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

By: Howie Dub

Howie Dub — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 16:45:54 +0000

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.

By: Jordan

Jordan — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:16:58 +0000

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?

By: Howie Dub

Howie Dub — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:13:40 +0000

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.

By: Jordan

Jordan — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:10:35 +0000

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?

By: Howie Dub

Howie Dub — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:08:26 +0000

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

By: Howie Dub

Howie Dub — Mon, 16 Nov 2009 08:05:06 +0000

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.

By: Adam

Adam — Sat, 14 Nov 2009 14:57:08 +0000

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

By: Danilo A. Henry

Danilo A. Henry — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:47:27 +0000

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……….

By: Danilo A. Henry

Danilo A. Henry — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:38:44 +0000

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.

By: Danilo A. Henry

Danilo A. Henry — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:27:53 +0000

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.

By: Danilo A. Henry

Danilo A. Henry — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 14:14:52 +0000

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

By: Donald

Donald — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 12:30:27 +0000

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.

By: Danilo

Danilo — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:37:33 +0000

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.

By: Howie Dub

Howie Dub — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 01:54:52 +0000

@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.

By: Jordan

Jordan — Fri, 10 Apr 2009 00:23:41 +0000

@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.

By: Martin

Martin — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:38:01 +0000

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.

By: Kay

Kay — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 22:11:42 +0000

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

By: E92-TORONTO

E92-TORONTO — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 15:50:40 +0000

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

By: L1ndja

L1ndja — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 07:12:32 +0000

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

By: Juan

Juan — Thu, 09 Apr 2009 05:56:29 +0000

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.