Advertisement

BMW X6 M and BMW X5 M priced in the $80,000 range

BMW X6 | April 8th, 2009 by 32
img_8344-1600x12001

Even though BMW has not revealed the official pricing today, we learned that the BMW X6 M will be priced in the high $80,000 range, …

Even though BMW has not revealed the official pricing today, we learned that the BMW X6 M will be priced in the high $80,000 range, while the “twin brother”, X5 M,  a few thousand cheaper.

This is quite unexpected, especially since many of us were betting on the base price to jump over the $100,000 mark. The German pricing released last week were showing the BMW X6 M being valued at 108,500 euros while the X5 M followed closely with a base price of 105,900 euros.

BMW X6 M and BMW X5 M priced in the $80,000 range

BMW is looking to keep the pricing within an acceptable range and not far from the higher X-models.  Will this convert more X6 buyers over to the M models? Time will tell, but for now, we are pleased to see those numbers.

  • Babak

    I guess this is somewhat understandable. The M5 and M6 are about $25,000 more than the 550i/650i, and this pricing on the X6 ///M would place it at able $20,000 more than the base X6 xDrive50i… perhaps they made the price delta less since the X6 ///M isn’t as different from the x6 50i as the m6 from the 650..

  • Kay

    The ML63 will rape this car from which ever angle you choose to interpret this statement.

    • Danilo A. Henry

      Talk is cheap, let us look at the outcome, when they go “toe to toe”

    • Adam

      AMG’s are just naturally greater than most M’s.
      It’s not a statement, it’s fact.

      • Howie Dub

        just b/c it’s naturally aspirated doesn’t mean it’s better. See my post to Donald regarding NA vs. TT.

  • Kay

    The ML63 will rape this SUV from which ever angle you choose to interpret this statement.

  • Jordan

    I was just reading autoblogs coverage about this and virtually all of the comments are trashing it. and they were even saying the new acura suv the ZDX or w/e they call it is better than this. quite shocked really. I would never be caught dead with a ZDX. it looks extremely ugly and i dunno what’s with Acura’s new designs lately. they look like they’re supposed to be stealth cars like the F-117 Nighthawk designer. there are no “lines” or “curves” its so boxy and not even boxy, it’s just weird angles and every piece a different size and no flow whatsoever. exactly like a F-117. and they have an arrow shaped front and rear now? what’s up with that. it looks hideous. and now im trashing the ZDX, but come’on… do ppl seriously believe the stuff they’re saying?

    Honestly I think if a poll was done of the ppl who wrote all those comments, they’d find that a huge majority couldn’t afford the BMW.

    • Danilo A. Henry

      The Acura, was clearly influenced, by GM’s Cadillac . The CTS , STS etc. This Design theme, was born, out of their Art and Science Division. i could say a lot more about Asian Desing, but i will leave that fo another time.

  • Gord

    In Germany the M5 is 100 000 euors, and in USA it is 85 000, so the X6 M and X5 M pricing make sense, but I would have thought with its new engine and computers it would be more.

  • Jordan

    @Kay:

    I think you’re sadly mistaken. Possibly in the interior “luxury” feel because it is a Mercedes. But track wise, and handling and dynamics I’d put $100 on the BMW.

    Now you said it’d “rape” it from which ever angle you choose. now that’s pretty vague and very unspecific as to where you think the ML63 would beat the X6/X5 M.

  • Gord

    @Jordan:

    Well, those 50 people (on Autoblog) don’t exactly represent the thousands of the people that consider buying BMW’s. ;)

  • Jordan

    @Gord:

    Haha exactly!

  • Juan

    Hmm… the ML63 would never keep up with this car. This car has more power and more torque. To make it even better the electronics in M cars make the ones in an AMG look like an atari. Also engineering goes to the BMW with always having the edge, better brakes, better suspension… they just make the speed and handling way more efficient than Mercedes does. Sorry to say it, Mercedes 6.2 liter engine is a monster, but its car is just brute dumb power… on top of that they’re chrysler inspired designs don’t say much for themselves, they change designs literally every refresh to square lights, to round, to concave lights, to triangular, you name it theyve got it. Ex: the old C class looks nothing like the 2005 C class which looks nothing like the current C class, which looks like a sebring.

  • Jordan

    @Juan:

    Ya I agree with that. M models are more performance orientated than AMG. AMG is just more raw power, hate to compare it to american cars but compared to the M division, AMG is mostly just straight line. M includes the full package with handling, brakes, electronics, and with x-Drive, AND it doesn’t have any understeer according to test videos I’ve seen. Very impressive and not surprising BMW achieved that.

  • Tony

    Very good business move to price these starting under $100k.

    I was on the fence because of the price and this just sealed the deal for me.

    When are these supposed to come out? Sept/Oct?

  • Howie Dub

    @ Kay:

    I don’t know what you’re smoking, but it must be good for you to think that. BMWs have always had an edge on MB in the handling dept., so the ML63 can’t rape the X5 M/X6 M there. Just compare the C63 with the M3; faster in a straight line, but got beat on the track. Now the X5 M/X6 M is estimated to go 0-60 in 4.5 secs and BMW has been conservative with their estimates with their TT engines, so chances are, these beasts will go even faster. Now the fastest stock time I’ve seen online for an ML63 is 4.5 or 4.6 sec (factory estimate is 4.8), which is the same as BMW manufacturers estimate, so where is the raping there? Looks like the raping may be the other way around when these beasts finally hit the streets. And pricing the base price in the $80K range is smart as it bests both the ML63 and Pepper Turbo S. More performance and handling for less…can’t really ask for more.

