It's no big secret that we like BMWs. Look through any one of our past comparison tests, and 9 times out of 10, if there was a BMW participating, it finished at or near the top. We have been accused of cashing checks from the Bank of Munich more times than we can count, and if you're thinking about firing off an e-mail telling us that we should change the name of our site to "bmwlovers.com," save it plenty of others have beaten you to it.
We might feel a tinge of guilt if it weren't for the fact that every time we drive a BMW, we're instantly reminded of just why they
earn the scores that they do.
The X5 is another perfect example. A world-class drivetrain, sedan-like handling, a beautifully designed and well-built interior, exceptional safety scores and we're supposed to feel guilty about this?
If there was any reason for us to rethink our love of BMW's sports car on stilts, it was the price tag. Starting at an already pricey $38,900, our loaner added more than $10,000 worth of options to finish up with a final sticker price of just over $50,000. Not cheap, especially considering the fact that this was the base 3.0-liter model, but with most of the options falling into the gadget department, we would probably enjoy a more basic model equally as much.
Rather than further nauseating the already downtrodden legions of e-mail evangelists, no doubt already hard at work on their latest diatribes on our fascination with all things German, we figured we'd serve 'em up some cannon fodder right off the bat by highlighting a few of the X5's most glaring weaknesses first.
For one, as far as hauling the family, the X5 isn't much better than a typical sedan. Rear-seat accommodations are average at best, with both the Lexus and the Acura offering more space, features and comfort. The most memorable aspect of the rear quarters was the power recline feature for the seatbacks, but momentary consideration of the usefulness of this "feature" quickly regulated it to gimmick status.
Second problem: cargo capacity. With the second-row seats folded, the X5's maximum capacity stands at an almost laughable 54.4 cubic feet. That's almost 20 cubic feet less than the Audi or Lexus, and nearly 30 cubic feet less than the Acura. Sure, it has a trick clamshell tailgate, but when it opens up to reveal a cargo bay that can barely swallow a laundry basket, the uniqueness fades quickly.
Third problem: the stereo/navigation system. Never one of BMW's strong points, the system in our X5 was a design catastrophe, leaving us practically beating the dashboard in aggravation. Between knobs that did nothing and unlabeled buttons that did too much, just tuning the stereo was a lesson in frustration. Listening to a CD would have calmed us down a bit, but, in another example of design ineptitude, BMW deletes the standard CD player when you order the $1,800 navigation system. That's right our $50,000 luxury SUV had no CD player.
The navigation system is equally unimpressive. Despite widespread use of DVD-based systems such as those in the Acura and the Lexus the X5 still uses a less sophisticated CD-ROM-based unit. This means multiple discs are needed to cover different regions of the country, something most owners aren't likely to even realize until they venture out of their home territory you know, exactly when they'll need a navigation system the most.
So the X5 has a few problems. Whether you consider them minor or not depends on what you plan to do with your luxury SUV. For most buyers, a luxury sport-ute is nothing more than a luxury car substitute, and it's in this capacity that the X5 excels.
Like its sedan cousins, the X5's cabin is bathed in high-quality goods from the headliner on down. If not for one finicky editor who didn't like the Poplar wood trim, it would have earned a perfect 10 in the materials category. The classic BMW instrument cluster still looks good after all these years, but we'll admit that the climate controls, while sharp in design, aren't the most intuitive setup.
Unlike the marginal seating in back, the buckets up front earned top scores for their firm cushioning and solid lateral support. A power tilting/telescoping steering wheel allows you to find a comfortable seating position easily, while the high stance makes for a good view out the windshield.
Build quality was first-rate throughout. Whether we were yanking on a door handle or pushing on a trim piece, nothing moved an inch. Squeaks and rattles were virtually nonexistent during our two-week test period.
And all this despite numerous trips up and down a rocky, potholed test loop. Sure, we know that the X5 isn't built for trail running, but we thought any vehicle of this type should be able to at least scamper down a mountain fire road without hesitation. Our test vehicle made it through with the help of an adjustable ride height suspension system. We're not sure if it was worth the extra $1,200, but the X5 was surprisingly capable in the rough stuff, with enough suspension travel to avoid bottoming out and good tracking through rutted washouts.
As acceptably as it performs in the dirt, the X5 really comes into its own on the pavement. One look at the "drive" scores from our evaluation sheets says it all. The X5 was rated first in the following categories: engine, transmission, brakes, suspension, tires, steering performance and fun-to-drive. If that doesn't tell you all you need to know, then the X5 isn't for you.
