To understand the new X6, you must go back a few years to the 2001 X Coupe Concept. This was the first time the world got a look at BMW's vision of a jacked-up sports car that "deliberately questioned existing preconceptions." Nothing whatsoever made it from the concept to the production X6– save a bit of flame surfacing and the chutzpah necessary to give well-heeled motorheads what they didn't know they needed: a jacked-up five thousand pound, four-door, four-seat, all-wheel-drive sports car.
It sure doesn't look like a sports car. Nor does the X6 ape the "Patton invades Sicily" SUV template. In fact, the X6 is from The Mars Rover School of SUV design. From certain angles, this futuristic Bimmer is downright ugly. Or worse. And whoever signed-off on those rear three-quarter windows should sign-out of the car designing biz.
From other angles, depending on the sun's position, the X6 has genuine presence. There's no mistaking this mamma for anything else; in a cognitive dissonance, supermodel in the supermarket kinda way. Of course, a lot of the X6's curb appeal stems from its sheer scale. The X6 is enormous. The top of the spoiler is at chest level. The roof is 18 inches higher still. Jeep Liberties are dwarfed while Ford F-150s are cut down to size.
As Mercedes calls the chop-top four-door CLS a "coupe," BMW refers to their quad-portal X5-derivative as one, too. Bimmer's "Sports Activity Coupe" (SAC for short) offers supremely comfortable rear seats for two. Despite the X6's sharply-raked roof, a brace of non-slouching six footers have more than merely adequate headroom. The roof's slope continues to the hatch, yet the X6's trunk can easily hold all four occupants' stuff. Or as the X6's press team translated it from the mother tongue, "Gear for unusual sports." In your face, Xterra.
Considering the fact that the X6's exterior is nothing short of bonkers, the parts-bin interior is a let down. From iDrive (which is getting better), to willfully counter-intuitive turn signals and windshield wipers, to the world's most annoying gear lever, all the crowd (un)favorites are accounted for. Luckily, the SUV's perfectly-executed steering wheel and the sporty seats (with adjustable side bolsters) draw attention away from the haptic haplessness.
Let us not forget the killer interior app: on either side of the transmission tunnel you'll find knee pads. Although they're as soft as you'd expect from the Germans (i.e. rock hard), the pads demonstrate BMW's faith in their two-and-a-half ton whale's on-road performance. As do the donuts; the X6 sports the fattest rubber ever offered on a production SUV (315/20 at all four corners).
Wide tires on a big, heavy vehicle usually mean nothing more than axle hop and long, lurid skids. BMW attacks Newtonian physics with a beer stein full of acronyms: xDrive (all wheel-drive), ICM (integrated chassis management), DSC (Dynamic Stability Control) and DPC (Dynamic Performance Control). The latter, DPC, is the one to watch. In essence, the system shifts rear-wheel torque left to right, all but eliminating understeer and oversteer.
Houston, we don't have a problem. Wet, dry, rocks, dirt, mud, whatever. No sky-high hunk of lard should feel this confident and secure across mountain two-laners. While only auto journos (hi mom!) would take an X6 onto a wet race track, the SAC's intelligent driveline allowed me to drift through corners. Yes the X6's steering is all but D.O.A., making its massiveness hard to plant with inch-perfect accuracy. Yet the soft-roader rewards smooth and gentle inputs with genuine finesse.
The X6 offers sports-oriented SUV drivers two ways to boogie: the beloved twin-turbo I-6 from the 335i or an all-new twin-turbo 4.4-liter V8. The xDrive50i's monster motor generates 407hp and 442 ft-lb of torque (@1750 to 4500 rpm). So equipped, the X6 bellows from zero to 60mph in 5.2 seconds. The xDrive35i takes a bit longer (6.4 seconds) to make the same sprint.
If bragging rights and stop light fights are your bag, by all means choose the double-blown V8. It's one hell of a mill and I look forward to BMW dropping it into any of their sedans. However, the lag-free I-6 gets the X6 closest to the Ultimate Driving SAC. Despite being down on power, the 3.0-liter is plenty punchy. More importantly, the lighter engine shaves 264 lbs. of ballast off the X6's front end, creating a much nimbler and more balanced machine.
Did I just say that?
On the downside, the X6's six-speed slushbox constantly hunts for gears. And I feel obliged to report an observed 12.5 mpg– though I did drive the X6 as if BMW were buying the gas. However, if you've ever been wowed by how well an Infiniti FX or Porsche Cayenne handles, the xDrive35i is going to blow your mind. If you hate sporty SUVs, look away now.
[BMW paid for JL's airfare, accommodation, meals, gas and insurance]
132 Comments on “2009 BMW X6 Review...”
Back to TopLeave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You can also login using Facebook Connect.
