Xoutpost.com

Xoutpost.com (https://xoutpost.com/forums.php)
-   X5 (E53) Forum (https://xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-forums/x5-e53-forum/)
-   -   2003 4.6is vs Range Rover Sport supercharged (https://xoutpost.com/bmw-sav-forums/x5-e53-forum/35626-2003-4-6is-vs-range-rover-sport-supercharged.html)

krazee 11-12-2007 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jst2878
Come on from one Bmw lover to the next, you definitely did not race a twin turbo porsche. You shouldn't insult the company of porsche without looking and racing the best truck they make. and the S is not the one

No dude I said nothing of a twin turbo...I'm a wee bit smarter than that...Hell I own a bimmer don't I.

det750 11-13-2007 11:45 AM

I have a 05 RR sport diesel for the last 2 years with not a single problem and found it to be great off road, the air suspension was great for carrying heavy loads and you can tow what ever you like, also have a 2001 4.4i sport and you can't compair the 2 on the road. The X5 is much better on the road and performace is in a different league just depends what you want to use it for.

I don't really see much point on having a RR SC as it just doesn't perform well on the road and if you want it for towing and off road work get the RR diesel

SeattleYates 11-19-2007 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TWALK
Porsche Cayenne Turbo-
Top Speed 266.0 kph / 165.3 mph
0 - 62 mph5.6 seconds
0 - 100 mph12.9 seconds

BMW X5 4.8is
Top Speed246.1 kph / 152.9 mph
0 - 62 mph6.1 seconds
0-100 mph N/A

I've driven a Cayenne Turbo, and I would have to agree that - because of the turbo - it is quicker than any stock X5. However, I added the Dinan S3 package (which includes supercharger) to my 2003 4.6is (see http://www.xoutpost.com/x5-e53-forum/...an-s3-wow.html ), and have clocked myself 0-60 in 5.2 seconds, which I believe is faster than any stock SUV except the Cayenne Turbo S. Range Rovers aren't even in the competition at that level.

mrkbbd 11-19-2007 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SeattleYates
I've driven a Cayenne Turbo, and I would have to agree that - because of the turbo - it is quicker than any stock X5. However, I added the Dinan S3 package (which includes supercharger) to my 2003 4.6is (see http://www.xoutpost.com/x5-e53-forum/...an-s3-wow.html ), and have clocked myself 0-60 in 5.2 seconds, which I believe is faster than any stock SUV except the Cayenne Turbo S. Range Rovers aren't even in the competition at that level.

Well not anymore...the SRT8 Jeep does it in the high 4 second range (about 475 HP), the ML63 does pretty close to 5 flat I believe (507 HP)

SeattleYates 11-19-2007 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrkbbd
Well not anymore...the SRT8 Jeep does it in the high 4 second range (about 475 HP), the ML63 does pretty close to 5 flat I believe (507 HP)

I guess that's right...somebody's always coming out with something bigger/faster, aren't they!? :confused:

Somebody who's a better driver than me (and used an optimal "launch" procedure) might be able to get my S3 4.6is down to 5 flat, but I doubt it would ever break into the 4's!

I guess if I want to go faster than that, I just need to park the X5 and take my M5 instead - I believe its 0-60 time is 4.1 :rofl: ...but that's a whole 'nother topic... ;)

LeMansX5 11-19-2007 05:28 PM

There are few threads in this forum on Cayenne turbo vs. X5 4.8is discussion if you want to check out.

BimmerDude 11-19-2007 05:47 PM

I've got a problem excepting that SRT 8 does it in high 4r's. Has anyone driven one of them? I mean really driven one? I had one for the weekend, (was thinking of getting rid of the X, thank God I didn't). First of all, handling SUCKS! There is a terrible hesitation when you punch it. It's like your hauling a house when you gun it to take off. It takes forever. IMO, I don't see the 4 second thing or high 4r's for that matter. I'd say maybe high 5's but nothing that fast. I never timed it and don't want to. The handling and drive alone will not sell me at all. MB, don't know about that one. But I'm sure since its AMG, that the handling is superb and acceleration has to be top notch. But again, as for Jeep SRT8, Great idea, but that's where it ends, at the drawing table. Again, my opinion only, so any Jeep fans out there, sorry. But the SRT8 is not what you think it is, even with that huge engine.

mrkbbd 11-19-2007 06:12 PM

well you can't expect that much out of a car that is supposed to compete with 100k+ cars for 50k


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:11 AM.

vBulletin, Copyright 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0
© 2017 Xoutpost.com. All rights reserved.