    • Danilo A. Henry

      I Agree. some Magazines, have even rated the M3, an all-around, better value, than the Porsche, 911. I have Stated this before. Mercedes AMG, CARS, mainly are Brute Force. BMW’s, HAVE a lot more Finesse.

  • Juan

    Im with you on that, not only that. It takes Merc a 6.2 liter engine to nearly be at par with the M3′s 4.0… And an update, mix an M3 DCT with a C63 0-100 MPH and the M3 will have the C63 eating dust! With the manual its a little harder, it takes a skilled driver to keep up with the C63, but thats my point… Merc needed to slap a 6.2 liter engine to keep up with the compitition… I dont know about you, but thats just brutal.

  • L1ndja

    @Juan: That’s not brutal that is gay.

  • E92-TORONTO

    FUCK ML63, LOOK SO DAMN OLD, THAT CAR IS NOTHING COMPARE TO X5M/X6M

  • Kay

    It’s funny how you guys don’t wanna see the truth. BMW bla..blah..blehhh! Look guys, it only fair that you stop living in denial. The ML63 AMG would smoke both the X6 //M and X5 //M. You’d soon see this when they both get tested. The Ferrari Enzo only beat the SLR by a strand of hair, both on straight line and round the racks. Well, my point is at the end of the day, BMW X6/X5 //M might slightly be more impressive than the ML63, … Well, that’s if it beats the ML63

  • Martin

    The X6 M would definitely EAT the ML63. Exactly, just wait until they get tested on track so you can see what real M performance is about. By the way, what is your point comparing the SLR. Were talking about X6 and ML, not SLR.

  • Jordan

    @Kay:

    Let me quote you:

    “The ML63 AMG would smoke both the X6 //M and X5 //M.”

    Then about 1 second later you say:

    “BMW X6/X5 //M might slightly be more impressive than the ML63, … Well, that’s if it beats the ML63″

    Lol.. first of all it’s quite obvs you contradicted yourself. And secondly, it’s also VERY obvs that when the BMW beats the ML63, it actually would be considered “slightly” more impressive.

  • Howie Dub

    @Kay:
    It’s funny how you say we’re living in denial when you’re the one denying the performance of the new X5 M/X6 M. So let me present some facts to you; besides straight line acceleration, the X6 50i bests the ML63 in both slalom and skidpad. Check roadandtrack.com. X6 50i got through the slalom at a speed of 64.9 vs 62.1 for the ML63. the X6 pulled .90g on the same skidpad that the ML was only able to pull .81g. If the 50i already handles better than the ML63, imagine what the M version will do. Every MB fan boy I know always says that most races are in straight line anyway when I bring up BMWs better handling. Maybe so, but I’ll have more fun driving up the PCH and probably get to my destination faster since I don’t have to worry as much about losing control.

  • http://bmwblog Danilo

    Anyone who has followed the Dynamics of both Companies, knows that Mercedes, always, has to over, emphasize, to Beat BMW”s. What Mercedes Achieves, with Brute Force, BMW ,DOES IT with Finesse. Although, Mercedes is a, player, BMW”s True, competiton, is the Porsche, Cayenne Turbo. Which the x6 ,has already beaten, in a straight line. check-out YOU TUBE.

  • Donald

    wow nice try BMW but we all know guys that ML 63 will kill both X6&X%M.if you haven’t notice both porcsche and BMW have twin turbo and the ML 63 is only 6.2 liter engen naturally inspired. YOU say BMW is beautiful just look at it when you are in front of it and come and tell me what were they diong.

    • Danilo A. Henry

      Right here, on this Blog, it was revealed, that the BMW X6 5.0i has already bested the ML63. (Road & Track). What do you think the ‘M’ Diviision, X6 will do…………You already know……….

    • Howie Dub

      sorry you have to eat your words, but both the X6 and X5 M BLOW the ML63 out of the water in both handling and straightline speed. Car and Driver has the X6 M at 4.1 0-60mph with launch control and 4.2 for the X5 M. Even w/o launch control, they hit 4.3 and 4.4 sec respectively, which is still faster than your precious ML. As for having turbos as opposed to being naturally aspirated, that’s just a choice each manufacturer makes. Have you forgotten that some of the previous AMGs used superchargers and the AMG 65 cars are all twin turbos? If Mercedes is using it for their top of the line AMGs, then maybe twin turbos are a superior technology to natural aspiration. Besides, if you slap a turbocharger on your naturally aspirated AMG, you void your warranty, whereas, the BMWs are covered.

      • Jordan

        is it true that it doesn’t void your warranty if you put turbos on a BMW?? is this just for M cars or for all BMWs?

        • Howie Dub

          the turbos are put on by BMW, which is why it’s covered. If you do anything to any car, any manufacturer will void your warranty.

          • Jordan

            oh ok.. i don’t really follow your last point tho….
            if you put a turbo on a non turbo M you’ll void it, and if you put a turbo on a non turbo AMG you’ll void it, correct?

          • Howie Dub

            my point in the previous post is in response to Donald saying that AMG engines are superior to the M twin turbo engines b/c it’s naturally aspirated. I’ve heard many people say that and then add that if they added a turbo or supercharger, their engine would have a lot more hp and speed, to which I would reply that if they did that, they would void their warranty, unlike a BMW, where the turbos are stock and covered by warranty. I was just preemptively responding to that statement. and correct, if you mod the engine in any way, you void the warranty on your engine.

BMWBLOG

NEWSLETTER