What’s next? X8 SAR? (Sports Activity Roadster)
Encouraging review, but I guess I still don’t get it.
Nice review…very intriguing vehicle. Only a company as awash in confidence and cash such as BMW could take such a gamble and really introduce something so, uh, different.
Something that caught my eye…the mileage numbers vary widely. 16/27 for the 6-cyl? If one could really achieve nearly 27mpg on the highway, then that is really, really good…especially for a 5,000lb vehicle. Are these the EPA 2008 numbers? C&D just did a test of “econo” cars and the 1st placed VW Rabbit averaged a dismal 22mpg.
I would expect 16 in the city from a vehicle as heavy and powerful as this. I would not expect 27 on the highway.
The Uncanny X-Car. The only official BMW mutant of the X-men.
If technology can make the X6 handle so well, how about applying it to the 3-Series wagon?
I think next we add an SUV rear end and AWD to the 6-Series and have a 650xi Sportbak, or maybe an X8 xDrive50i…
Mix and match, mix and match.
This thing shares so much with the X5 I’ll probably combine the samples in TrueDelta’s research. Not that I expect to have many of these in the panel, but I could be wrong.
http://www.truedelta.com/reliability.php
Sounds like a nice ride for those that can afford it.
Sounds like a compromise for those who like them and can afford it.
Having said that – what is the tow rating? Just curious at what BMW’s Aztek is capable of.
That steeply sloped rear glass must make for interesting (read: nonexistent) rearward visibility. I expect to be dodging these right and left across suburban parking lots soon. Make no mistake: this thing will sell (er, lease). Within six months all the junior execs that have been yupping around in their Cayenne S and Turbos will have traded for one of these.
I definitely don’t get it either. Why pay $60k plus for a heavy pseudo-SUV that handles well courtesy of a soup of alphanumerical security nannies, guzzles gas, and looks ugly, while losing the appeal of SUVs (Off-roadiness and room in the back)?
Interestingly, Edmunds tested it as well (sorry Jonny!) and their review was the most negative I’ve read in a while on their site…for any vehicle, let alone a BMW.
I can’t wait for sport to be associated with lightweight again…
Oh, and it keeps reminding me of the unholy Subaru outback Sedan. Not a good thing….
The styling at BMW is increasingly reminding me of Pontiac’s 1995-2000 era. Really, strap some cladding to the doors and you’re a grill away from the Aztek at this point.
A few more design liberties and we’re looking at the ultimate frightening machine, I think.
Brian E: Excellent point — the rearward view out the hatch is laughable — like, Countach laughable.
Luckily there’s a backup camera and gargantuan side mirrors.
This review would have made sense a week ago.
Sadly, a monstrosity such as this isn’t an April Fools Joke.
I’ve read 4 reviews on this vehicle as of today and I still don’t get it. As if the X5 SAV wasn’t enough, now we have an X6 SAC which, for all intents and purposes, is a more sporting X5 with a chopped off rear roofline. I admit, the blown V8 is tantalizingly delicious (especially if BMW drops it into the 5 series) as is BMW’s ability to make this 2 1/2 ton monster dance on a track but my question would be: who would really buy this vehicle? Matter of fact, are people REALLY going to cross-shop the X6 against the far prettier Mercedes CLS?
Nice review…always keep coming back to this website. But I’ll be damned if I’ll ever understand what missions this sports uti…err SAC has in life.
i really like the look. buts that’s it.
I don’t get what’s so “different” about this – it’s a big crossover with lots of power and decent handling. Very similar to some other crossovers, but perhaps better executed. It will appeal to the same people that other such vehicles appeal to. What’s so special, and what’s so controversial?
brownie: Not “decent” handling — reality warping handling.
That’s the difference. Oh, and lots of folks are allergic to the way it looks.
Aztek CLS coupe, by BMW.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see Morticia Addams step out of it.
I like it!
Jonny: Okay, fine – “reality warping handling.” Still, so what? Maybe it’s an interesting exercise in physics, but it’s still (to me) just the next evolution of the “crossover with sporting pretensions” segment.
Pictures 2 and 5 translate into quasi Azteck. BMW design jumped the shark a while ago, but you’d think they’d course correct by now. I guess they’re just relying on those that can get past/ignore the exterior and for those that just have to have the roundel on the hood. They’ll sell a lot, but they’ll still all be ugly.
Ok, I’m the odd duck here. I like it.
It’s definitely not even close to the Aztek in looks IMHO, and the V8 would be fun to play with.
There’s no real practicality to it – it’s a toy – and it sounds like a fun one at that.
