was wrong.
He thought that by putting Chrysler's doors on an MB he would save money without harm for MB. It's plain stupid.

In the end he totally ruined MB's fantastic image in no time and increased warranty-costs by a thousand, allowed Lexus to grow and BMW like Audi to steal the Nr.1 place MB had since ages.
Brilliant.

Some bosses did enormous mistakes that were, with reason, criticized by not-experts as well as by experts.

It's not because BMW's head decided something, that is is God-inspired.

If I listen to you, I cannot speak of anything except what I'm specialised in...
So basically, Martin would speak alone with himself on GCF.

 

[martinbo]

So basically, Martin would speak alone with himself on GCF.

Pffff... LMAO!

Thanks cool but really, you shouldn't take me too seriously. After all, I reckon I know only 10% of 10% of what there is to know about automotive stuff.

We're all here to learn from each other.

And, I am learning from all sides of the fence on this one. It's fascinating.

Just wait till you read my HUGE about face.

 

[Cashmere]

^lol, that is hillarious!

 

[Merc1]

Differences aside, she is pretty darn hot if you ask me:

M

 

[Centurion]

Differences aside, she is pretty darn hot if you ask me:

M

Visually the car is in an imbalance. There is too much body surface. Black cladding or some chrome strips are needed to break up the design. BMW did a better job with the standard X6.

 

[Tarek]

^She is desperately needs any black or CF parts for the bumpers and the diffuser.

 

[Mr Robert]

Differences aside, she is pretty darn hot if you ask me:

M

No, doubt. It will be a perfect performance diesel.

 

[jack]

this car urgently needs some contrast colors
carbon elements, especially in the rear, would have helped alot

i'm not a fan of color coded wheels arches(if the original design intended otherwise), and this car won't change my opinion

 

[LaArtist]

Why the heck does it look so FAT..compared to the normal X6?
is it due to the coloured arches? or small wheels ( which arent small really)

 

[Tarek]

The whole colored thing makes the car looks like a huge fat piece of soap,pity coz the X6 50i is gorgeous.

 

[PanterroR]

No, doubt. It will be a perfect performance diesel.

I appreciate you saying that for my car.

 

[Centurion]

Why the heck does it look so FAT..compared to the normal X6?
is it due to the coloured arches? or small wheels ( which arent small really)

It's due to every single part of the car being colour coded. It works on low and sleek sports cars like the F430 but on an SUV with a giant body, it makes the car look fat.

 

[LaArtist]

^And one thinks someone would spot that before they debuted it..
but i guess this is how they like it...

 

[klier]

The whole colored thing makes the car looks like a huge fat piece of soap,pity coz the X6 50i is gorgeous.

 

[Merc1]

Oooh...now the white one I want to see. Everyone is seemingly down on the whole car being body color, but I like it.


M