BMW and M Power Owners

-Ad- said:
An estate does fail miserably for us, so it is utterly useless. A saloon is even more useless for our requirements. I'm not batting around the bush here :D

We need the height inside for a combo of bikes, dogs and luggage space, so it's the only choice whilst being an incredible car.

We not making a car choice based on 'wants', it primarily comes down to needs first then we add the wants in later.
Click to expand...

Do bikes not go on the roof? We manage to fit our 45kg poodle in the back of an estate remarkably well.
 
-Ad- said:
Haha, I thought the same
Click to expand...
LOL since your debate was still going on - refer back to the accident statistics thread - 3 times the chance of going off the road in an x5 versus 5 series
- everyone makes their trade-offs.

jpaul said:
A statistic take from the uk data sheets that does satisfy my preconception of poor SUV stability,
number of serious accidents, leading to the car leaving the carriageway (#incidents, #cars registered, #accidents/million)

X5 BMW 31 90036 344.3067218
5* BMW 22 239717 91.77488455

Maybe there is a trade-off for SUV crash cell integrity though, or X5's have fewer slight acccidents, or many other ways to misinterpret significance.


Personal accident / driving-event history plays a part in a purchase decision, so I rate increased passive safety(manouverability/stability) highly.
Click to expand...
 
Dis86 said:
Do bikes not go on the roof? We manage to fit our 45kg poodle in the back of an estate remarkably well.
Click to expand...

Yes they would, but would you drive hundreds of miles (with long 500 mile trips) with a number of multi thousand pound bikes on the roof? We wouldn't dream of it unless going to a relatively local race.

Otherwise you have a significant risk of theft and also some risk of damaging them whisky navigating the motorway network. It's just not worth the risk for longer trips.

MTBs can go on the roof, but the issue is getting them up there both safely and without damaging the care, especially heavy full sus or heavy e-mtb in the future.

jpaul said:
LOL since your debate was still going on - refer back to the accident statistics thread - 3 times the chance of going off the road in an x5 versus 5 series
- everyone makes their trade-offs.
Click to expand...

Posting headline figures to satisfy your view is quite strange and no better than clickbait Daily Mail headlines.

- What's the ratio of SUV vs the other car, exact same numbers, 50/50 split?
- What data do you have showing the amount of miles covered by every single car from the dataset so you have an accurate view of total mileage covered between every car out there.
- What data is there from each of the cars in said dataset showing the types of journeys they cover over all these miles?

Essentially it's impossible to do the above and gather accurate data that gives meaningful information.

Just meaningless headline figures unless you have any actually viable data. Next you'll post data showing the Audi driver's use their indicators less than BMW drivers ;)
 
Last edited:
-Ad- said:
An estate does fail miserably for us, so it is utterly useless.
Click to expand...

There we go again.

It does not 'fail miserably' and is not 'utterly useless'. It's probably not as useful as an SUV. That's a world away from being 'utterly useless'. An estate car is not 'utterly useless' for carrying bicycles.

An X5 has an additional 25cm of height over a 5 Series Touring - but some of this is a product its additional ride height. The extra height between the floor of the loadbay and the roof is smaller, perhaps as little as 1cm.

Again, my point here isn't that you should have bought an estate. You should have bought what you wanted, which was an X5. But let's tone down the ridiculous statements like 'utterly useless' and 'fail miserably'. We're talking about two cars that have essentially the same properties here, we're not comparing a Renault Espace with a Caterham 7.

I think what you meant to post was 'I prefer the X5, it's a bit easier to load for us' rather than 'EVERYTHING ELSE IS UTTERLY USELESS'.

We don't make a car choice based on 'wants', it primarily comes down to needs first
Click to expand...

If this were true you'd be driving a Kia not a BMW. An X5 is all about wants over needs.

Infact, to use your own descriptions, a BMW X5 is UTTERLY USELESS (ie, not quite as good) for your needs and what you need is a Volkswagen Transporter T7 which would be FAR SUPERIOR (ie, a bit better) :D

Or an X7? :D
 
I remember when I said most SUV drivers would be better off with a van a few years back and got laughed at...
 
[TW]Fox said:
Let's be honest an X5 is somewhat nicer to drive than a van.
Click to expand...

Yep just picked our new X5 up from Hailsham BMW this afternoon... The drive back to Bristol was lovely with plenty of power and getting my butt cheeks massaged was Very nice indeed.:D:cry:
Now just got to give the Dealer a big nudge for the M5 now........Come on VDC send the car to the dealer
 
-Ad- said:
Posting headline figures to satisfy your view is quite strange and no better than clickbait Daily Mail headlines.
Click to expand...
you need to go and pull the government accident statistics xls's and do some research, rather than replying in scientific ignorance, on x5 versus 5 series accident stats,
reading the older thread should give you some starting material.
 
What’s the correlation between those accident and actual occupant injury? You were the one citing danger which is just a nothing story.

he doesn’t need to do anything; the onus of proof lies with you for a fact where largely none of this audience actually care about.
 
The other massive plus on the X5 is the 45e has a battery that is much bigger than the 545e, giving it more useful electric range (and lower company car tax).
 
hurfdurf said:
In my spec me thread

https://www.overclockers.co.uk/forums/threads/25-30k-spec-me-a-convertible.18934860/

I’ve noticed gear sticks in M cars vs non M cars as they are recommended.

The 440i has the same auto gearshift lever as my Z4 35iS. The M4 is slightly different. This is the same for the 6 series vs the M6. Is this purely an aesthetic thing?
Click to expand...

It's both - your Z4 and a 440i had the same shift lever but completely different gearboxes. The Z4 35iS had a 7 speed DCT, the 440i has an 8 Speed conventional ZF automatic.

The M4 and the M6 both have an M-DCT transmission, whereas the 440i and the rest of the 6 Series range have the ZF 8 speed.

DCT is for 'genuinely sporty' cars.
 
[TW]Fox said:
It's both - your Z4 and a 440i had the same shift lever but completely different gearboxes. The Z4 35iS had a 7 speed DCT, the 440i has an 8 Speed conventional ZF automatic.

The M4 and the M6 both have an M-DCT transmission, whereas the 440i and the rest of the 6 Series range have the ZF 8 speed.

DCT is for 'genuinely sporty' cars.
Click to expand...
But they're stopping dct aren't they? Thought the M5 used the 8 speed (possibly due to 4wd:confused:).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom