Diesel X5 launch and pricing

[Craig]

BMW has had diesel engine cars in the U.S. before. They haven't had any diesels in U.S. for years. They will release them sometime this December...

Craig

[grover432]

Originally Posted by Craig

I have driven the MB diesel in the ML and it was a dog. I'm sure with the twin turbo on the X5, it won't have that problem... It had enough power to go down the highway 75-80 MPH, but had no passing power what so ever. It was fine for city use...

Craig

I drove the GL320 and found it a great drive with alot of interior room at a price in Canada, comparable to a BMW 4.8. Of course the 4.8 has much better performance, but the GL had much more usable space.

The problem with the GL (and ML) is the turbo lag. I wouldn't really call it a "dog", but if you aren't patient, you won't like it. Once it moves off the line it is fine, but it takes a second to build boost (from a stop), something the X35 won't suffer from. The GL320 was very quiet; almost as quiet as a gas engine and while underway, you wouldn't know you were driving a diesel. Some "first drive" reviews of the 335d comment that the diesel is a bit noisy. I guess I'll have to wait and hear the diesel in the X5.

At the risk of being flamed; to me a SAV (SUV, whatever) is about utility. I know there is a segment of the market that wants both, hence the previous 4.8is and the Posche Cayenne. But no matter how fast these vehicles get, they don't really handle like sports cars so I tend to assess a suitable SAV based on drive, performance and utility, not the fastest straight line performance.

Having said the above, I did find the GL's lag irritating and think it would bother me more as time goes on. I like the utility, but think the 35d would be the better daily driver. If the engine is quiet and I don't have to pay to much of a premium over the 3.0si, it may be the best compromise for someone who needs utility but also wants an engaging drive.

I'll reserve judgement until after the test drive.

[LeMansX5]

Comparo of gas and diesel engines

[tim-atl]

Those numbers are nice but.... can someone tell me in what state Diesel is a measly 30 cents more than gasoline?

Tim

[hchon]

Originally Posted by tim-atl

Those numbers are nice but.... can someone tell me in what state Diesel is a measly 30 cents more than gasoline?

Tim

I am guessing the comparison was against the premium grade gas (vs. diesel). I just checked my local gas prices on www.sanfrangasprices.com and the difference between Premium and Diesel was about 30 cents.

-hchon

[tim-atl]

Originally Posted by hchon

I am guessing the comparison was against the premium grade gas (vs. diesel). I just checked my local gas prices on www.sanfrangasprices.com and the difference between Premium and Diesel was about 30 cents.

Thanks for enlightening me.

I assumed extreme diesel disparity existed everywhere. We're at 70 cents in the Atlanta area - which beats the $1 diff we were at.

http://www.atlantagasprices.com

Tim

[grover432]

So, if you are calculating the payback on a 35d vs a 3.0si, based on a $4,000 option price, it will take 9 years to pay the diesel option back (driving 12,000 miles/year). So anyone choosing this option is doing so because they want more performance with better fuel economy than the 3.0si has to offer. I keep a vehicle 5 years max, so I can't justify the 35d based on fuel economy alone.

And for someone who does mostly city driving, the Rx may be the best choice. Of course you have to calculate the payback on that vehicle by considering the extra cost of the Hybrid. Also, you'd need to like the RX, which I don't.

[Craig]

The new RX looks terrible. It's always been a women's car in my opinion. I've driven several of them through the years. They always give me one when I take my Lexus in for service. The RX doesn't drive anything like the X5. The diesel is also a green car as well as the RX hybrid. The diesel also has a lot more torque than the 30i. It's not just about fuel mileage.

Craig

[alefcole]

Originally Posted by grover432

So, if you are calculating the payback on a 35d vs a 3.0si, based on a $4,000 option price, it will take 9 years to pay the diesel option back (driving 12,000 miles/year). So anyone choosing this option is doing so because they want more performance with better fuel economy than the 3.0si has to offer. I keep a vehicle 5 years max, so I can't justify the 35d based on fuel economy alone.

And for someone who does mostly city driving, the Rx may be the best choice. Of course you have to calculate the payback on that vehicle by considering the extra cost of the Hybrid. Also, you'd need to like the RX, which I don't.

I agree, thats why I bought myself a 3.0, since to me the performance is more than enough.
Now, if I had to choose near 4.8 performance with better fuel economy, then i will buy the diesel.

[JA330xi]

Just bot a 3.0si. Couldn't/wouldn't wait for the 3.5d. The car is very smooth. Not a rocket off the line but not slow either. A very nice highway cruiser. Just took a 650mi RT trip with less the 2k on the odo. I am very pleased. Getting 21mpg on the highway at 70+mph. I think that will improve a bit as the engine gets broken in. I'll wait for two or three years to trade for the 3.5d. With premium gas at $2.05 in my area fuel economy is less important.