BMW X6 M & X5 M Officially Revealed
Add a Comment
Login
Comments (87)
It's rear is the size of texas...and it's front spoiler gapes like a porn star. The X6 was already ugly to begin with, and I'm guessing the memo for the M version basically said "Rice it up!!" I have serious beef about the X6. Anytime I come beside one at the traffic light I make fake puke faces at the driver just so these unique individuals know that they spent 70 grand on something as sensually curvaceous as the morbidly obese; to know that they were brave when the said to themselves, "let's do something stupid today" at the dealership. Props to the X6 owners, for making every Aztek owner smile an understanding smile...
April 5, 2009 9:48 am
I can see it now..... mother of 3 out manuvers cops as she escapes with $500 worth of soccer balls!!
April 5, 2009 10:00 am
it's 555 metric horsepower(hp, PS, cv) , 550 break horse power (bhp). KW is the international standard to avoid confusion.
April 5, 2009 2:34 pm
recession hits, everyone else starts work on small, cheap economical cars, US SUV dependent firms teeter on the edge of bankrupcy.... BMWs solution, build an expensive, uneconomical sports SUV.... perfect timing!
April 5, 2009 11:06 am
exactly , you can see how clever BMW are , the X5M and X6M are without any competition cause everyone else is building small cars.
April 5, 2009 3:09 pm
sorry about that. I think we were one day late on this. Our news reporting abilitites tend to get weak on the weekends when were spending time with our families.
April 6, 2009 5:35 am
that is unacceptable, you have to get it before everyone else god dammit!
April 16, 2009 7:02 am
Looks like they have put the X6 front, headlights included onto the X5, like they did with the M3, putting the 3 Coupe face on the Saloon.
April 5, 2009 11:41 am
Neither of them look M enough to me, especially at the rear. And the rims are too small. If an M3 has 19" the X5/6 should have 22".
April 5, 2009 11:47 am
oh my god,,, OH MY GOD
I can't believe you have just said that...
I would take a 3.0 X5 over a Range Rover Sport
Against the Supercharged version, I'll take the 4.8i
Against this version, you have nothing
You should never talk about cars with anyone,,, really!!!
April 5, 2009 7:07 pm
I am saying that the X5 M is an amazing car, and IF you were to compare it with any other class,, never compare it with a Range Rover because it doesn't stand a chance with this car,, the only cars I can think of is the Cayenne Turbo S and the ML63 AMG
Just mentioning a Range Rover is a joke to me
April 6, 2009 4:58 pm
i own the first "fast" x5 and love it to this day . i cant wait to get the first x5 M! . the rims look weak but they can be changed . i hate the x6 period the back is so bad its not right m or normal i hate it.
where i live and what i do a SAV works perfectly for me. i also dont want to be a rolling log like the mentioned "Range Rover Sport "...i personally love the big fast suv wars...always have. i cant wait to get this x5 :)
April 5, 2009 2:06 pm
Gas prices are incredibly low, small cars with high economic features (which WERE booming last year) have had their sales tank along with the oil collapse, and high end luxury cars are no worse off than any other portion of the market- and in some areas, like here in So Cal, they're UP. So why are these cars poorly timed? I swear, folks like scratchy996 sound like conspiracy theorists after a while.
The X5 M will be highly successful, plain and simple. The X6 M will be a high-po version of the X6, a low volume niche car. Saying the cars are useless or somehow abhorrent for merely existing doesnt make you sound smarter, guys, BMW would have scrapped the cars all the way up to late development if they thought they were in any way an albatross for the brand. Instead, we get reports that they are scrapping new low-end 4 cylinder cars.
I for one appreciate BMW for still being competitive and building stuff like this. Are they for everyone? No. But neither is an M3 - a small 8 cylinder car?? Get out the pitchforks and torches!!
April 5, 2009 3:27 pm
couldnt agree more. haters just fail here. cant wait for these 2 to blow away all the competition. designwise i do think they could have done a better job with the front bumpers and the wheels. but the x6m looks so much better than the x5. ill take mine in red.
April 6, 2009 3:20 am
Pointless, pointless, pointless... yeah it's the real M "enthusiasts" who are going to be driving these... yeah right... BMW just admit you sold out and stand for nothing you use to
God the front bumpers look just awful...
April 5, 2009 4:37 pm
honestly this is really ugly, the normal version of the x6 or x5 is okay and you dont need this ugly body kit. it's as bad as the new e-class amg version body, both have a ugly body. always bmw used to make the best M body, but this is just too simple.
April 5, 2009 5:04 pm
The X5 is such a relatively slow car compared to its competition. I don't understand the point of having both X5M and X6M cars. I would've thought it would be better to have an X6M only, to emphasize its sportiness. The X6 makes the X5 look so dull and outdated despite the fact that form the front both cars look nearly identical.
April 5, 2009 5:33 pm
So slow?
You think 4.5 seconds is slow?
that is faster than an M5 and an M6, faster than an M3, faster than a Cayenne Turbo S, faster than an ML63, as fast as a C63 and SL63, almost as fast as an Audi R8 (0.1 second difference)
April 6, 2009 5:01 pm
I said the X5 is a relatively slow vehicle compared to other vehicles in its category such as the ML and the Cayenne. What is the car that you are talking about that has a 0-60 time of 4.5s?
April 7, 2009 10:17 pm
And another thing..too many holes in the front. Make the bumpers look like some cheap tuner crap.
April 5, 2009 5:35 pm









