any model/year to watch out for???

[Clockwork]

I just made a huge rookie mistake

[Clockwork]

holy cow. I was looking for cargo space for both the X3 and X5 and noticed the X3 has more cargo space apparently.
Also, I assumed the 4.4i would have slightly better gas milage than the 4.6 and 4.8, but according to the Canadian Driver article ( CanadianDriver » BMW » Used Vehicle Review: BMW X5, 2000-2006 ) the 3.0 and 4.8 have best gas millage. Am I being lied to???

[JCL]

Originally Posted by Clockwork

I was looking for cargo space for both the X3 and X5 and noticed the X3 has more cargo space apparently.
Also, I assumed the 4.4i would have slightly better gas milage than the 4.6 and 4.8, but according to the Canadian Driver article ( CanadianDriver » BMW » Used Vehicle Review: BMW X5, 2000-2006 ) the 3.0 and 4.8 have best gas millage. Am I being lied to???

Well, you hadn't mentioned the X3 up until now. Is it a candidate? It does have more cargo space, and more usable cargo space, than the E53, as it doesn't have the sloping rear window. It has a more usable roof rack as well (it is longer). That said there are things it doesn't have, like dual-zone climate control, and all the bells and whistles that you can find on the E53 on some models.

But if you don't need to tow more than 3500 lbs, if the SUV is for poor road conditions as much as for anything else, if you want x-drive, if you like the 3.0 in your E46, and you like the agility of the E46, then the X3 is a very good choice. It certainly has fewer issues than the more complex E53 in my opinion. I enjoyed our E53, but when it came time to replace it the E70 was not a consideration, as it was larger and heavier, two things I wanted less of. We went to a 2007 E83 and are very happy with it. Ours has the 260 hp 3.0, 6 speed manual, around 800 lbs less weight to carry around, and thus more performance than the 4.4 E53s.

The problem with comparing fuel economy is that the test changed over the years you are considering. There were various correction factors applied to try and get closer to real world conditions.

Up through 2003, the 3.0 got better mileage than the 4.4. From 2004 onwards, the government test figures showed very similar fuel consumption between the 3.0 and the new 4.4 engine. The trouble is, that is from a dyno test, and it didn't show up in the real world. On a simulation run on a dyno, the acceleration rate is predetermined, and is very slow. If an owner has power available in the real world, they tend to use it. In the real world, the 3.0 is generally better, all V8 models are worse, but the 2004+ 4.4 is the best of the V8s.

[Fraser]

Originally Posted by JCL

On a simulation run on a dyno, the acceleration rate is predetermined, and is very slow. If an owner has power available in the real world, they tend to use it. In the real world, the 3.0 is generally better, all V8 models are worse, but the 2004+ 4.4 is the best of the V8s.

If you are after an E53 V8, the slight difference in economy between the pre and post 2004 4.4s, the 4.6 and the 4.8 isn't worth considering in the big scheme of things, IMO. Even the 3.0-litre doesn't do much better than the V8s in many circumstances. JCL also makes a good point about the X3. For reasons I don't fully understand it's always been underrated.

[chas3]

No, of course they are not the same mileage if measured to the last drop of gas. However, the difference is that small (less then half a liter per 100km) that it makes the 4.8 more worthy. If you live in an area where they don't tax you per engine capacity, you should definitely go for the 4.8.
As about the cargo space, yeah, the E53 does not excel in that area. Without the net (to prevent luggage to trip in the passenger area) I feel the trunk is pretty much the same as the E60.

[Clockwork]

JCL. I was looking at E83's previously, but something keeps drawing me back to the E53. styling/luxaries.
I will never tow anything and it is just needed for Calgary winters/snowfalls.
I'm going to see a 2004 and 2006 E83 now. one being a manual (which I'd REALLLLLY like to buy for winter driving) but no moon-roof. thats a must for me
thanx for allll your help JCL, you freaking rock (as do the rest of you fine ppl on the site)

[JCL]

Originally Posted by Clockwork

JCL. I was looking at E83's previously, but something keeps drawing me back to the E53. styling/luxuries.
I will never tow anything and it is just needed for Calgary winters/snowfalls.
I'm going to see a 2004 and 2006 E83 now. one being a manual (which I'd REALLLLLY like to buy for winter driving) but no moon-roof. thats a must for me
thanx for allll your help JCL, you freaking rock (as do the rest of you fine ppl on the site)

You're welcome.

Up until now, this thead was discussing E53 models. 2000 introduction, 2004 LCI (Update), 2006 end of production.

For the E83, it is slightly different. All had x-drive, even before it was brought to the X5. Engines vary between a 2.5 at 185 hp, a few different 3.0s around 215/225 hp, and a newer more powerful 3.0 at 260 hp. What changed significantly was the ride and handling. It got better several times, importantly in 2006 (for the 2007 model year). That was when it stopped being something of a buckboard, the early models rode pretty hard. All E83s are firmer than E53 models; I think the non-sport E83 is pretty close to the sport E53. If you aren't looking at a 2007+ vehicle, you may not want sport package. I didn't, as I couldn't stand the ride. Drive them yourself and decide.

I know what you mean about the image of the X3 vs the X5. The X5 has more presence. The ride is more luxurious, while the E83 is more tossable and sporty. The E53 has some nice luxury features, but on a used vehicle that can also mean more to fix. I sold my E53 after four years, even though it had zero issues, and even though I could wrench on it myself, because I didn't want the hassle of dealing with it out of warranty. I don't have those same concerns about the E83. It is an E46 underneath. Essentially bulletproof, with the possible exception of the ATC transfer case, which isn't servicable.

[Clockwork]

Thanx again JCL.
I never mentioned in this E53 forum about the E83, strictly cause I didn't wanna cross-contiminate and make some people upset that I'm talkinga bout X3's on an X5 forum

I'd be foolish to not atleast be looking at the little brother of the X5, BUT I still think I will end up with a 4.4i.
And not cause it may or may not be more gas efficient (cause I know thats amute point with V8's) but because there are a LOT more 4.4L's floating around and parts would be the easier/cheaper/faster to get.

I will mention that I took an '07 3.0si M Sport out tonight, but it was an automatic unfortunately. Great handling/braking but very bumpy ride (i understand its based off a 3er chasis) and less ammenities than I'd LIKE (not need, but like) to see in a vehicle that expensive.

I will try to test drive 2 more X3's tomorrow. a manual and an auto.

The '05 X5 4.41 I have lined up for a test drive saturday is loaded with comfort package and also has extended warranty. Which would tickle me pink to have warranty again on atleast ONE of my Bimmers hahaha

[JCL]

If one of the vehicles you are looking at is an X5, I don't see the downside of discussing both. I am sure some members view only one forum on xoutpost. Personally, I consider it all one book, with chapters, so I look at all the new posts and don't mind if they are about E53, E70, E83, M, Other, Lounge, Politics, or Premium Members. I don't go into the brakes/tires/detailing/stereo subsections, but that is just me.

There may be more X5s than X3s around Calgary, but there shouldn't be more 4.4 models than 3.0 models. The 3.0 held 65-75% of the X5 market share during its life, so they outnumber V8 models from 2 to 1 up to 3 to 1. If there are a lot more 4.4 models around, it means that a lot more people are selling them, given that they are a smaller population.

Good luck with your search.

[Fraser]

Just a side question: Are Canadian delivered X5s and X3s the same as US delivered models in tune/spec/options etc?