Throw it hard into a turn and it holds on like a five-year old on the first day of school. The steering is near perfect, body roll is tightly controlled, and if you push beyond its limits, the standard Dynamic Stability Control (DSC) cuts in quickly to keep you headed in the right direction. The Audi did mange to post a slightly faster speed through the slalom, but in terms of overall vehicle dynamics, the BMW wins hands down.
The engine might not look that impressive on paper, but a broad, smooth powerband and a perfectly programmed transmission make it feel more powerful than the numbers would suggest. And, unlike its competitors, the BMW feels just as content at 6,000 rpm as it does at 2,000, not a trait most people are looking for in an SUV, but no doubt one of the reasons why the X5 is so often referred to as the "sports car of SUVs." A 60-to-0-mph braking distance of 116 feet again had us comparing the X5 to high-performance two-seaters that weigh half as much.
Needless to say, the X5 is a BMW first, a sport-ute second. Sure, it has a high stance and four-wheel drive, but that's about as far as its sport-ute capabilities extend. Its limited cargo- and passenger-hauling capability render the X5 far from versatile, but in this high-dollar segment, such practical concerns are far less distracting. If you want a vehicle that looks utilitarian but doesn't drive that way, you can't do much better than this BMW. But if function over form is your underlying philosophy, the X5 doesn't warrant much consideration.
Second Opinions:Road Test Editor John DiPietro says:The X5 may have taken first with me if not for the lack of value; we're talking $50,000 here, and it's not the V8 model. Not that there's anything wrong with the six, which was energetic from low revs to high and emits one of the best soundtracks of any engine extant. The automatic transmission is flawless when in "sport" mode, making the most of the engine's potential performance so adroitly that I never found myself wishing for more power. And the handling was the best of the group, on- or off road. But still, BMW charges extra for so many features that are standard on the Acura, nickel-and-diming their way until the price is 10 grand above the MDX. Plus the MDX has that handy third seat. The X5 3.0 is nice, but it's not 25 percent nicer than the oh-so-close MDX.
Road Test Editor Liz Kim says:What can one say this is a pure BMW, through and through. It has the same steering feel, the same quality of materials and workmanship, its chassis is perfectly balanced and it's the only vehicle in the test that will nudge you to take that winding road. The others only begrudgingly take you there. Little wonder that this structure is able to support high-performance versions like the 4.6is and the idiotically fast LeMans edition.
Yes, it appeals to the right side of the brain, the one that appreciates a finely crafted vehicle, a marvel of engineering. However, the left side of the brain cringes at the tiny cubby known as the cargo space and at the prohibitively expensive cost. It also rolls its eyes at the fragile sounds made by the suspension when asked to travel over rough surfaces and the futility of having a hill descent control system. Yes, I would pant to be the owner of an X5 since I have no need to ferry progeny (and their doodads), nor am I the outdoorsy type, but I would be remiss to recommend the Bimmer to anyone who needs either of the above capabilities.
Road Test Editor Erin Riches says:This is the crossover to get if driving enjoyment and SUV styling and ride height are your priorities, while budget, passenger-carrying and cargo-hauling concerns aren't very important. Take the X5 on a two-lane highway, and the excellent suspension, steering and brakes will immediately reveal their shared lineage with other BMWs. None of the others in this test could match its composed ride and communicative steering, not even the allroad, an armored A6 wagon. And even with the base engine, our test vehicle certainly didn't feel unsatisfying the power delivery from the inline six was as smooth as ever, especially when the automatic was in sport mode. The X5's 15/21 fuel economy rating is pretty lousy, though.
On the inside, the X5 feels more luxurious than either the Acura or the Lexus (and about on par with the Audi), but the backseat, while supportive, is really only comfortable for two adults or three small children. Further reducing the BMW's practicality is its small cargo area the smallest of the group though I have to admit I was fond of its clamshell-style hatch. While the cockpit certainly had more automated functions than the MDX's, those unversed in German cars might find the collection of small flat buttons and unfamiliar symbols overwhelming compared with the Acura's more straightforward arrangement. Finally, our test vehicle's audio entertainment was limited to the radio and a tape player hidden behind the nav screen it's a bit assuming to ask someone spending 50 grand to forgo a CD player.
I like the X5, but it's not practical or affordable enough to be my top choice here. If someone I knew wanted to buy one, I would push hard to get that person to test-drive a 525i wagon, which, of course, has a lower base price, more cargo room and even better handling.
Stereo Evaluation - 2002 BMW X5
Add A Comment »