While I understand the comparison to the CLS on its face, at least the CLS is based on a car (and weighs 1200 pounds less than the xDrive50i), and the sacrifice of practicality for styling is much easier to swallow. But I am definitely overanalyzing this thing – it wasn’t designed to make sense.
I’ve seen this thing in person, and while I cannot justify its existence nor would ever buy one, I can see this thing doing well. It has presence – it’s HUGE – but it just highlights how impractical it is. But people won’t be buying this thing for practicality, and probably won’t care about milage or anything relating to the environment.
looks like a 1983 AMC Eagle SX/4
http://www.american-motors.de/en/gallery/pr/eagle-sx4/
at least the AMC had no pretention.
w/b jonny!
I still don’t get this vehicle. It’s absurdly heavy, very thirsty, and has little space for such a big vehicle. Like many recent German vehicles it’s all justified by a pile of electronics. Briefly I can feel the seduction of such vehicles. But it only takes a weekend at the track to remind why we like to turn off all of these electronics.
Before I pass judgement on this vehicle, tell me, besides poor gas mileage and room for only four people, what compromises to practicality are made?
B-Rad: uh… no third row?
What do you mean?
One of the reasons that German made cars became so popular in the 1970s in the USA was because they were precieved as “serious” in a manner that Detroit iron could never be considered.
German cars were supposed to be; well built, excellent driving, no-nonsense cars with minimal styling made for folks that took the art of driving seriously.
Flashy, silly, oximoronic cars that served no true purpose were what those other manufactures could concerntrate on because they could not make cars like the Germans.
First of all WTF is a X6? If the X6 were a pair of shoes it would be a pair of high-heeled hiking boots with an adjustable sneaker sole. Yes, a pair of shoes that do not make any sense, being made with the sole purpose of selling to people that also lack any sense.
I guess it is time to start collecting all of these abominations from the SUV era. We have that Suzuki two seat thing from the 90s, along with that Izusu “VeriCross” Monster, lets now add in a Sabaru Baja and a Chevy SSR.
It look like the X6 is meant to find the middle ground between those vehicles mentioned above and that crop of “over the top” Uber-Idiot mobiles like the Cayenne Turbo and AMG G-Wagon.
My prediction is that BMW and MB are going to look back at this era with much regret in about 10 years. Vehicles like the X6 only serve to hurt a brand that refers to its cars as “the ultimate driving machines”.
Well, whenever I thought about this vehicle before I read this review I always thought that there would be no rear headroom and very little cargo space. I figured it would be an impractical vehicle to own and would just be a fashion statement/ego booster. But it seems like, except for the fact that you can only take your three best friends with you, this isn’t an all too impractical car (sorry, SAC).
Either way, I don’t like it and wish BMW would kill it now and I suppose I want to be able to justify that.
I’ve only got a few words about this vehicle: Horrible, stupid, ugly, fat, horrible. OK..that about sums it up for me.
B-Rad: I’ve sat in this thing, and I fit in the back (I’m 6′3″), but it was not nearly as spacious as an X5 (thanks to the sloping roof). It’s not that the X6 isn’t practical at all, it’s the fact that you get most of the drawbacks of an SUV (weight and mileage) without one of the few advantages of an SUV (space). The shape of the tailgate itself impedes on cargo room, and for a vehicle that’s longer than the X5, it’s down 15 cubic feet of cargo room.
But then again, people won’t be buying this thing for practicality. If this were a consideration, they would be in a 535xi sedan or – wait for it – a 535xi wagon. It’s all image. I think we all need to step back and just realize this thing makes no sense, and was probably never designed to make any sense.
X-cruciating.
A Bangle-butted, flame-surfaced Aztek.
I heard in the old days, some creative folks would make their Pony cars etc with tall rear wheel that needs a ladder to climb up.
Is kind of Deja Vu again.
Wonder how these machine corners? Will it still pulls 1.0Gs on cornering or Thank God the gaurd rail prevented her from going into the infield.
None the less with 0-60 in 5.2 is no slouch, makes real good sop light Grand prix. As long as no turning involved. IE race with a Hemi Cuda, rendered a 440 6 pack Road Runner into a Road Chicken.
Next thing they need is a Vacuum fan installed under the car, just like the old days Chapparall
( i forgot who did it, some Can Am car, it was out lawed soon enuf) The suction aids cornering ability so until Kingdom come nothing is going to tip this baby.
Nice review and it’s good to see BMW has gotten over its vagina phobia and is once more providing press vehicles for TTAC.
