Consumer Reports says BMW X5 3.0 TIPSY!

I own a BMW X5 and the thing runs like a sports car. Not an incredible sports car, but given its size its nimble. My daily driver is a screamer, an AMG Mercedes CLK55 with 343 horsepower so i can compare. i have never felt it get unstable, and with the Xdrive it has both abs, antiskid, traction control all meshed together.

I attended an event sponsored by BMW in the summer of 2001 (in MA). I forget
the name of the event but they had every model BMW made and you could test
drive them all.

The even had a demonstration comparing high speed (around 50-60mph, I
believe) avoidance maneuvers using the Mercedes suv, a of Lexus suv, and a
BMW X5.

The non BMW suvs had HUGE stabilizer bars hanging off the sides (kind of
like wheelie bars but on the side).

They would have each vehicle drive a designated speed (50 or 60, can't
remember exactly) and at points marked on the track, they would turn hard
right, and then back to center. The Lexus leaned like it would fall over.
The Mercedes actually leaned onto only 2 wheels and would have flipped if
not for the bars.

Then the BMW X5 repeated the same exercise with NO stabilizer bar. It hardly
leaned in comparison. The reason is that the engine has been set very low to
create a low center of gravity.

As part of this event, you could sign up for an autocross session using
X5's, so I did. We put those X5's through a lot of torture and they did not
lose their composure. At the time, the X5 only had a 4.7? engine so I don't
know how much different the 3.0 is but I was very impressed the X5 having
seen it in "person".

I don't put too much credence in CR's evaluation of cars. I'd be more
concerned if a more reliable car authority made those statements.

Just my 2 cents!

Charlie

...

...

I really do not think that anyone with a brain cell trusts consumer reports.

Let's see, Consumer Reports wrote that the BMW 5-Series is their favorite
sedan of all time with a great engine, good economy, great handling, and a
smooth ride. You say that no one with a brain trusts CR. So you're saying
the 5-Series must suck because CR liked it and no one with a brain trusts
them, right? Boy are you going to get flamed. Pretty ballsy to say that in
this news group.

Or...it could just be that the BMW SUV X5 did go up on two wheels in their
avoidance test, while the other models tested did not under the same
conditions...and you are simply full of it and can't stand the truth.

--

- GRL

"It's good to want things."

Steve Barr (philosopher, poet, humorist, chemist,
Visual Basic programmer)
...

It'll be interesting to watch the BMW apoligists try to deal with this
one. Too many of them feel that BMW can do no wrong. Clearly, they
make great passenger cars. Arguably the world's best passenger cars.
I'm proud and grateful to own and drive one.

But, the fact is, for all their virtues, there is a not not to like
about them. But the BMW apologists consider it heresy to utter the
remotest criticism of their sacred machines. Face it, folks, it's a
car and a car company. They do a helluvalot of things right; but they
also do a helluvalot of them wrong. It's just possible the X5 falls
much more strongly into the latter category. What is a
performance-based passenger-car company doing making a small truck
anyway?

I've never driven one, but I did follow one on a two lane coastal
highway one day. The guy driving refused to let me by despite my
repeated flashing of headlights everytime we passed one of those
"slower traffic use turnouts" signs. Every little straightaway he'd
give it all it had to try to put distance between us. I'd just hang
back hoping for enought break to get by the fool because every time
the road changed to a bit of a challenge, he'd have to slow to a near
crawl. Ok, the fool probably couldn't drive for shit, but the car was
obviously not up to CA Hwy 1 either.

I'd never own an SUV, BMW's or anyone else's. I like to drive too much
for that. But, I have no doubt there are much better handling SUVs
than the X5 and CR is spot on with this one.

Oh yeah, did I mention that I was driving the V6 Accord that day?

mandycan
(can you?)

"Chris Phillipo" <
The clip of the X5 that I saw did not have out riggers. They also showed
a Mitsubishi SUV that DID have the outriggers.

The X5 came close to tipping - was on two wheels for a while - during
an avoidance maneuver. Of course, those CU drivers think that drivers
let go of the steering wheel while avoiding things (or they did in the past;
not sure if that's the case here) so it's hard to consider this "normal".

They were testing DSC systems to see if they would prevent roll-overs,
btw, not SUV's per se.

Floyd

...
CR recommended Bayliner boats (which are really bad), they made other really
bad recommendations as well. I will not even go into the details where CR
screwed up. I do not own a BMW - I would not based on some of the mechanical
reliability issues that I see with them (especially 2002 and up models,
earlier models are rock solid in my book), and also the IDrive system which
is a total disaster. However, I still think CR is really lousy. Based on
their subscription rates dropping, I am not the only one that feels this
way.

I really do think only those with dubious motives distrusts them. Perhaps
they work in advertising, and desperately need us to believe them.

Perhaps you're too young to know why these organisations exist. Makers
sure as hell aren't going to tell you when they screw up a design, and
government's ear is always closer to big business in any capitalist
country.

Any off road vehicle needs ground clearance. Therefore a higher centre of
gravity. Any vehicle made to *look* like an off roader - even although
it's got crap off road performance - will also have a higher centre of
gravity than ideal. So *will* fall over where a car wouldn't. It's as
simple as that.

--
*Funny, I don't remember being absent minded.

Dave Plowman London SW 12
RIP Acorn

From the pictures I have seen, I would wager that the outriggers lower the center
of gravity and make the car less tipsy, even if they don't contact the ground. It
is true that they extend out past the edge of the cars, but they are symmetrical
about the long axis of the car, so they should not change the side to side center
of gravity location. And since it appears the bulk of the structure is relatively
low down, they should actually lower the vertical position of the center of
gravity (a good thing if you are trying to prevent roll). I am sure they change
the moment of interia about the long axis, which should make the vehicle roll at a
lower rate. I'll have to think about whether this improves the situation or makes
the vehicle more likely to tip. I think it improves the situation. The additional
weight should also cause the vehicle to sit slightly lower on the suspension which
should also make it less tipsy. All, in all, I think the outriggers would make the
vehicle less tipsy instead of more tipsy.

Regards,

Ed White

Who should we trust to tell us the truth? The vehicle manufacturer? Enthusiast
magazines that are trying to not piss off there chief source of revenue? The
government? The internet?

CR is not perfect and I often disagree with their opinions. However, I don't
think they are any more likely to be dishonest than the other sources of
information. I am certainly more inclined to trust their test results than those
of enthusiast magazines.

Regards,

Ed White