As for the X6 – I also don’t get it. Doing something well that shouldn’t be done in the first place is a hollow achievement. A 5,000 lb sports car strikes me as a triumph of engineering over common sense.
kitschig
Adj. 1. tacky – tastelessly showy; “a flash car”; “a flashy ring”; “garish colors”; “a gaudy costume”; “loud sport shirts”; “a meretricious yet stylish book”; “tawdry ornaments”
Jonny: “Jeep Liberties are dwarfed”
X6 height: 66.5″; Liberty height: 72″
You must have been feeling tall in the saddle, eh?
Paul Niedermeyer: Width-dwarfed, you nitpicker.
I really can’t stress the size of the X6 enough.
Massive.
Anyone who buys one of these better be in it for the long haul or be leasing. Depreciation will be huge. As in MB R-class huge.
If you want to combine functionality and performance make a beautiful wagon. As in better than an RS6 wagon in looks for less monely.
Audi wagons are probably the best looking ones on the market. The only thing I like as much is the new JDM Mazda 6 wagon. Put the TT V-8 in a 3,700lb awd wagonish form and you have a great combination of performance and utlity.
Ok, so maybe I’m over-analyzing a bit much. The loss of practicality, as someone said earlier, would be easier to swallow if it were a CLS I was looking at. That being said, I’d rather take the new FX over this monstrosity. And yes, the tail-end does remind me of the late (Rest In Hell) Aztek. Non too attractive that butt is.
The I6 in the BMW 335i is a BI-turbo, not a TWIN-turbo.
In a BI-turbo setup, each turbo is responsible for pressurizing HALF of the cylinders. In a TWIN-turbo setup, the turbos are sequential, and pressurize ALL of the cylinders.
The Truth About Turbos.
@carguy: As for the X6 – I also don’t get it. Doing something well that shouldn’t be done in the first place is a hollow achievement. A 5,000 lb sports car strikes me as a triumph of engineering over common sense.
Well said. The twin turbo V8 in *cringe* an M version of the X5 seems like less nonsense than this. Room for 4 and what amounts to “just a trunk” sounds an awful, awful lot like a sedan to me. When I first heard about this car, I was under the impression it was going to be a sexed-up 5 series wagon. Thanks for assuring us that pictures just don’t do it justice, as I can’t see where the extra 1200 pounds over the 550i went, other than AWD and turbo hardware.
The rear three-quarter windows are the Hoffmeister Kink, which every BMW has had for the past 50 years or so.
Yuppie: The I6 in the BMW 335i is a BI-turbo, not a TWIN-turbo.
In a BI-turbo setup, each turbo is responsible for pressurizing HALF of the cylinders. In a TWIN-turbo setup, the turbos are sequential, and pressurize ALL of the cylinders.
The Truth About Turbos.
Bi-Turbo and Twin-turbo are the same thing. There is nothing that indicates a “twin-turbo” is sequential, unless it is stated so by the manufacturer.
“Twin-turbos” have been around for decades, but only recently have sequential set-ups become practical, and to my knowledge, so far only (or mostly) on diesel engines.
The Truth about Turbos
So far, from memory, but now confirmed by: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twin-turbo
Definition of the X6 from Webster’s ….
Answer to question no one was asking.
So, what is this car?
The ultimate “I enjoy driving and I have a chalet in the mountains” statement? Or is it just another tiresome expression of useless excess?
I spent a few days in the mountains the other week, in Switzerland. Nobody drives a SUV down there; it’s just Subarus, old Volvos and 4×4 Toyota sedans. The fatso vehicles are driven by city folk and by Russian or German tourists. Just sayin’.
Corporate toads with executive ambitions will buy them like hotcakes. They will use them for 5-mile commute home. The only time they will taste gravel is in parking lots of trendy yuppie restaurants.
BMW is going for the kill with the X6, tired of being outdone by the Lexus RX (which serves the exact same market). Since the X6 is going to be $20K more expensive, it will automatically be more desirable.
BMW will make a lot of money on these.
If they put a BMW logo on a six ton dump truck and called it a SDT it would sell.
This monstrosity is a vivid illustration of Mencken’s dictum that no-one ever went broke by underestimating the taste of the American people.
I am hoping that the peak oilers are correct and that oil goes to $200/bbl soon. It is the only possible justice for a country that is willing to buy these things.
Since it is a SAC, I assume Truck Nutz are a standard feature.
If BMW would just remove about a horizontal 3 inches from the midsection, this would be a great looking car. But this just looks like a 3 Series with down syndrome.
I like it. I can’t afford it, but I like it.
I’ll also admit that I like the Bangle-designed BMWs. I also have no problem with i-Drive. I don’t think it’s that bad. I have driven several BMWs at the Ultimate Drive and have had no problem adapting to it quickly.